even nuclear attack. Annotated Bibliography The topic I choose was Iraq
and its past and still ongoing problems with the United Nations. The reason I
choose this topic as oppose to another topic is war and the United Nations
has always fascinated me. With Saddam Hussein still being stubborn with UN
weapons inspectors it was incredibly easy to obtain information regarding this
topic. The Los Angles Times; California; Feb 12 2000; The newest article I
attained was from the February 12 edition of the Los Angles Times. It was
entitled “Compromise Broached on issue of Arms Inspectors in Iraq”. It
discussed how Iraq is still refusing to allow the UN weapons inspector into
the nation. It also talks about the UN feelings on the chance of inspectors
ever being allowed to do their job. Apparently the Vice President has no
intention of ever letting the inspectors into the country. Last Thursday he said,
” There shall be no return of the so-called inspection teams. We reject the
infiltration by spies using such cover.” In my humble opinion it would make
life in Iraq better if the inspectors where just allowed into the country. Most
importantly sanctions the UN has placed upon Iraq would be removed.
Apparently the really don’t care about the sanctions according to their deputy
foreign minister Nizar Hamdoun who said they can live without sanctions
“forever”. The UN has a different opinion they believe they cannot. I believe
they can, they have done fine up to this point and I think they will continue to
do fine. I think Iraq has many things they don’t want the UN to know about
such as chemical and biological weapons. They are a threat and need to be
dealt with accordingly. New York Times; New York; Feb 8, 2000; Barbara
Crossette The next article I choose was from the February 8 issue of the
New York Times. This article was entitled “Iraq Suspected of Secret War
Effort”. This article sort of scared me. It was about in Britain, research and
intelligence experts, also convinced that there are more germ warfare agents
left in Iraq than previously known, have suggested that Iraq may have
produced the organism that causes bubonic plague. But no evidence has been
published in support of that theory, but American experts say, and United
Nations inspectors found not trace of the plague in Iraq. This is only because
Iraq not allowing them to inspect and when the UN inspectors where allowed
in they where only allowed to inspect “certain” areas. This statement made by
the so-called American experts was bull*censored*; they only said to
comfort the American public. This expert Milton Leitenberg from the Center
for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland has been
collecting information about Iraqi weapons sites and activities from two Iraqi
defectors. Milton is really not sure if the new thing is a virus and not a
bacterial agent but he said in an interview that Hans Blix, the new chief
inspector for Iraq might need to focus his attention on Biological weapons.
Milton and other British experts say inspector will have to be more aggressive
in demanding access in Iraq. I think so to, biological weapons are illegal as a
form of warfare since the Geneva Convention outlawed them. And the fact
that there are not allowed to be used as a form of warfare should be reason
enough to be more aggressive not to mention the fact that these weapons of
mass destruction will be if not are already in the hands of a mad man! Also
according to this article the eradication of biological weapons in Iraq may be
as important or more important to the people of Iraq as to the outside world.
Experts working with the United Nations Special Commission, the first
disarmament task force created for Iraq after the Gulf War said some of the
bacterial and viral agents Iraq was producing then had little application for
war. Evidently a fungal agent called aflatoxin can lead to liver cancer, and
rotavirus, which causes diarrhea in children and the elderly. This is just
another reason for the inspectors to be more insistent in their attempt to gain
entry into Iraq, their military compounds, and laboratories. World History
Volume II; William J. Duiker & Jackson J. Spielvogel Pages 1136-1137
Duiker provided some insight on the history of this conflict. According to
Duiker “Saddam Hussein, assumed power in Baghdad in 1979, then accused
Iran of violating the territorial agreement and launched an attack on his
neighbor.” (1136) It seems Saddam has been a problem from the beginning
and should have been taken care of before he became a real threat like he is
now. Duiker also says during the war between Iraq and Iran poison gas was
used on civilians and also defenseless children were used in the minefields.
Then in August 1990 Hussein’s military forces went into the small country of
Kuwait and claimed that they were stealing oil from Iraqi land. This is when
the United Nations decided to get involved, after all not only was this small
defenseless country under attack but our nations oil supply was endangered.
