Thursday, October 16, 2008
Brainstorming
My argument I feel is one that is a major issue right now and which is also a key in the Presidential debates. Are we winning the war in Iraq? There are many viewpoints on this and it is highly controversial. I'm hoping to look at both sides and create a very challenging paper in support that the war is going well in Iraq relative to where we have been. It's one of the main topics between candidates because one supported the surge; the other one is against it.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Persuasive Analysis- Barack Obama site
Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe we must be as careful getting out of Iraq, as we were careless getting in. Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased, directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government. Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of 1 to 2 brigades a month that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 – more than 7 years after the war began.
Under the Obama-Biden plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel. They will not build permanent bases in Iraq, but will continue efforts to train and support the Iraqi security forces as long as Iraqi leaders move toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism.
I took the idea from another blog put up earlier except it was McCain. This paragraph came from www.barackobama.com. The article is a persuasive view on the idea of what should be done in the war in Iraq. It strikes me that the first thing he does is tearing down the manner of the war. Yes, we were careless getting in but should it always be a relation to how the war started. I’m positive that all the candidates are looking for an end to the war. Some candidates want to do it in a different light than others. This paragraph puts blatant emphasis that we should be getting out of Iraq. I’ve seen the debates online and all Obama’s said is completely opposite from the main commanders in Iraq on this issue. Yes, the Iraqi government is working to get itself going but how will the removal be responsible and phased if you have already put an emphasis that this number of people will be brought out at this amount of time? It’s almost a paradox within itself in this paragraph. I have to say the wording of the second to last sentence definitely creates a distinguished light to the Democratic Candidate. “Military experts believe we can safely REDEPLOY combat brigades.” It’s kind of funny because in his speeches’ he only commends a relatively small amount of troops being sent to Afghanistan but where else will he send those that remind? The troops aren’t coming home, they are just being sent somewhere else to fight and die. Of course, he chooses to end with the concept of the fact that this war has gone for seven years now. Yes, it is getting to become one of the longest wars in the modern era but that is a necessary thing when military budgets are creeping slower due to two different branches being of a different political background. The slower we advance our military the quicker the rest of the world is catching up on us. Thus, an increased efficiency to kill is slowly rising for the sides against the US through black market goods.
Wow, I just saw this quote and laughed “against al Qaeda in Iraq.” Whoever put this paragraph in definitely is looking to create a different image than what he puts up. Obama has claimed in several speeches that there have never been any ties to al Qaeda in Iraq. How is this making sense then? The ability to train without a training ground seems redundant and oblivious. In order to train someone, a base has to be set up to train the Iraqi’s. If you plan on moving the base continuously, won’t that cost more to do than just setting up a permanent base? It will take the original amount however many times over to continuously supply help to them. The last sentence is definitely probably the most flawed I’ve seen in a while toward a certain group of voters. Sectarianism exists because of the different beliefs in the Islamic tradition. It’s like Southern Baptists to Methodist. Yes, you don’t see us fighting over it but there have been many instances of it early on in our democratic history. Maryland and Pennsylvania were set up for religions sent into exile relative to the rest of the country. A religion always takes a while to get going under a peaceful manner. Islam is the youngest of the major faiths and thus most likely to be not fully developed into a passive religion.
Under the Obama-Biden plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel. They will not build permanent bases in Iraq, but will continue efforts to train and support the Iraqi security forces as long as Iraqi leaders move toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism.
I took the idea from another blog put up earlier except it was McCain. This paragraph came from www.barackobama.com. The article is a persuasive view on the idea of what should be done in the war in Iraq. It strikes me that the first thing he does is tearing down the manner of the war. Yes, we were careless getting in but should it always be a relation to how the war started. I’m positive that all the candidates are looking for an end to the war. Some candidates want to do it in a different light than others. This paragraph puts blatant emphasis that we should be getting out of Iraq. I’ve seen the debates online and all Obama’s said is completely opposite from the main commanders in Iraq on this issue. Yes, the Iraqi government is working to get itself going but how will the removal be responsible and phased if you have already put an emphasis that this number of people will be brought out at this amount of time? It’s almost a paradox within itself in this paragraph. I have to say the wording of the second to last sentence definitely creates a distinguished light to the Democratic Candidate. “Military experts believe we can safely REDEPLOY combat brigades.” It’s kind of funny because in his speeches’ he only commends a relatively small amount of troops being sent to Afghanistan but where else will he send those that remind? The troops aren’t coming home, they are just being sent somewhere else to fight and die. Of course, he chooses to end with the concept of the fact that this war has gone for seven years now. Yes, it is getting to become one of the longest wars in the modern era but that is a necessary thing when military budgets are creeping slower due to two different branches being of a different political background. The slower we advance our military the quicker the rest of the world is catching up on us. Thus, an increased efficiency to kill is slowly rising for the sides against the US through black market goods.
