Posting 10 by Jennifer October 30, 2007

I have a terrible time writing a good introduction.  I don’t capture the reader’s attention or clearly state what my paper is about.  I have trouble creating a clear thesis statement and placing it in the correct place.  I usually throw in information that is irrelevant and does not belong.  To have a good introduction I need to have a logical and smooth beginning statement.  I need to clearly state my thesis and make it interesting.  I should introduce the purpose of the essay and any important concepts.          

  To have a good introduction I could start out by asking a question.  I could also use historical context, build my introduction around a key definition, or begin with an example.  I need to make it clear and exciting.  Make the reader want to find out more.  Another way to have a good introduction is to write your introduction last.  Pay special attention to your first sentence and be straightforward and confident.

http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/introductions.html

English 121 Book

Writing Tips Handout

roys ramble vs my ramble October 28, 2007

Roy. What to say, she rambles a lot, and so do i? In my essay i go into explaining that religion is not really the cause behind war, as many believe, but instead it is just centralized government and only through anarchy and self relience can we acheive peace. Which of course is impossible because no culture has ever been able to acheive a total anarchy. And most of her ramble is critisism of many different things. Im sure if i re-read her passage a few more times i could find something to relate, but her passage and my essay are really two completly different rants… both their to piss people off, and make a point that us as the author understand, and no reader unless after spending countless hours reading will find a point. Well hopefully by the final draft my essay wont be like that.

I think the only thing i can take from her text would be to stay focused on my main point, and not ramble, or else i will confuse everyone, probably even myself and completly forget my main point, like a 13 year old argueing against george bush.

i take that back, i could use some of her refferences to different september 11th’s throughout history as references of attacks on people and dictatorships ect… and i could completly argue her anti american rant, cause one of her sentences trys to give a lot of the protesters credit for the government disarming themselves of nukes, and i kinda disagree with that, i feel protesters played a very small role in that. but i dont know where that will fit in my essay.

Damn if I do, Damn if I dont October 24, 2007

One of Roy’s ideas that stuck out to me was the fact that she seems accuse America of feeding our enemies.  We are the providers of the weapons that they use against us, we give them money that they use to fight us.  How are we to know that our giving is going to turn against us.  I think that we use these things to use peace and that there is no way for us to be able to foresee an enemy turning our power against us.  What else could we do?  Not give anyone help and anger the rest of the world.  There is just no winning when it comes to war, power, and money.  The real question here is where does she get all of this information about all of these countries that she packs into this essay.  Is it true or is it just her accusations.

What is your Ideal then Roy? October 24, 2007

I enjoyed reading roy’s piece. It was interesting what she had to say about her own country and other countries, especially the US. She seems to have something wrong with every culture and the way they treat war and interventions. A great deal of these i agreed with. However this piece in a way angered me. If all of these countries have got the wrong policies, then which is the right way to do things. You can sit and complain and disagree all day. However Roy doesnt set up her own ideal strong enough, she makes the reader interpret what she is concluding and in return the reader gets this vague ideal that Roy would choose. What would happen in Roy’s ideal world that is the question i kept asking myself and would ask Roy if i could

War: a necessity? October 24, 2007

Roy talkes about how our war with iraq was for one reason, adn now we are fighting for another, but people keep dying. Roy states that she feel that non violence is the way to go because fighting gets us nowhere. But i disagree with roy with her idea of non violence. i feel that war is a necessity it helps gain, social structure, and economic power, and religious beliefs. without those three things the world would be a mess. I mean yes people die, but they die fighting for what they believe in, so its not all that bad.

should we go to war? October 24, 2007

Roy explains how when we started war with Iraq we were just trying to find Osama bin Laden but this has all changed. We are now fighting for their freedom. She wonders since we are fighting for Iraq’s freedome and women rights shouldn’t we be bombing Pakistan, Bangledaesh Delhi, Islam and many other countries? I agree with her idea of non violence. It really doesn’t get us anywhere in life except death.

What Can I Do?-Ross 9 October 24, 2007

 In her writing Roy states that, “There are many americans who would be mortified to be associated with their governments policies.” I find this to be very true. A war with Iran for example, I do not support such a war in the least. Then I ask myself, what can I do about it? The answer is nothing. By myself I mean nothing to the whole country. So I have no choice but to sit here and type while a group of old guys voice their opinions in place of mine.

Come September. CM response October 24, 2007

2. Isolate one of Roy’s points and respone to it.

I find myself thniking about all the many times the US has been involved in things we shouldnt have been. I appriciate Roy for pointing out just a few examples. I cant agree more with her in that while the 9-11 attacks were brutal and wrong, how many times have we done pretty much the same thing in multiple situations with out the prestige? The answer is alot if you havent noticed. I think Roy speaks for a large population of the world when she says, ” To share the grief of history, to thin the mist a little. To say to the citizens of America, in the gentlest, most human way: Welcome to the world.” In other words, get over it and get over yourself. What a novel idea. 

