Here's your group's thread for discussion. Click on the little pencil below to start posting!
Photo: 080924-N-3595W-158 GONAIVES, Haiti (Sept. 23, 2008) Haitians help Sailors from Assault Craft Unit (ACU) 2 offload disaster relief supplies from a landing craft, utility. Service members from the Navy, Army, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard embarked aboard Kearsarge, along with medical personnel from the USPHS, Canadian Army and Air Force, Brazil, Project Hope and International Aid are working together to conduct hurricane relief operations in Haiti. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Gina Wollman/Released)
-Remind yourself of your subtopic
ReplyDelete-Say what your conclusion is
-say what your main premise are
-Say whats the main argument against you
-whats your response
These are the questions we need to answer for our group
Main topic : should the U.S. intervene in foreign matters
ReplyDeleteSo pretty much we have to make one giant argument map out of the information that we have all gathered with the main topic as our conclusion
ReplyDeleteKatrina Luna
ReplyDeleteMilitary Intervention
Conclusion: Military intervention should not be part of the US Foreign Policy.
Premises:
-The adverse effects on those being given aid outweigh the positive effects.
-Millions of dollars are being spent with nothing to show for, no beneficial end results.
-The US citizens do not reap any direct benefits.
-The military becomes more of an imposition, than an intervention.
Opposing Arguments:
-The people in need of help tend to be suppressed and cannot easily ask for help or have the means to reach out for aid.
Response:
-This argument is valid, yet the majority do not seek help because it leads to riots, innocent deaths, and destruction of land and homes. Also, even with the aid of the military intervening, there has yet to be successful results.
Angelina Rucobo
ReplyDeleteNarcotics Intervention
We should pursue narcotics intervention in other countries with our end goal being to to minimize the impact of international crime and entry of illegal drugs in the U.S and partner nations by providing foreign assistance as well as cooperation among other countries.
1.by fighting against the flow of drugs in transit we can help to prevent them from reaching U.S land
2.by fighting the production of drugs at the source we help other countries with their own drug problems so that we have less of an obligation to help them in the future
3.many countries are continually forming drug networks that will stay intact if we do not break the cycle
ARGUMENT
will it ultimately cut down on costs by intervening at an earlier stage rather than later?
YEs. by intervening before they even reach the U.S we will be cutting down on the amount of drugs that come in which will always help in the long run. If starting at an earlier stage even helps to keep a little more drugs out of the U.S then it is definitely worth it. The less drugs coming in the less drug related problems we have to pay for when they get here. why not start from where it comes from first..
Roberto Sanchez
ReplyDeleteconclusion
-The U.S. should be able to intervene militarily in foreign affairs when its necissary for our national security
premise
-The U.S. by intervening in foreign affairs protects its civilians from physical harm
-The U.S. through intervening in foreign affairs promotes democracy
-Intervention protects our own state sovereignty ie national borders
-The U.S. sometimes needs to intervene militarily to obatian or keep economic stability
For tomorrow have your papers summarized into one page going over all the main points of your topic so we can start discussing and pulling our presentation together.
ReplyDeleteSorry I couldn't make it to the meeting today my final took longer than expected and I had to work after. I will bring my one page summary of my article tomorrow. Were meeting in the library right?
ReplyDelete