Thursday, December 6, 2012

Global Security

Two of the top news stories are mirrored in our daily topics of our Government textbook.  One is about Security and another is about the metaphorical "Fiscal Cliff" taxes breaks and the budget.  Choose one of these articles to read and respond with your observations and opinions. Should the US get involved in Syria?  What is the upside of that?  Should the President extend the tax breaks or allow congress to have a continuing resolution, and resolve the budget in the New Year: 2013?  What are the downside/upside to either choice? Explain your reasoning.Fiscal Cliff Story/Blogger  or Syria and global Security

This is a great resource for those who want more information:
Global Security



11 comments:

  1. Ubaldo and Vivi/5thDecember 6, 2012 at 1:50 PM

    We believe that the president and congress should come to a compromise. The government shouldn't stop supporting the unemployed, but the unemployment checks should be a bit less money. We do not have enough money in the budget to pay everybody's unemployment checks, but we've already made too many cuts everywhere else, like law enforcement and public services. People would rather get less money per month then no money at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marissa and Katie 5thDecember 10, 2012 at 12:54 PM

      We both agree with Ubaldo and Vivi's statement. It is hard for a person to survive in this economy without a job nor financial support. If everyone lets go a little money from each check then this would benefit a lot of people who are unemployed. It is way better to receive a little support then no support.

      Delete
  2. I read the article on Syria and Global Security and I realized that it's sort of a lose- lose situation. I mean, sure, if we (the U.S.) successfully stopped Syria then many lives will be saved. However, things wouldn't be the same anymore. Syria is one of the members in United Nation, it's kinda like a family. So if Syria are forced to stop producing the Sarin, it'd eventually isolated itself and other countries will be more careful of each other; a nest of suspicion is casted on everyone. It's also possible that Syria will hold a grudge against the U.N. (especially the U.S.) and strike back when they can.
    On the other hand, if we can't stop Syria, many people will die, and since its a chemical weapon, it can scatter to other places and harm people. Since we're trying to save the planet, it's not a really good idea for Syria to that. But either way, after this event, the U.N. will never be the same. Unless Syria volunteers to give up peacefully, I guess we have to go out and stop it so many lives will be saved for now. The future? I guess we'd just have to wait until then.

    ReplyDelete
  3. We think that the US should not get involved with Syria as it should not even concern us whatsoever. This is a conflit tha needs to be resolved but without our involvement. If we were to get involved with Syria, this would give us another ally but that's not much of a reason to get involed. The president should not extend tax breaks but rather allow congress to handle the budget. The president wouldnt really do much given the past four years. It woud be better if congress made the decisions concerning the budget. The budget will be in a better position to recover.

    ReplyDelete
  4. After reading the article about global security and Syria I believe that the United States should definitely get involved in the situation with Syria because it is an act of crime. I also believe that the UN should go into Syria and resolve the problems there. Even though the interference of the US and the UN could cause the situation to escalade into something worse, I believe they should not let Syria kill their own people. It seems like everyone is just sitting around while a genocide is occurring and falling out of proportion. We need to act on this before it inevitably blows up in our faces.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I read the article on Syria and Global Security and I realized that it's sort of a lose- lose situation. I mean, sure, if we (the U.S.) successfully stopped Syria then many lives will be saved. However, things wouldn't be the same anymore. Syria is one of the members in United Nation, it's kinda like a family. So if Syria are forced to stop producing the Sarin, it'd eventually isolated itself and other countries will be more careful of each other; a nest of suspicion is casted on everyone. It's also possible that Syria will hold a grudge against the U.N. (especially the U.S.) and strike back when they can. On the other hand, if we can't stop Syria, many people will die, and since its a chemical weapon, it can scatter to other places and harm people. Since we're trying to save the planet, it's not a really good idea for Syria to that. But either way, after this event, the U.N. will never be the same. Unless Syria volunteers to give up peacefully, I guess we have to fight.

    ReplyDelete
  6. After reading the article about Syria global security, I believe that the U.S should get involved in the situation with Syria because they have chemical weapons, in which they can use against the U.S. I also believe that the UN should go into Syria, too, and also resolve/fix the issues that Syria has there. Even though the US and the UN could end up as a conflict between them to escalade into something worse, like war. I strongly believe that the Syrian's should not kill their own people. It seems like everyone is just sitting and waiting while a genocide is happening around everyone there. I think we (The United States) need to act on this before any chaos occurs.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think that the US should not get involved with Syria. I as a citizen believe that prices know a days are really high. If the US goes into war they are going to raise taxes making it almost impossible for me and my family to afford the necessities. My family is currently going through a economical crisis and we are having a lot of trouble affording certain things.I also think the US shouldn't just leave Syria. They should try and come to an agreement with Syria on these chemical weapons

    ReplyDelete
  8. I am in complete agreement with Steve. After reading the article about Syria global security, I believe that if a nation has chemical weapons that are being used against their own people, then someone needs to step in and try to put a stop to it. I know that because it has nothing to do with other countries, they're all going to be hesitant to get involved, but if we don't stop this now, then who's to say that it wont involve the US later when Syria decides to strike somewhere outside their borders. Plus the article said that Syria agreed not to use the chemical weapon against its own people and now that it is being used against the people of Syria, either the US or UN, or maybe both, should put an end to it in order to enforce the penalties that come with "criminal acts" if these acts go unpunished or unstopped, I strongly believe that it will escalate into a bigger problem down the line, something that will be too big to stop before tons of other people get hurt.

    ReplyDelete
  9. In my opinion I think that the US should not get involve in Syria not just because it will prevent problems between the states, but it also means that taxes will be raised. I feel that if the US does go into war for helping Syria it will make our state more unsafe for our generation and depending on how long the war lasts it might affect future generations in all life aspects as US citizens. The taxes also will be raised making our chances of leaving the economic crisis behind; it would literally leave us very limited. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t try to help them but I just think that we shouldn’t get to the point of joining the war.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I believe the US should not go into war with Syria because it will only cause us more problems. The president should just focus on the problems we are having now. For example, people need medical insurance, we need programs that help our environment, and also we need more jobs for people. We have enough problems here, we do not need to add one more to our list. I know that as humans we tend to feel compassionate for others but in this case we don´t know the results it will bring if we do go to war. Who knows if they still have chemical weapons that they don´t want to give up and they use it with our people. The US does not want innocent people dying. Although many Syrians have died because of chemical weapons, we can still stop them from killing our troops.

    ReplyDelete