Wow, I just saw this quote and laughed “against al Qaeda in Iraq.” Whoever put this paragraph in definitely is looking to create a different image than what he puts up. Obama has claimed in several speeches that there have never been any ties to al Qaeda in Iraq. How is this making sense then? The ability to train without a training ground seems redundant and oblivious. In order to train someone, a base has to be set up to train the Iraqi’s. If you plan on moving the base continuously, won’t that cost more to do than just setting up a permanent base? It will take the original amount however many times over to continuously supply help to them. The last sentence is definitely probably the most flawed I’ve seen in a while toward a certain group of voters. Sectarianism exists because of the different beliefs in the Islamic tradition. It’s like Southern Baptists to Methodist. Yes, you don’t see us fighting over it but there have been many instances of it early on in our democratic history. Maryland and Pennsylvania were set up for religions sent into exile relative to the rest of the country. A religion always takes a while to get going under a peaceful manner. Islam is the youngest of the major faiths and thus most likely to be not fully developed into a passive religion.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Chapter 14
Chapter 14 seems to be one of the self-help sections of the book. It introduces the classically way to argue on an issue. Probably the most interesting argument to me is the five stages of developing an argument. The 1st level is the personal opinion or basically a circle stage. It seems to me that broad ranges of people fall into this range today. The 2nd step is argument by one or more reasons. This step I feel is where I’m just beginning to get to throughout most of my writing. The 3rd step is truth seeking. This step is my most challenging because of my strong conservative ideology. I stand by my views even though there may be fundamental reasons why I’m wrong. The 4th stage is articulating the assumptions within an argument. This step is an expansion of truth seeking into forming a new opinion on an issue. Stage 5 is the ability to link the argument to the values and beliefs of the intended audience. Adapt the structure of the argument to the audience at hand. I commonly think of this as the salesmen’s approach.
This entire chapter seems to be about developing yourself into more of a salesmen approach. I don’t really this concept because it can commonly make the person seem more ignorant than knowledgeable. They create a blind ideology of how to make a person believe what you believe when I feel that most peoples’ ideals are not the problem at hand. This is why the country is a democracy; everyone can have a different opinion but all still hold up evenly. Even with the mistakes a speaker can commonly make, it enhances my view that this is about more of a speaking pitch than a writing pitch. I know a speech is merely a paper spoken but its mindset can create fundamental problems with how to make it better so that you can convince others to follow blindly at first. With enough information in one’s presentation, anyone can follow a very thought out speech and think he’s right.
This chapter is definitely going to help me improve in the persuasion caption of dealing with communication. I will though have to say it is not my biggest sense of my mind because I have major differences within most ideologies that I have never seen people take before. Many people would call the views complete arrogance of everything but I take it as I see it.
This entire chapter seems to be about developing yourself into more of a salesmen approach. I don’t really this concept because it can commonly make the person seem more ignorant than knowledgeable. They create a blind ideology of how to make a person believe what you believe when I feel that most peoples’ ideals are not the problem at hand. This is why the country is a democracy; everyone can have a different opinion but all still hold up evenly. Even with the mistakes a speaker can commonly make, it enhances my view that this is about more of a speaking pitch than a writing pitch. I know a speech is merely a paper spoken but its mindset can create fundamental problems with how to make it better so that you can convince others to follow blindly at first. With enough information in one’s presentation, anyone can follow a very thought out speech and think he’s right.
This chapter is definitely going to help me improve in the persuasion caption of dealing with communication. I will though have to say it is not my biggest sense of my mind because I have major differences within most ideologies that I have never seen people take before. Many people would call the views complete arrogance of everything but I take it as I see it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)