The Prince

Chapter IX Of the Civil Princedom
This chapter had the best advice for achieving the role as a prince or leader of a country.
"I come now to the second case, namely, of the leading citizen who, not by crimes or violence, but by the favour of his fellow-citizens is made Prince of his country" (24).
This seems to be the best way for achieving this role because the people support you as the leader and to me a great leader is one who is supported by the people.

Chapter VI Of New Princedoms Which a Prince Acquires With His Own Arms and By Merit
This chapter had an idea included that would represent the worst advice.
"The wise man should always follow the roads that have been trodden by the great, and imitate those who have most excelled, so that if he cannot reach their perfection, he may at least acquire something of its savour" (12).
A wise man wouldn't need to follow the actions of previous leaders or imitate those who have excelled. A wise man would have his own ideas and goals to pursue that might not be the same as great leaders of the past but could make him an even better leader.

Time Article Iran

The National Intelligence affirms that Iran is a threat

The Bush Administration: Plan is to pressure Iran in order to stop them from gaining the intelligence to complete nuclear bombs. They believe that easing up on the pressure would be a "tragic mistake".

Iran policy is a compromise between the hawks, who believe military action is needed, and Washington realists and European allies, who believe negotiating between the U.S. and Iran is the way to go. Iran can't be trusted and President Bush will not speak with Iran until they stop their production of enriched uranium. He is continuing to push coercive sanctions while leaving the option of military action "on the table".

Washington Hawks: This group doesn't want to risk failure to notice nuclear threats or intelligence that happened with Iraq. They believe military action should be kept on the table along with coercive sanctions to further pressure Iran.

Democrats and Republican 'Realists': This group supports negotiations with Iran. The administration's claims on activity in Iran has been "inflated" and there is no reason to seek military action. This group wants to attack the Bush Administration for inflating the threat of nuclear attack and push a new approach for diplomacy.

Israel: Recognizes the threat reported by the NIE and thinks that if the U.S. doesn't react on the information Israel will face mortal danger by an Iranian bomb. Israel will push the U.S. to take coercive action and persuade Europe to back up stronger sanctions.

Europe, China, Russia and Arabs: These European countries believe we should keep pressure on Iran to meet the UN demands but don't believe the NIE gave any threatening report. China and Russia don't see the need to strengthen sanctions against Iran.

Iran: Will not be "bowing" to any foreign power trying to weaken their uranium enrichment and nuclear programs. They insist on maintaining their current research rate.

It's hard to say what group has the best method of action when we don't know whether or not the Bush Administration is inflating the NIE reports or not. It is also hard to know whether or not Iran would use a nuclear bomb if it was concocted.

Iran: Struggle for Democracy

Citizens of Iran are demanding democracy after twenty-five years of Islamic theocracy. In the 1950's Mossadeq was the prime minister that gained control from the Shah. Shah's pro-Western regime was reinstated but portrayed as benefiting Western powers, the United States. Opposition arose against Shah and Khomeini was founded the new influential cleric. He declared the country the Islamic Republic of Iran and called for a new religious government based on the strict principles of Shi'iah Islam. He died in 1989 and lower-level clerics controlled everyday political operations. Members of the opposition could expect imprisonment, torture and even execution. The ruling clerics possessed the countries wealthy while citizens experienced unemployment with a rising cost of living. Young people, three-quarters of the population, couldn't listen to Western music, criticize rulers or be involved with the opposite sex.

Mohammad Khatami was elected president in May of 1997. He was a moderate cleric that represented a voice for the young people, university students, and women in the demand for increased democratic freedoms. Reformist newspapers began to circulate as the opposition movement had begun. The conservatives tried to stop the advancements of reform; a clerical regime sent police forces to attack the Tehran University dorms leaving three dead and many injured or arrested. Clerics were moving to protect their conservative ideas by closing reformist newspapers, torturing opposition leaders and having Bassijis break up student demonstrations. Reform seemed to disappear. "The growing political crisis in Iran garnered worldwide attention" and has grabbed the attention of the United States specifically. The citizens and some officials in Iran are torn on whether or not they want U.S. intervention leaving our country to face the difficulty in compiling a strategy for facing the Islamic Republic of Iran.

After reading this article it seems obvious that the first step in solving any problems would be for Iran to figure out their governmental situation. With political crisis occurring throughout the country that remains the number one priority before solving problems with nuclear factories.

Should the U.S. Attack Iranian Nuclear Facilities?

When deciding whether or not the U.S. should preemptively attack Iranian nuclear facilities I believe Edward N. Luttwak made a better "no" argument. The issue summary in the beginning of the article tends to provoke the no opinion by listing three possible outcomes which creates negative outcomes. The use of force "could alienate the Iranian public, further incite Muslim opposition to the United States around the world, and lead Iran to retaliate by working to stimulate attacks on U.S. soldiers in Iraq by Shiite groups linked to Iran" (129). To forestall anticipated outcomes by acting first will not lead to anything positive. In the yes argument, Mario tries to say the U.S. is "given up on a vital element of its national defense" (130). However, According to Edward, these efforts to build nuclear weapons began over thirty years ago and are still years away from producing a single bomb. This shows that a preempt attack will not be effective; how can there be such "uncertainty" on whether or not Iran will attack when they have yet to produce a bomb? What would be the chance of an attack on the U.S. when we have been allies with Iran in the past? Most Iranians except for the very few extremists admire the U.S.; we need to gain our future allies back. Also, the engineers and scientists working on the nuclear weapons are more sensible people and not necessarily nationalists who promote their leaders. Overall, the situation hasn't progressed enough to ignite the fear and "uncertainty" to provoke action against Iranian nuclear facilities.