Posting 9 by Erik Beil October 24, 2007

While reading this peice I found myself agreeing with so much in it. What I found most profound was her words on anti Americanism. If someone says one thing negative that automatically makes them anti American. Afterward much of what they say isn’t even heard because of the blacklisting. Another great point she made was about the general feelings of the American public after 9/11. If you weren’t for war than you were for Terrorism. My  middle school history teacher was all for war and when someone spoke up and said “Oh crap i bet they’re going to reinstate the draft” he said you shouldn’t be so joking about other peoples patriotism. Is it patriotic to follow everything your government does? I dunno I think disagreeing makes it a democracy.

post 9-marie October 24, 2007

2. Isolate one of Roy’s points and respond to it.

Even though the terrorist attack on the twin towers was 6 years ago, there is still no way to tell the families and co-workers who lost someone that it is time to move on and move past it. As Roy explains, there is no amount of revenge of killing someone that could bring back or make peace with the situation, because it would mean killing more innocents just in a different family. I have not lost a family member or a friend due to war but if i had, i think I would want revenge at first just so that something was being done, but after mourning for a little bit longer, i would realize that there is no amount of killing that I, or anyone else, could do to make up for my loss.

posting 9 by mac October 24, 2007

Roy makes a point about the reasons we went to war after september 11.  she says that it was to liberate the afgahns and topple the taliban regime.  this point goes along with my paper in that it states that we did go to war for a reason and that it is just to go fight.  “Since it is September 11 were talking about…….that date has long held significance.” (p.257 4th paragraph)  this is saying to me that we do have reason for going over to Iraq to fight.  our president may not have justified it very well but we still had the reasons to go over there.  9/11 is a historic date that will be burned in the back of americans minds for generations to come.  it turned out to be a positive thing for us because it created an even greater national security.  i dont know about most people but i feel alot better about getting on a plane now that we tightened security, so in other words it gave us a reason to liberate Iraq and it created a stronger national security.

posting 9- jon robitaille October 23, 2007

Roy says that in response to the September 11 attacks America should not have gone to Afghanistan and Iraq because this only perpetuates the actions which led to the attacks. i believe she is right, although some sort of action may have been necessary i don’t think an all out war was the best option for responding to that crisis. perhaps a more covert operation was necessary, of perhaps simple negotiations may have solved some of the issues. America cannot hope to resolve all of our issues with the middle east by going to war with them, it may be in our best interests to fade out of the world focus and just let time pass until the anti American hatred subsides. i believe that ultimately it will take an action similar to this for there to be any form of peace.

Posting 9 October 23, 2007

One of the many things that Roy says is that “War is only a brutal desecration of their (loved ones lost in war) memory.” I completely one hundred percent agree with this statement. I believe that war is not a justifiable answer to country’s problems and that even if one country wins they still lose. They still lose the people who died fighting for their country. And the people who lost their loved ones will mourn for years and years after the war has ended. I do believe that people who fight for our country deserve honor and reward, but does it really solve our problems? I don’t believe so…. Governments will say that they will not put the nation through another war like the last, but they choose to anyway…

i must be “anti-american” October 23, 2007

“there can never be a single story. in india those of us who have expressed views – that are at variance with the indian government’s – are branded anit-national. flags are bits of colored cloth that goverments use first to shrink-wrap peoples minds and then as ceremonial shrouds to bury the dead. when independent, thinkgin people being to rally under flags, when writers, painters, musicians, film makers susperpend their judgement and blindly yoke their art to the service of the nation, its time for all of us to sit up and worry. the term anti-american is usually used by the american extablishment to discredit and - not falsely, but shall we say inaccurately – define its critics. or that you’re opposed to free speech?” (254-255).

“one nation, under God….” we dont have God anymore. we’re not allowed to say the Pledge of Allegiance anymore in school. doesnt that make all americans….anti american? america was founded under God, so if we cant openly say anything with him in it in public, in our school systems, or be like it use to be, are we not anti american? criticize an american movie, doesnt this make you anti american? disliking a black person that is american…does this make you anti american? my own father criticizes me all the time, does that make him anti american? its almost like Roy is giving us a choice. be anti american, or be ignorant. learning what our country is actually doing and be disgusted by it, or not know a damn thing and be blindly faithful, even if it gets you killed over who made a better business deal, not, fighting to save ourselves from being bombed again. i must be anti american b/c i am not fond of making millions for myself, or eating at McDonald’s. Roy is saying, that our own government is scared that its people will find out real truths that it’ll strive to put a name on someone to save their ass…..they’re investments.