Really in my opinion this is the main reason we got involved not for the moral
reasons but the financial reasons. From here the book taught me no new
information. We restored peace to Kuwait and destroyed much of Saddam’s
forces. The only problem is we did not destroy enough of his forces because
they are better equipped than they ever were. I have herd that Saddam if he
did posses such chemical weapons that the article spoke of he does not have
the launch capability, meaning he does not posses sufficient I.C.B.M.s (Inter-
Continental Ballistic Missiles) but how long before he does posses such
devices. Only time will tell but for now it is high time we tell Saddam and the
Iraqi government to let us in or else threaten another military strike maybe
even nuclear attack.Can’t find it here?
Try Collegiate Care Trust
By: James Kyle
E-mail: J44Kyl@aol.com
Justin Cameron February 1st, 1999 Lack of trust is a reoccurring theme
through out the three cases. One might ask, why you need trust in any civil
society? Lack of trust in a civil society has the society with no real stability.
Trust in authority is lacking in each case. The approval rating for Bill Clinton
is high. Does this mean that most Americans trust Bill Cliton? Most polls
would tell that trust is a serious issue. So, what is the consequences of
Americans not having trust in there president? It can’t be to bad because the
economy is doing great and the budget and finally balanced. Most Americans
are happy so what is the problem? The lack of trust is a direct correlation
with weak and/or illegitimate authority. Trust with our president has always
been a sensitive issue. Richard Nixion broke that trust with the country and
sealed the fate for himself and his party for a short term. No one really
understood why Nixon had ordered the break in of the democratic offices in
the first place. What made matters worse is Nixion never came out and
admitted his mistake even when the evidence was overwhelming. Clinton’s
case has some similarities to it. While he finally did come out and admit what
he had done he showed little remorse and accusations still remain about a
cover up. The lack of trust in a political position in this country tends to the
norm. It is created and redefined every day in Washington with a political
figure. This creates an image and a strong stereotype for all political figures.
This in turn hurts all of our civil society. Without the trust then how do you
have the legitimate authority to lead the country. Most would say that
Clinton’s leadership really is not the question but his judgment is. To me, that
is a contradiction and that poor judgment leads to poor leadership. His poor
judgment leads to his ethics and morals that he has. People with weak family
values will have a hard time trusting Cliton with just recognition of their own
problems. The lack of trust is not just with Cliton in the impeachment
arguments. All of the political system seems to be lacking credibility. How
mush faith do people have that their representative will represent their opinion
and not act in the best interest of their party? Who in all this has the best
interest in the country? If Congress does not represent the majority and
decides on the rational of what party they are in then it is a illegitimate use of
authority. Cananada’s theme in the early part of the book was an issue with
trust. In such a community, trust was not apparent and was earned. The lack
of trust went further then authority. In his neighborhood trust was earned the
hard way by a serious of tests. The policy matrix in that community dictates
that trust when earned is essential for survival. Trust within sub cultures of the
society also lead to survival. Even with individual families trust was earned.
Geoffrey Canada’s mother sent his bothers out to retrieve a jacket to prove
that the family could trust in each other in adversity. Federal mandates
dictated massive efforts to extent efforts to improve the equality of the
educational opportunity. A lack of trust was apparent in Hamiltion High in the
60’s and 70’s. This was in part do to the end of segregation of schools. At
such a great time of transition there were so many outside influences trying to
control the policy matrix. Most notable was the federal government
mandating the segregation. The lack of shared values during the transition
played a crucial role in the process. The civil rights was suppose to be a
trickle down effect from the federal government. The problem there is that
not all respected government officials believed in equality for education.
Conflict arose and with it side were drawn. Ho could the government decide
on what a “moral education” is when such confusion existed on what morals
were for many political figures. The lack of shared values weighed heavily
with trust of many just to provide a safe educational environment. The lack of
values can be an argument traced back to the Clinton’s scandal. Who is to
say that Clinton himself did not help dictate what many people believe is a
society that is severely lacking values. To many, he began