War and the Everyday Life
These discussion boards have been designed to explore controversial topics. Often these debates have the potential to become heated. In the act of creating ideas, heat can be a good thing, but not at the expense of hurt feelings or frustration. Remember that any argument asks that we change something about ourselves. If we are asking our readers to change, we need to be civil about it. Likewise, when we are challenged by others with a different opinion, we need to keep an open mind. Remember, we are not changing the world here, only examining it.
Some important rules to follow:
- You may not attack other people or their ideas in this course. To do so may result in failure of the assignment. You may, however, disagree with the ideas of others, but do so in a constructive manner. (e.g. "I don't agree with your post. I think instead that . . . " NOT "That's a dumb way of looking at this." Debate in academia is important, but let's all be adults here.
- Ask open-ended questions (e. g. "What if we thought about things this way?"), and avoid making statements meant to be absolute or closed-ended questions ("There is no other way to think about this," or "Do you agree with me?").
- Remember to consider the lessons we've worked on throughout the rest of the class. Rather than simply reacting to the readings and the responses of your classmates, think about the arguments being made. Really consider the effectiveness of these arguments.
Go to the resources tab and use the EBSCOhost link to search for the following articles, then, using the questions below as a guide, write a 75-100 word response about the issue being discussed. Next, please take the time to respond to your classmates.
Go to the resources tab and use the EBSCOhost link to search for the following articles:
- Harjo, J. (2007). When the world as we knew it ended. World Literature Today, 81(6), 34-35 (please read both "No" and "When the World as We Knew it Ended--").
- Melville, H. (1976). Punishable by death. Saturday Evening Post, 248(5), 16-17
- Alexie, S. (1994). Flight. Ploughshares, 20(1), 38.
The effect of war is broad-reaching. It is not restricted to the soldiers who fight the battles, it deeply affects the families of those who have sent their sons and daughters into the fray. War affects those who live within one or the other societies engaged in the war and those who live their lives within the war zone.
For those who live inside of these war zones, day to day life must still continue, despite the "inconvieniece" of war. These people, though not directly involved with the conflicts going on between opposing forces, have to live with the disruptions to their daily lives.
In contrast, America, at least in recent years, has been fortunate to have avoided engaging in war on its own soil. Thankfully, most Americans are not faced with the day to day reality of war-- instead laying the burden of fighting and dying mostly on the back of the American soldier.
Soldiers, those who have layed down their lives for the good of a nation, are likely the most directly affected (though not necessarily the most deeply affected). Soldiers have a duty to their country and a mission to keep their nation and their families safe. Most soldiers do not specifically choose to enter battle; they are compelled.
This begs the question: Who are the real victims of war? Families, soldiers, bystanders, governments, society itself? Perhaps war can be a good thing, not simply a necessary evil as this prompt has implied. Perhaps the victims of war are actually those who do not partake in it.
In your opinion, who are the victims of war and why? Remember, no answer is wrong provided you support your answer. Take some time to really consider this issue and make your post.