H of D Quote Response

“In seasons of pestilence some of us will have a secret attraction to the disease--a terrible passing inclination to die of it. And all of us have like wonders hidden in our breasts, only needing circumstances to evoke them.”

In times of plague some will have the disease—an inclination to die of it.
All of us have hidden wonders in our hearts only needing situations to cause them to appear.

I think the quote is trying to state how humans are inherently evil; relating the hidden wonders in our hearts to secret attractions to diseases that are both evoked by circumstances. This quote relates to a theme in Heart of Darkness, human nature. In the novel Joseph Conrad uses rivets as symbols for laws and restraints. As Marlow made his journey into the heart of Africa he was exposed to a less civilized culture, lacking restraints, allowing circumstances to evoke wild, savage, and evil behavior in Africans and Mr. Kurtz. The main idea, without some kind of restraints humans will express their inherent evil. This compares to both White Fang and Lord of the Flies. In White Fang, Jack London’s idea is that humans are clay and behavior is molded by one’s environment. Humans can be evil if their environment causes that behavior but they aren’t inherently evil. Conrad and London have opposing ideas on human nature while Conrad’s theory is similar to William Golding’s. In the Lord of the Flies we learn that living in a utopia doesn’t create perfect behavior to match. These boys had food, shelter, and nice weather but their utopia didn’t prevent the inherent evil of mankind to surface. While not all of the boys expressed evilness (attraction to disease) they all are considered inherently evil (all of us have hidden wonders).

Heart of Darkness Section Two

African Americans are displayed as savages. Marlow can make observations about their savage appearance but his feelings contrast with what his eyes see. When he was thinking about the death of his helmsman he said, "I missed him even while his body was still lying in the pilot house. Perhaps you will think it passing strange this regret for a savage who was no more account than a grain of sand in a black Sahara" (46). Marlow is aware of how African Americans don't count for much in Sahara; he misses the helmsman and feels sorrow. He also uses the term "savage" and "nigger" showing how he views African Americans as inferior but not necessarily referring to the color of their skin. He may feel superior to African Americans but that doesn't make him racist. According to the American Heritage Dictionary corruption is ruining morally, perverting, contaminating and destroying integrity. The Europeans have corrupted African Americans by simply using the terms "savage", "nigger" and describing them as wild and untamed. Marlow speaks of the African Americans when he says, "Well, you know what was the worst of it--this suspicion of their not being inhuman" (32). Marlow states that when people begin to suspect that African Americans are not inhuman it can be the worst feeling. "They howled and leaped, and spun, and made horrid faces" and ugly as it might have looked "he must at least be as much of a man as these on the shore" meaning a real man knows there is a relation between himself and the African Americans, whether he speaks of it or not the thought is there (32).

Marlow displays some thoughts of colonialism when he says, "We were wanderers on prehistoric earth, on an earth that wore the aspect of an unknown planet. We could have fancied ourselves the first of men taking possession of an accursed inheritance, to be subdued at the cost of profound anguish and of excessive toil" (32). He is stating that they were wondering in what seemed to be unclaimed land that they could have taken possession of but they would have been overpowered by distress and hard work. Mr. Kurtz also explains that "we whites, from the point of development we had arrived at, a must necessarily appear to them [savages] in the nature of supernatural beings--we approach them with the might as of a deity" This shows how many white people thought they could approach African Americans as supernatural beings and godlike, showing they had good intentions for colonizing.

Marlow said that "all Europe contributed to the making of Kurtz" relating to the idea that Mr. Kurtz' mother was half-English and his father half-French. Meaning Kurtz was not of one background and not the average European looking to colonize Africa. Kurtz had a diverse background "all Europe" not just a part of Europe shaped him.

Should U.S. Send Peace Troops?

The issue in Darfur is between Arab Janjaweed and the Muslims. Rebel groups in Darfur formed to attack the Sudanese government for discriminating against non-Arab tribes. The Sudanese government formed a militia known as Janjaweed to chase rebel groups out using rape and murder to clear entire villages. Chad and the African Union have made efforts to stop the battle while the Sudanese government rejects UN force and requested the AU to leave.

Lawerence Kaplan argues that Darfur is in need of foreign intervention. Many activists want to fund the AU and lobby for the UN however; Lawrence thinks the AU won't put a stop to the killings, the UN will not solve the crisis and "the victims of Darfur can be saved by one thing and one thing alone: American power" (149). Through his argument he seems to be playing the sympathy card. The killing taking place in Darfur is horrible and if the U.S. can help it should but as David Rieff said in the no argument, "The United States is the last country that should be leading an international operation in Darfur" (151). The U.S. is in a bad position; viewed as a bully and imperial aggressor. International military should be deployed to keep the civilians safe from the attacking Sudanese government and to ward off the term genocide. David made a point concerning political interests of non-arab tribes, rebels, and the Janjaweed. He says, "To describe the former simply as victims deprives them of any agency. To describe the latter simply as killers precludes actually understanding the conflict a anything other than an eruption of human wickedness, rather like a volcano or an earthquake" meaning that a side can't be taken without understanding the conflict (153).

Although it seems morally correct for the U.S. to send peace keeping troops, I believe the no argument is stronger. With problems in Iraq and being in a bad position, the U.S. shouldn't be leading a peace intervention. The United Nations should stand up for one of their goals in securing peace.