Post nine by Coleridge October 23, 2007

Roy is right, in stating that many Septembers have passed since so many deaths in Asia, and we are still worried about the terrorist attacks of 9/11. We need to realize that one war, or attack, is no more important than the other. War is all around bad, and that’s what my paper is about. War could end up destroying earth as we know it, with all the weapons that are made specifically for war and fighting. We should take time to concentrate on the past wars, and realize that war is bad, and we should look for a means to make peace, or solve conflicts peacefully instead of war.

Posting Nuevo por Cam W. October 23, 2007

First of all, I would say that I agree with everything that Roy had to say. Though it is hard to read what she had to say about America. Has America really stretched itself too thin like Germany did in WWII? Maybe. But I am willing to bet that a change in presidency will evoke some durastic changes foreign policies. How? I do not know. Hopefully the foreign policy will be revised to serve people, not CEO’s and Fortune 500 companies. America is a corparation, the richest, and most powerful country in the world, and yet that power is abused–greed and power have become the backbone of this country. That isn’t to say that everyone who occupies this country is, but it is scary that the government has become its own nuclear stock-piled island…

Roy by Tommy Domingo October 23, 2007

In this reading Roy said that there has been so many Septembers in the past where inoscent people have died in Asia and we are still stuck on the US terrorist attack in September.  It seems that she is saying that to stop feeling so bad about what happened to the US becuase far worse things have happened in other countries some things even cuased by the American government.  I think there are pros and cons to this argument.  I think if you want to get the American people to look at atrocities in other countries you sould not point a fingure at the faults of America at the same time.  Poeple do not want to hear that it was the US governments own fault for the occurance on September eleventh. Just talk about the other countries by them selves and leave out the US at least for the time being when talking about terrorism and unjustified deaths becuase it is still a touchy subject for most Americans.  But I also believe that the occurances in Asia and South America do need to be voiced.  The American public needs to know what is going on world wide and get involved.

We fight for money not for rights October 23, 2007

2.  Isolate one of Roy’s points and respond to it.

Roy talks about how we invaded Afghanistan to topple the Taliban and liberate the women.  She makes a good point in how the latter  is unlikely since the US has a good amount of allies that keep women repressed.  The US will use justifiable reasons to justify itself for invading countries, to help trick the ignorant people into believing that it is actually trying to help women.  We may end up helping the women, but the main reason we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan is purely business.    I read worldy news everyday and I know that they US has friendly business relationships with countries that practice segregation and discrimation but since those countries are friendly to us, we haven’t invaded them yet.

Posting 9– By Julia G.K. October 23, 2007

In Roy’s speech she talks about ”anti- national”. In her own country India those of who  have expressed views on Nuclear Bombs, Big Corporate Globalization and the rising threat of communal Hindu fascism- views that are at variance with the Indian Government’s- are branded “anti- national”. (P254) She is right that “anti- nationalism” should be against every thing in his or her own country, and agree with another country. I wondering why India government not allows them have speech on those topics. I mean like Roy, she is not against her own country; she just advocacy of nonviolence. I do not know if India afraid of infuriate other countries, because those who talking about things like Nuclear Bombs are Indians.

Posting 9 by Mariko October 23, 2007

1.  Roy covers (or at least mentions) a gamut of topics and themes from this segment of class.  How do her ideas fit with your essay? 

Roy’s words, “How many Septembers have gone by since August 1945 ?”(p258). fit with my essay. After a lot of people were killed through a war,  people promised that they would never repeat such a war. However as time passes, people forget the past, and then repeat same stuff and then regret about what they did. In this point, my idea and Roy’s idea are similar.

posting 9, by christian October 23, 2007

one of Roys main points in her essay is that the united states fight on terrorism will lead to our downfall. when she quotes Rumsfeild saying that we just want the world to let us live our own, she is right in saying this isnt going to work because we dont recognize that we arent the only people on this planet. Americas government needs to take a step back and look at what the world thinks of us. we look like a power hungry warlord trying to regulate the whole world. i think that America is too focued on what we want and doesnt recognize the rest of the world. every major civilization in history has fallen because of they get greedy and want everything. that is the path we are taking, and our focus on war shows this. it is hard to justify preventing other countries from making nuclear weapons when we have the most and are the only country that has used them. their are more important issues than oil that should be considered when we police the middle east for our personal gain. roy also discusses the idea of anti-americanism, and how it only creates a scapegoat. she is right when she says their are many people who are ashamed of what the u.s. is doing. people need to get up and find the truth in what is really happening and make a choice for themselves. if we keep up this campaign we will end up like all the other great civilizations in history.

