Exercise 5.6

Exercise 5.6 asks us to have a conversation with a fictional character named Dave. Dave's questions are: 1. Hey you, I think you can't really say that one option is better than another. Don't you agree? 2. There's all this stuff in the book about research as a process of discovery. What did you discover? 3. What do you figure was the most challenging problem you had to solve while working on this project? Hoe did you solve it? 4. After all this work, what do you take away from this experience? What have you learned that you can use? My responses are: 1. I think that this is only true in some circumstances. I would say that if you are comparing multiple options and each person can back their options up with logic and facts then not one option is better than the other but I think that if an option cannot thoroughly be backed up but another can than the one that can be backed up is better. 2. I discovered that there are different kinds of sources and that they vary in their amount of authority and how generalized they are. I also discovered that it can be effective to include different kinds of sources in your research and not just one kind. 3. I think that the most challenging problem was narrowing down such a broad topic. I solved this by only choosing to talk about about a certain aspect of my topic. 4. After all my work I can take away the approach to writing a paper when you break your paper up into chunks and write chunks at a time.

Exercise 5.3

In class today we cut a copy of our rough drafts where each paragraph ended. Then we sorted our paragraphs into two piles, one that was relevant to our thesis and another that was not relevant to our thesis. After that we analyzed our paragraphs in the relevant pile and looked to see if there was anything we could add to them. We were asked to respond to two questions after completing the activity. The questions are: 1. Experiment with the order/structure of your paragraphs. How are they different? What did you learn? 2. How did this whole process help you re-see your essay? My responses are: 1. I reordered my paragraphs by switching the order of the reasons around and kept my intro in the same place. I learned that the order can change your essay's flow. 2. This whole process helped me see that I can change some parts of my essay and give it a new look/flow without changing the material. I also learned that I stayed pretty relevant to my thesis through out my essay.

Exercise 5.1

In class we went through our rough drafts and with two different colored highlighters we highlighted our voice in one color and another person's voice with the other color. We after doing this we had to answer these questions: 1. Which color dominates 2. Are you turning over too much of the text to your sources? 3. Are you ignoring them and rattling on too much about what you think? 4. Does your source use seem appropriate to support your purpose? My answers to these questions are: 1. The color I chose for my voice dominates but there is still a decent amount of the other color. 2. I don't think that I am turning too much of the text to my sources. 3. I think that I am at times. There are times when I talk to much about my opinions. 4. I think that for the most part my source use is appropriate to support my purpose but there are times where I could use my sources to back up my opinions.

Exercise 4.3

Step One: Chose three different beginnings or leads to your research paper: 1. Bullets flying. Explosions. Lots of yelling. Fearing for your life. Killed of be killed. These are the some of the stressful situations our soldiers are put under. After imagining all these situations I wonder about how the soldiers are effected both physically and mentally from being put these situations. This also leads to further questions such as if the effects are worth it. I ultimately question weather the U.S. military cause more good than harm. 2. Our budget should be bigger. We need more money to increase our armed forces. With being in multiple conflicts we need to build a larger military to recover. These are all claims from the pentagon. We need to build bigger and we need to spend more they say. While the pentagon may believe this is true is it really necessary? Have you ever thought about how this will effect he American people and effect our economy? So I'll raise another question, does the U.S. Armed Forces cause more good then harm? 3. One definition of terrorism is the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. Another is the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. And a third is a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government. If you think about do all these definitions of terrorism describe the majority of the actions of the US military? While using the dictionary definitions of terrorism, is the US better then "terrorist" or are we just the same as them? What make us any better? Do these definitions make you seriously think if our military is truly doing good, or are they doing more harm than good?

Exercise 4.2

In the exercise we are supposed to use a template provided in our books to write a thesis statement. Exercise 4.2: Based on my research of the military, the assumption that the military has a positive impact on our country appears to be difficult to determine due to the positive and negative effects of the military.

Exercise 4.1

In this exercise we were asked to look through someone who had read your paper's perspective and ask ourselves questions they might ask. Then we had to respond to the questions we asked ourselves. Here are my results: Dave's Questions What’s the big deal about this? How can the military possibly be doing harm, outside of the killing involved? Do you think we, the U.S., get involved in another country’s conflict? Based on everything you have learned so far, what’s your point? Cody's Answers First off, the military are the people who “project” us and “fight for our freedom” so why wouldn’t you care about who is doing that. I think that the big deal is that the military are the people who go out and fight for/represent our country. I think that the military can do harm by spending too much. Due to being in several conflicts back to back the pentagon keeps increasing military spending. Another thing to think about are the physical and emotional effects on troops as a result of combat. I think that sometimes we shouldn't get involved in another country’s conflict. I think that if it is something between two sides of the country and the result won’t affect us then we shouldn't do anything to intervene. My point is that the military can do both harm and good at the same time. While the military can protect us from attack it can also be used in a terroristic manner to get what we want.

