http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_12_10/Mutual-understanding-on-destroying-Syrian-chemical-weapons-at-sea-reached-Russia-diplomat-0127/
This article continues my last blog about the US' plan to use the FDHS on a naval ship to destroy the weapons. The plan was proposed to the UN. Its main issue was getting the support of Russia. The article is short, but extremely vital in reported that Russia does indeed support the US' plan to destroy the weapons. ""In this case, high hopes are on our US partners. They have a specially equipped vessel to implement such a task," Bogdanov said." This is a direct quote from Russia's Foreign Prime Minister. This issue begins to show more of the continued cooperation between the world to face such a heinous act of destruction. Oddly, in research, I have found Albania does not back the US' plan, but is honestly being mostly ignored by much larger nations of the security council.
Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_12_10/Mutual-understanding-on-destroying-Syrian-chemical-weapons-at-sea-reached-Russia-diplomat-0127/
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
Obama/Syria Cartoon
Monday, December 9, 2013
US plans for destroying chemical weapons
http://rt.com/usa/us-destroy-chemical-weapons-498/
This article outlines the basics of the US' plan to destroy Syria's chemical weapon stash. The crux of the plan is to deploy the US' new technology that known as the Field Deployable Hydrolysis System (FDHS). It is a 15 man operated system that can neutralize 25 metric tons of chemicals into a non-usable state each day. This system has not yet been deployed in any real situation though and has only been used under controlled environments. The plan is to equip a large US naval ship with this system, load it with all chemical warheads found and neutralize them in international waters. A very large issue with this is retrieving the weapons and warheads themselves. The US only has one month left to meet its deadline of neutralizing the deadliest of the weapons such as mustard gas and sarin. This presents issues of involvement. The US currently is relying mainly on Syrian rebel forces to create access to the weapons and allow UN inspectors to find them and begin transporting them to the US ship. It may seem that the US is, once again, overstepping its bounds in foreign policy, however I believe it to be an extremely important issue to become involved in with the mass destructive capability of these chemical warheads. I also believe it is the US responsibility as one of the security council members of the UN to enforce such a violation of the Geneva Accords.
This article outlines the basics of the US' plan to destroy Syria's chemical weapon stash. The crux of the plan is to deploy the US' new technology that known as the Field Deployable Hydrolysis System (FDHS). It is a 15 man operated system that can neutralize 25 metric tons of chemicals into a non-usable state each day. This system has not yet been deployed in any real situation though and has only been used under controlled environments. The plan is to equip a large US naval ship with this system, load it with all chemical warheads found and neutralize them in international waters. A very large issue with this is retrieving the weapons and warheads themselves. The US only has one month left to meet its deadline of neutralizing the deadliest of the weapons such as mustard gas and sarin. This presents issues of involvement. The US currently is relying mainly on Syrian rebel forces to create access to the weapons and allow UN inspectors to find them and begin transporting them to the US ship. It may seem that the US is, once again, overstepping its bounds in foreign policy, however I believe it to be an extremely important issue to become involved in with the mass destructive capability of these chemical warheads. I also believe it is the US responsibility as one of the security council members of the UN to enforce such a violation of the Geneva Accords.
Whos responsible?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/9/obama-lied-about-syrian-chemical-attack-cherry-pic/
For so long now, we have been told that we may never know who exactly is behind the chemical attacks and more so the reasoning behind it; but this article is rather opposite. Researches have been putting in countless hours trying to track this attack backwards and find the person responsible and just today the Washington Times came out saying they are getting closer to that answer. This is probably top ranking news with this event. The article mentioned that Syrian President Bashar Assad is at the top of the list; although not far behind him is an al Qaeda linked group and the al-Nusra Front are also being further looked into. If and when this information is figured out it will, one be a sigh of relief to finally know the answer to a longing question, but two interesting to see their answers to the endless why questions they will receive.
European Citizens fighting in Syria
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/eu-security-officials-note-increased-flow-of-fighters-to-syrias-civil-war/2013/12/05/5226dbd6-5de2-11e3-8d24-31c016b976b2_story.html
This article described that E.U. security officials are noting a much higher increase flow of E.U. citizens to Syria. The exact intention of these people is not known, however, the article takes a heavy stand that it must be for nothing else aside from terrorism. It states that the officials believe these citizens are leaving to fight in the war along side Al-qaeda and other extremist groups. This seems to be quite the assumption. First it must be determined whether the rebels in Syria are indeed "rebels" and "terrorists" or the more honoring "freedom fighter". I feel that this article is horrendously biased in automatically assuming almost everyone going to Syria during the war has terroristic intentions and that they may even return to the E.U. with those same intentions. The article is quick to demonize those fighting in Syria against al-Assad's dictatorship and possible chemical weapon attack. The article ends with "The Interior Minister of the German state of Hesse, Boris Rhein, this week proposed a nationwide hotline and network of counseling centers to try to combat radicalization. He said a new government-sponsored study in Hesse had found that jihadist recruiters had begun to systematically target students." It's an odd note to end at, leaving the reader with more presumptions of complete terrorist motivations.
