Published February 11, 2005
I suppose this applys more to Americans, but I would appreciate any opinions
[pre]The war in Iraq is on many minds, some more than others. Many husbands were sent away from their wives and fathers taken away from their families, causing sorrow and fear. Mothers and wives think every day about their husbands standing in the line of battle, putting their lives on the line. They don’t know if their husbands are dead or alive, and their hearts jump at each phone call or knock on the door. Women are also sent to Iraq, leaving their young children without a mother. In some rare cases, both the mother and father of a family are sent to fight, brutally ripping apart families. Most spouses and families of those in Iraq understand that their husbands and wives are helping to keep America safe, and although it saddens and frightens them, they respect and honor the fact that their spouses are brave and it is their duty to go and fight. But others do not. They believe that it is wrong to tear families apart. These men and women protest the United States policies on the war in Iraq. Some Americans would view these people as traitors or as being un-American. Others think that protest is simply freedom of expression and that this right is given to them. Either way, the war in Iraq, and our nation’s policies on it, cause daily controversy in the lives of Americans. Many people think that protesting the war in Iraq is not un-American in any way. The first amendment to the Constitution was ratified in December of 1791. This Amendment states that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” This, in short, grants the freedom of religion, speech, expression, and the right tot assemble. That means that every American has the right to make his voice heard, even if it differs with the Government’s policy. This freedom allows men and women who disagree about the war in Iraq to speak their minds. When the Amendment was formed, it is doubtful that it was intended for it to be considered un-American for citizens to exercise their rights. Protests from citizens could save American soldiers lives and help to prevent the U.S. from making mistakes in leadership. After all, war protests helped to end the Vietnam Was, which if it had continued, would have undoubtedly killed thousands more people. Lastly, protests are a way to make sure that the people’s voices are heard. I will summarize my feelings on this topic with a quote from a great man. John Adams once said,” Posterity—you will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it.” Let us use this freedom granted by John Adams’s generation and not waste it. We much allow people to speak their minds, for if with don’t, this freedom will be lost forever.[/pre]
Points:
Time spent:
IP address:
Canary word: Present
Possible AI signals:
Original Text:
Are you sure you want to delete this comment? This cannot be undone.
Mark this comment as a review? Points will be awarded to the poster.
Your comment was posted, but it wasn’t long enough to count as a review. Reviews need about four complete sentences (at least 250 characters). Try writing another review that explains your thoughts in more detail — the author will appreciate it, and you’ll earn points for it.
Hello!
RandomTalks here with a short review!
I enjoyed reading this article! I am not an American, and therefore cannot exactly relate where you are coming from. However, I will try to comment on the writing of the article instead of its content!
Firstly, I really liked the way you have presented your thoughts! It was neat and concise and I could not spot any grammatical errors, so you are clear on that ground. I liked how focused your approach was to the essay - you were clear on the issue you wanted to highlight, even though by the end of it, it was not very clear where exactly you stand on this subject. I think that was a rather clear and subtle way to emphasize the main message of the essay - this question of every individual rightfully possessing the right to free expression. Instead of directing our thoughts to fit the purpose of your essay, you gave us the freedom and the space to make up our own minds.
Although, the end point was very clear to the readers, you went about it in a very subtle way that made the readers more invested in what you had to say about the topic. That is a very effective way to hold your reader's attention!
I have only two complaints regarding the essay. One has to be the formatting. This would have been so much more visually appealing if it had been broken into the necessary number of paragraphs. Right now, it just stands like a huge block of text that might steer away your readers before they even begin reading. There were several opportunities for you to make some paragraphs, especially as you deal with distinct thoughts in different sections. Putting it all together seems a little more callous and it does not have the same effect it would have, had it been divided into paragraphs. It would be a much easier read for one, that's for sure!
Also, like the other reviewer said, you did not really expand on this sentence and for someone who is not an American, it was a little difficult to understand. The rest of the essay was very well though-out and planned, but here, you seem to have scratched the surface of something bigger before completely extracting from it. As a result, it was a little difficult for me to follow you r next thoughts!
I liked the fact that you ended with a quote that neatly summed up the moral of the essay in an effective manner. It was a proper and satisfying conclusion that left the readers with something to think about.
That's all!
Keep writing and have a great day!
yeah, okay. it's quite good.
apart from the paragraphing which you explained)
the only thing that came to mind was how you said these people were viewed as un-american, but you didnt explain why.
oh and you forgot to include the monk who set himself on fire