The people that Shelton killed are considered combatants because they support they governmental system and work with it. Based on Just War Theory, the proportionality of killing these people is that their deaths are outweighed by the justice that will bring to the judicial system. Shelton believes the system to be corrupt, focusing instead on conviction rates rather than making sure the right person is placed behind bars. By killing these people Shelton can put a new mindset into the “system” because those affected by the killings will want the right man punished rather since they now know how it feels to be wronged. All the killings made by Shelton were to people who were directly showed how flawed the system was.
I especially enjoyed his analysis on the vigilantes and in particular the American Protective League (APL) which is a fairly significant picture of the state of affairs within our country and moreover, the lack of control the government had against the people. The “conspiracy theorist” inside of me has always believed in false flag terror, citizen spies and inside jobs and the existence of the APL was complete confirmation for me. While most would argue that these types of organizations couldn’t exist today, Kennedy opens the door to this type of behavior, which seems illegal in its very fibers. As discussed last week, this time period was rich with reform and political parties were eager to trump the other in any way possible. In Over Here, Kennedy touches on the elites pulling the strings behind the scenes spreading political influence and propaganda along the way.
I believe that the unpatriotic aspects of the war is the main reason the book was banned. Americans see World War II as a moral war against senseless manslaughter that we won. To show how we also participated in senseless manslaughter ourselves would be hard to explain to
In my opinion, making someone a hero doesn’t always make him that much more interesting. So as you can see I am for Loewens argument that heroification is a bad practice because it doesn’t show all the sides and actions done by a person. American history textbook authors should show all aspects of a person and not just the good parts. Not everyone is perfect and they should be their imperfectness should be
The choice is yours. If you believe that the media is right so be it, but if you think they are wrong look into it. But if you think they are right, you can tell all the war veterans and current soldiers that what they did as a living is wrong and is a disgrace. See what they have to say to you. They put their life on the line to protect the sorry Americans who are to caught up in what they drive and how they look to look at the big picture.
He analyses facts from american history and describes the paranoid style through these events. His goal is to define an archetype of the paranoid style in order to identify which people are more likely to have this kind of behaviour. Several concepts such as treason, belief or persecution are presents in the majority of the events described by the author. Although it is focusing on america, Hofstadter states that the U.S aren't an isolated case and that the paranoid style can be found in almost every country's history (for instance, conspiration theories targeting Freemasons, Communism or the jewish lobby are international). He notices numerous waves of different intensities of paranoia in history which leads to believe that this phenomenon could be ineradicable
This caused much controversy as Americans would classify him as a traitor or hero for what he did. Americans called him a hero because they feel like they should have some type of privacy and security when it comes to their private documents and what they do over the internet as well as in their free time. Other Americans feel like he is a traitor because he revealed documents that were classified and did not have permission from the National Security Agency to leak them to the public. I classify Edward Snowden as a hero. The National Security Agency (abbreviated NSA) is the creator and manager of the signals intelligence agency of the United States of America who’s responsibility it is to check and analyze all foreign communications.
Individuals have also made good arguments about the negative outcome that racial profiling might bring to our society. Obviously it has led the dominant race to have superiority to the minorities – racial discrimination. James Zogby, the president of the Arab-American Institute have made a point that he have seen a lot of dark skinned people being searched and treated with humiliation, which is really wrong – Racial Relations. David Harris, a writer and Professor at Toledo College, have already written a couple of books about racial profiling. He states that law enforcers think that they would be more accurate in targeting a suspicious group, but in reality, what happens is the total opposite wherein officials have inaccurate results in targeting the suspect—Race Relations.
Vincent grew up to be a great man, who was unfairly targeted and beaten to death. His legacy will always live on as a scar reflecting the awful and ignorant opinions of some former Americans. It is also represents the courage that inspired many Asian-Americans to fight back for their civil liberties. “We must let the world know that we think this is wrong. We can't stop now without even trying.” (Zia, pp.
It does "damage to our country's image" and undermines our credibility in Iraq.” (Applebaum) It undermines the work of our soldiers that are helping make Iraq into a country ruled by its people instead of a dictator. The use of torture robes them of their dignity and makes them into another oppressive force in a war torn country. Where did all this begin? America has always been the defender of the oppressed and downtrodden. We as a people are the defenders of freedom.