This article described that E.U. security officials are noting a much higher increase flow of E.U. citizens to Syria. The exact intention of these people is not known, however, the article takes a heavy stand that it must be for nothing else aside from terrorism. It states that the officials believe these citizens are leaving to fight in the war along side Al-qaeda and other extremist groups. This seems to be quite the assumption. First it must be determined whether the rebels in Syria are indeed "rebels" and "terrorists" or the more honoring "freedom fighter". I feel that this article is horrendously biased in automatically assuming almost everyone going to Syria during the war has terroristic intentions and that they may even return to the E.U. with those same intentions. The article is quick to demonize those fighting in Syria against al-Assad's dictatorship and possible chemical weapon attack. The article ends with "The Interior Minister of the German state of Hesse, Boris Rhein, this week proposed a nationwide hotline and network of counseling centers to try to combat radicalization. He said a new government-sponsored study in Hesse had found that jihadist recruiters had begun to systematically target students." It's an odd note to end at, leaving the reader with more presumptions of complete terrorist motivations.
Saturday, December 7, 2013
Chemical weapons munitions destroyed
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/12/06/all-syrian-chemical-weapons-munitions-destroyed/3892017/
I found this article interesting because it is the U.S.'s perspective on the Syrian civil war and the chemical attacks on Damascus. The article states that Syria has already begun to destroy a lot of its munitions about 63% this is pretty substantial number and it is the first I have heard about this. Also, I found it interesting that the Syrian government is being so cooperative is because they want to 'ward off any possible U.S. military strikes.' And yet I have read in other articles that war was not on the table and this article was written two days ago, so the information is resent. I am happy that the chemical weapons are being destroyed I can only hope that the waste is properly disposed of after the chemicals are neutralized.
I found this article interesting because it is the U.S.'s perspective on the Syrian civil war and the chemical attacks on Damascus. The article states that Syria has already begun to destroy a lot of its munitions about 63% this is pretty substantial number and it is the first I have heard about this. Also, I found it interesting that the Syrian government is being so cooperative is because they want to 'ward off any possible U.S. military strikes.' And yet I have read in other articles that war was not on the table and this article was written two days ago, so the information is resent. I am happy that the chemical weapons are being destroyed I can only hope that the waste is properly disposed of after the chemicals are neutralized.
Friday, December 6, 2013
Birth of another war?
http://www.usnews.com/cartoons/syria-cartoons
This comic is showing the past wars we have had Afghanistan and Iraq and next could be Syria. We could be giving birth to another war and that "angle" could be Syria. Any way we look at it war could still happen even though the chemical weapons are being taken out of Syria. We have our eyes set on Syria and will not take them off. Mostly because of oil its possible that the colors of her two boys shirts represents oil they are "oil black" and she has red and blue for the U.S. or in this case the "mother of U.S. wars. They also show the death that occurred in both of those countries. The black hair and eyes are very representative of the darkness that occurred in Afghanistan and Iraq. The skull, the TNT and the knives with blood on them all clear indication of death and destruction. It also shows how we believe we are a great super power that we are but we have already have given birth to two other wars and now yet another possible "child" of war. The other comics on this site are all great they tell about Obama, Putin and Syrian Policy/Foreign Policy.
This comic is showing the past wars we have had Afghanistan and Iraq and next could be Syria. We could be giving birth to another war and that "angle" could be Syria. Any way we look at it war could still happen even though the chemical weapons are being taken out of Syria. We have our eyes set on Syria and will not take them off. Mostly because of oil its possible that the colors of her two boys shirts represents oil they are "oil black" and she has red and blue for the U.S. or in this case the "mother of U.S. wars. They also show the death that occurred in both of those countries. The black hair and eyes are very representative of the darkness that occurred in Afghanistan and Iraq. The skull, the TNT and the knives with blood on them all clear indication of death and destruction. It also shows how we believe we are a great super power that we are but we have already have given birth to two other wars and now yet another possible "child" of war. The other comics on this site are all great they tell about Obama, Putin and Syrian Policy/Foreign Policy.