Unamerican? October 23, 2007

Roy says that she has been called anti-american because she does not believe that everything that our country does is good. This, in my opinion, is one of the worst terms to be called. It shows that you are not loyal to the only thing that relates us all together and is what makes us different from everyone else. There is something wrong if you dont believe in your country, sure you might not think everything is perfect, but you must have faith in it. America, love it, or leave it

kyles response to Roy October 23, 2007

When Roy explains the fact that “war cannot avenge those who have died” she strikes on a thought that i have long felt to be true.  a murder leads to another, one war will spawn another and there is no satisfaction in that. She explains this thought using strong imagery, like “sharp pains”, and “blunting the edges of her pain”. By writing in a style that connects with her audience Roy makes a strong point about war.

Posting 9 by Jennifer October 23, 2007

Arundhati Roy states, “The theme of much of what I write, fiction as well as nonfiction, is the relationship between power and powerlessness and the endless, circular conflict they’re engaged in.” (254) I think that this relates to my paper because, that is what war is all about.  Who has the most power.  The one with the most power usually wins, but then a new powerhouse shows up and the cycle continues.  I talk about suicide bombers in my paper.  They do not have the power to defeat other countries, so suicide bombings are their method of warfare.  That is how they try to get their point across.  And finally I talk about how suicide bombs are a type  of terrorism.  Roy focuses a lot of her story on The War on Terror, which we are currently involved in.

Intro writing by Erik… late… Office PWNZORZ October 22, 2007

Instead of using a movie for this portion i decided to use my favorite show on TV at the moment, “The Office.” For those that don’t know (you should) it is a comedy about a paper distribution company office branch. Anywho, it’s every show has a little 3-5 minute introduction before the opening theme begins. Each one of these introduces a mini plot for the episode. For example, on last Thursday the season premiere began with a brief recap of season 3 with Micheal Scott (the boss) telling the viewers that he’s hoping to make this a good year. He then drives to work, keeping the monologue going with small jokes and such, and upon entering company property, HITS one of his employees with his car! Lawl… yeah it’s going to be a good year. It set up the rest of the episode and started some questions that I’ll be looking forward in the future episodes. The filmmaker shouldn’t change a single thing… the office is untouchably perfect.

-Erik, the reason I hadn’t credited you for this before is that is was not published.  I found it, and now it is. -Ariana

Posting 9 – Roy – Due Wed 10/24 October 22, 2007

Please answer one of the following in your post.

 1.  Roy covers (or at least mentions) a gamut of topics and themes from this segment of class.  How do her ideas fit with your essay? 

2.  Isolate one of Roy’s points and respond to it.

im never wrong! david luce October 19, 2007

The entire situation with religion and war is much larger, more complex, and far more confussing then what we have read. We could read this entire book plus many others, study numerous religions and still not understand religion and war.

But almost all religions state it is honorable to die for the sake of it own god and sacrafice yourself for the religion. But when is it neccissary to sacrafice yourself for your religion?  What is sacrifice? would you consider killing people because they do no have the same beliefs a sacrifice for the religion?

Besides the point of sacrifice, what about recruitment? dont some religions such as christianity strongly believe in converting others, rather than killing them? so there are two different ideas of what to do with different people, one is; killing those not to value or against your religion, two; trying to convert those different from your religion.

Now what about war? how does a religious war come about between countries that represent no religion? Does religion value war, or do humans value war? are the needs of man buried into religion? Is religion simply a cover? anyone else still not have a justifiable argument to these questions? anyone else still need to read more passages on relgion and war? i do, i personally love the topic, cause i cant be wrong.

questions of war (kyle) October 17, 2007

Is a war ever justified?

whose to decide what life is worth?

after a war who is truly victorious?

thinking of jackie chan singin war in rush hour…… October 16, 2007

what IS war to different cultures?

a society that is more developed need war more than those societies that are not?

is man really born with an instinctive necessity to wage war upon one another?

Few Of Many Questions That Rocky Wants Answers To October 15, 2007

Does lack of government and education make an country more prone to war or is it vice verse.?

If there was no religion, would there be less fighting, the same, or more?

Is war the only mean of progress?

War? October 15, 2007

what is the difference between suicide bombings and a traditional war, are they both wars?
What is the solution after war? what does it solve?
is war truly something that societies cant live without?

October 15, 2007

1. Is war going to be the cause of the end for everyone?
2.Just because a religion says that war is ok, do we really have to listen?
3. Is war the only way that our society can get out points across?

Questions by christian October 15, 2007

what caused the start of suicide bombing and less conventional forms of war in the modern world?

 how is fighting for an idea different then fighting for land or glory?

are liberty and justice more important than the human sacrifice of war?