Annotated Bibliographies

In class we discussed about what an anootated biblioraphy was. Our assignment was to find 5 sources and make an annotated bibliography for each source. This is what I came up with: Annotated Bibliography #1: Lubold, Gordon. "Is US Fighting Force Big Enough?" The Christian Science Monitor. The Christian Science Monitor, 14 Oct. 2008. Web. 05 Nov. 2013. This source is credible because it is published in a magazine that is reliable and longstanding. The article is published in The Christian Science Monitor which has been producing weekly magazine’s and daily news briefings since 1908. The audience of this magazine is anyone. The Christian Science Monitor is not a religious publications, it is an organization owned by a church. The organization only publishes one religious article a week. The article is also credible because the author has a plethora of knowledge on this topic.. The article was written by Gordon Lubold. Lubold is a national security reporter for Foreign Policy. He was a senior advisor at the United States Institute of Peace in Washington, where he wrote on national security and foreign policy. Prior to his arrival at USIP, he was a defense reporter for Politico, where he launched the popular “Morning Defense” early morning blog and tip-sheet. Prior to that, he was the Pentagon and national security correspondent for The Christian Science Monitor, and before that he was the Pentagon correspondent for the Army Times chain of newspapers. He has covered conflict in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and other countries in South Asia, and has reported on military matters in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. He has spoken frequently on the sometimes-contentious relationship between the military and the media as a guest on numerous panels. He also appears on radio and television, including “Diane Rehm,” “To the Point,” a syndicated broadcast on NPR, and C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal”. I can not say if I disagree or agree with the author. I say this because I feel like before I make a decision I should do a little more research on the effects of war on the opposing side, the environment, and our country’s soldiers. Annotated Bibliography #2: Thompson, Mark. "U.S." US Pentagon Sequestysteria Comments. TIME Magazine, 25 Feb. 2013. Web. 08 Nov. 2013. The article Pentagon Seguestysteria is a credible source. It is credible because I was published by an experienced author and it was published in a well-respected magazine. Pentagon Seguestysteria was written by Mark Thompson and was published in TIME Magazine. Thompson is a Pulitzer Prize-winner and has covered national security in Washington since 1979, and for Time since 1994. Time is an American weekly news magazine published in New York City. It was founded in 1923 and for decades dominated by Henry Luce, who built a highly profitable stable of magazines. A European edition (Time Europe, formerly known as Time Atlantic) is published in London and also covers the Middle East, Africa and, since 2003, Latin America. An Asian edition (Time Asia) is based in Hong Kong. The South Pacific edition, covering Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands, is based in Sydney. In December 2008, Time discontinued publishing a Canadian advertiser edition. Time has the world's largest circulation for a weekly news magazine, and has a readership of 25 million, 20 million of which are in the US. I agree with this author. I think that what he writes is true and he brings up good points. Annotated Bibliography #3: Grossman, Dave, and Bruce K. Siddle. "Psychological Effects of Combat - Dave Grossman, Author." Psychological Effects of Combat - Dave Grossman, Author. Killology, 2000. Web. 08 Nov. 2013 This article is credible because it is published and written by Dave Grossman and published on his own website. Col. Grossman is a former West Point psychology professor, Professor of Military Science, and an Army Ranger who has combined his experiences to become the founder of a new field of scientific endeavor, which has been termed “killology.” In this new field Col. Grossman has made revolutionary new contributions to our understanding of killing in war, the psychological costs of war, the root causes of the current "virus" of violent crime that is raging around the world, and the process of healing the victims of violence, in war and peace. Lt. Col. Dave Grossman is a U.S. Army (Ret.), the director of Warrior Science Group, whose website is www.killology.com. He is a member of the American Board for Certification in Homeland Security and a member of the American College of Forensic Examiners Institute. Grossman is an internationally recognized scholar, author, soldier, and speaker who is one of the world's foremost experts in the field of human aggression and the roots of violence and violent crime. Due to this article being more statistical I cannot really agree or disagree with what Grossman is saying but I plan on using this to show if the effects of war are positive or negative. Annotated Bibliography #4: Waal, Alex De, and Rakiya Omaar. "Can Military Intervention Be "Humanitarian"? | Middle East Research and Information Project." Can Military Intervention Be "Humanitarian"? | Middle East Research and Information Project. Merip.org, n.d. Web. 08 Nov. 2013. This article is credible because it is published by a credible source. Middle East Report provides news and perspectives about the Middle East not available from mainstream news sources. The magazine has developed a reputation for independent analysis of events and developments in the Middle East. Understanding of the Middle East in the United States and Europe is limited and plagued by stereotypes and misconceptions. MERIP successfully addresses these limitations by addressing a broad range of social, political and cultural issues, and by soliciting writings and views from authors from the Middle East not often read in the West. I agree and disagree with this article. Annotated Bibliography #5: "Association of the United States Army." Legislative News Update 15 March 2010. Association of the United States Army, 15 Mar. 2010. Web. 08 Nov. 2013. This article is credible because it was published by a credible source, the Association of the United States Army. Since 1950, the Association of the United States Army has worked to support all aspects of national security while advancing the interests of America's Army and the men and women who serve. AUSA is a private, non-profit educational organization that supports America's Army - Active, National Guard, Reserve, Civilians, Retirees, Government Civilians, Wounded Warriors, Veterans, and family members. AUSA provides numerous Professional Development Opportunities at a variety of events both local and national. This article is a news update so I cannot agree or disagree with it. I plan on using this article to show the negative effects of war on soldiers.

Exercise 2.2

Upon completing exercise 2.2, I hound some many things. I found some aspects that I did thinking of talking about initially. I found ways to narrow down my topic. With doing this activity I found some arguments that I can make. I found that I can talk about the effects of war on solders, the land, and the effects in general. I can use these effects to possibly answer my question. I also found that I can talk about when is or when isn't war necessary. Another thing that I found I could talk about is the size of the US military, is it big enough, too big, or to small. Some sources that came up on my search are http://www.killology.com/article_psychological.htm, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_war, and http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2008/1014/p03s05-usmi.html.