KWL
http://world.time.com/2013/08/22/the-known-knowns-and-known-unknowns-of-a-chemical-attack-in-syria/
While reading this article all I could think about was how Mother Agnes would agree with some of the statements made. By the end of the article I felt as if I had enough information to fill in a whole KWL chart, but with what is known to be true, what we think is true, and what is actually true. The article starts by saying the attacks may not have been targeted towards anyone that the chemicals can effect people different ways depending on different factors such as health and age. This reminded me of Mother Agnes' few of the kids not really being dead. Which goes along with the sub topic in the article of number of deaths, it mentioned how they have from 100- 1400 people on a death list but are not doing cross checking with names so it is unclear if that number is right or not. When I read that small section I was shocked, how do you not know the exact number of people killed, I feel like that should be something closely looked at.
While reading this article all I could think about was how Mother Agnes would agree with some of the statements made. By the end of the article I felt as if I had enough information to fill in a whole KWL chart, but with what is known to be true, what we think is true, and what is actually true. The article starts by saying the attacks may not have been targeted towards anyone that the chemicals can effect people different ways depending on different factors such as health and age. This reminded me of Mother Agnes' few of the kids not really being dead. Which goes along with the sub topic in the article of number of deaths, it mentioned how they have from 100- 1400 people on a death list but are not doing cross checking with names so it is unclear if that number is right or not. When I read that small section I was shocked, how do you not know the exact number of people killed, I feel like that should be something closely looked at.
Thursday, December 5, 2013
whats going on today?
http://www.nationaljournal.com/defense/how-the-u-s-will-dispose-of-syria-s-chemical-weapons-20131203
I thought that since we had articles giving some general information about the attacks and some history on the civil war it only made sense to see what was going on now with the chemicals weapons in Syria; and after searching around a little I found this article that tied them all together. Being only published three days ago it has some of the newest information not only about what is going to happen in Syria with the chemical weapons, but also the United States involvement in that. After reading all the other post about what has been going on in Syria, I finally understood what all the craziness was and is about, so I was so happy to read at the start of the article that al-Assad said he would get rid of all the chemical weapons in Syria. The article gives you a basic understanding of how they are planning on carrying out this very dangerous and expensive plan.
I thought that since we had articles giving some general information about the attacks and some history on the civil war it only made sense to see what was going on now with the chemicals weapons in Syria; and after searching around a little I found this article that tied them all together. Being only published three days ago it has some of the newest information not only about what is going to happen in Syria with the chemical weapons, but also the United States involvement in that. After reading all the other post about what has been going on in Syria, I finally understood what all the craziness was and is about, so I was so happy to read at the start of the article that al-Assad said he would get rid of all the chemical weapons in Syria. The article gives you a basic understanding of how they are planning on carrying out this very dangerous and expensive plan.
The Write up!!!
For the reflective write up I would like each of you to analyze what happened within the blog as a whole. This analysis should include 2-4 ‘themes’ or ‘categories’--preferably, though not necessarily exclusively, themes from class. Trace your chosen themes through the posts on the blog. You can quote from the posts, or the media itself, but please cite it in the paper. Please discuss posts that are not just your own! Using comments as well as primary posts to support your themes is encouraged.
In many ways I picture this project as a research paper without the final product. What I mean by this is that online you are discovering and interrogating sources—analyzing them as raw pieces of data. In this written (and more formal) portion, I want you to create/impose order on the chaos that is data collection. This write up is just the analysis or discussion portion of a ‘normal’ paper, with some ‘conclusionary’ remarks for good measure. This essay may include personal observations and will definitely show what you thought most interesting.
The essays should be between 3-5pages long and are due on BB by 5pm on December 16, 2013 (our final period).
If you need some help likely categories might include geopolitics, individual perspectives, Al-Jazeera vs BBC, how the US is involved, role of oil, regime change..... These are *just examples* you do NOT need to use these!!! I wanted to give you some clues as to the possibilities so it would be easier to see the themes for yourselves.
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
political cartoon
aljazeera article
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/08/2013827531476414.html
I found this article particular interesting because it shows another view on the attacks and the United States Response to the Attacks. This article was written and posted on the Aljazeera website and its target audience are people that aren't American, and might not know to much about American policy. This article is saying That Kerry is blaming the attacks on Damascus and the people of Damascus. They used a direct quote to show what they believed. I dont think Kerry was attacking the city of Damascus itself, but so attacking the fact the Syrian regime wasn't cooperating with the UN investigation. He also was attacking the claims that the event may have been frabacated. It was also interesting to read the comments left on this article from individuals from multiple countries and see their take on the situation. Many believed that Syria should be left alone to handle its own problems without outside intervention. Do you think Kerry was blaming Damascus for the attacks?
