Question 1. Discuss how you see the "war on terrorism" as of this date. Do you think the United States should be engaged in such a war? Give reasons for or against this "war" and whether or not we are giving up our own principles to wage this war.
Question 2. Which of the current threats to the "commons" (global warming, acid rain, etc.) do you feel is the most serious? Explain why. To what extent do you think citizens of the developed world are aware of these threats and to what extent are they responsible to alleviate these threats? Are the United States and other developed countries responsible to protect less developed countries and their indigenous peoples (e.g., the responsibility of the Brazilian government to protect the Amazon rain forest and the few remaining uncontacted native peoples who live there)?
This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.
1. The “war on terrorism” from the very outset was almost impossible to fight, and I still see it that way today. It is much more difficult to fight a war against an idea than it is to fight against a country. Ed Kilgore writes that perpetual war is nonsensical, and since the “war on terrorism” will never end, it is not a war worth fighting (Kilgore, 2013). Kilgore states that the idea “of waging undeclared wars fought under hazy international and domestic auspices is dangerous enough” (Kilgore, 2013)....
This is only a preview of the solution. Please use the purchase button to see the entire solution