I found this article particular interesting because it shows another view on the attacks and the United States Response to the Attacks. This article was written and posted on the Aljazeera website and its target audience are people that aren't American, and might not know to much about American policy. This article is saying That Kerry is blaming the attacks on Damascus and the people of Damascus. They used a direct quote to show what they believed. I dont think Kerry was attacking the city of Damascus itself, but so attacking the fact the Syrian regime wasn't cooperating with the UN investigation. He also was attacking the claims that the event may have been frabacated. It was also interesting to read the comments left on this article from individuals from multiple countries and see their take on the situation. Many believed that Syria should be left alone to handle its own problems without outside intervention. Do you think Kerry was blaming Damascus for the attacks?
Monday, December 2, 2013
Third Post!
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/directory/c/chemical_attack.asp
I found really interesting cartoons that are related to chemical attack in this website.I think these cartoons show how human beings are believing what they see on TV and how media hides the truth from people.Some of the other cartoons on here show how media comes up with different stories related to attacking so they could grab peoples attention.I hope you guys like this website. You'll see more of these cartoons If you click on "more cartoons" option at the bottom of the page.
I found really interesting cartoons that are related to chemical attack in this website.I think these cartoons show how human beings are believing what they see on TV and how media hides the truth from people.Some of the other cartoons on here show how media comes up with different stories related to attacking so they could grab peoples attention.I hope you guys like this website. You'll see more of these cartoons If you click on "more cartoons" option at the bottom of the page.
Syrian civil war from the beginning
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DowaIjF5iE0
This video takes a look at why the civil war started and what has been done since the beginning. I though it would be good to put on the blog to give a good over all perspective on the civil war. As i was looking through videos on chemical attacks in Syria I found this one on why the civil started in the first place. I kinda knew why but not the whole story about the who, what, why, when and how. After watching the video I have a better understanding on the events that happened to begin the civil war. Once protest started for and against the new President, security forces opened fire on the protesters. Some of these videos did reach the West. But could not be verified as authentic. The governments military tried to force the protesters to stop by using brute force on the places that they did not yet control. This raises a question if the government had a history of trying to take back control by using brute force, is it then also possibile that they would try and use any means necessary to take back control? Even going so far as releasing chemical weapons on civilians? Once the chemical attacks began fingers immediately where pointed at each other. The government at the insurgents and the insurgents to the government. Another question is raised why would insurgents attack civilians? To me it does not make much sense wouldn't they attack the government and military facilities not civilian people?
This video takes a look at why the civil war started and what has been done since the beginning. I though it would be good to put on the blog to give a good over all perspective on the civil war. As i was looking through videos on chemical attacks in Syria I found this one on why the civil started in the first place. I kinda knew why but not the whole story about the who, what, why, when and how. After watching the video I have a better understanding on the events that happened to begin the civil war. Once protest started for and against the new President, security forces opened fire on the protesters. Some of these videos did reach the West. But could not be verified as authentic. The governments military tried to force the protesters to stop by using brute force on the places that they did not yet control. This raises a question if the government had a history of trying to take back control by using brute force, is it then also possibile that they would try and use any means necessary to take back control? Even going so far as releasing chemical weapons on civilians? Once the chemical attacks began fingers immediately where pointed at each other. The government at the insurgents and the insurgents to the government. Another question is raised why would insurgents attack civilians? To me it does not make much sense wouldn't they attack the government and military facilities not civilian people?
Sunday, December 1, 2013
Different View on the Attacks
http://www.globalresearch.ca/mother-agnes-mariam-footage-of-chemical-attack-in-syria-is-fraud/5348939
In the previous article that I posted, it mentioned a woman by the name of Mother Agnes Mariam who has very strong views toward the media's representation of the chemical attacks in Syria. She lives in Syria, not far from where the attacks took place and gives her opinion about how she thinks the media has misinformed viewers about the attacks. She does not believe that the footage shown is actually of those who were hurt in the attacks. It is an extremely interesting interview and I watched a couple of other interviews that you can find online if you search her name if you are interested in a different view than most sites represent. It is interesting to see where her ideas come from and how she thinks the media has shown the attacks in order to portray them as an attack by the Syrian government.
In the previous article that I posted, it mentioned a woman by the name of Mother Agnes Mariam who has very strong views toward the media's representation of the chemical attacks in Syria. She lives in Syria, not far from where the attacks took place and gives her opinion about how she thinks the media has misinformed viewers about the attacks. She does not believe that the footage shown is actually of those who were hurt in the attacks. It is an extremely interesting interview and I watched a couple of other interviews that you can find online if you search her name if you are interested in a different view than most sites represent. It is interesting to see where her ideas come from and how she thinks the media has shown the attacks in order to portray them as an attack by the Syrian government.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)