Most recent edit on 2005-10-16 17:25:43 by EschaTon
Additions:
The war in Iraq is like the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, because both were unnecessary and wrong. The Iraq war was wrong because it was founded on the lie of it [it what?] containing weapons of mass destruction, while the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was founded on the lie that nothing was wrong with the infected poor African American males[is that true?]. The lie continued until they couldn’t find w.m.d.’s anywhere, just like the other lie was continued until the New York Times exploited [exposed] the lie. I think both events are both examples of the government breaking the rule “Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas,” or so use your property as not to injure your neighbor’s. In both examples, the government is using its power to hurt a neighboring country or fellow human beings.
The war in Iraq is similar to the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment in the fact that once there was no use for continuing the act, it still went on. This is evident when the w.m.d.’s were not found in Iraq, [W]e no longer should have been there. Just like after Penicillin was found to cure Syphilis the experiment should have ended, but they continued to subject innocent people to the traumatic effects of untreated Syphilis. Now some of you may say that after taking over Iraq we couldn’t just leave it without a functional police force or government, but they could have reinstated the loyal Iraqi army under the control of the UN until elections could have been held. Others might say in [that] the Syphilis trial was beneficial in learning about the long term effects of the disease. This is not the truth[,] because after 1947 the disease was easily treated because antibiotics were widely available making the secondary effects pointless. [with antibiotics. The human study of the secondary effects was pointless.]
Both things are [you were writing in the past tense until this point] government funded mistakes that result in no gain to the American people, but as an economic loss to them. The Iraqi war presents a loss economically through the increased spending by the defense department to pay for missiles, troops, food, and the rebuilding of the things they destroyed. The Tuskegee trials, funded by the Public Health Service, provided an economic loss through funding the study, and also the subsequent lawsuit for the crime against the African-American men that were subject to unnecessary trauma. Some people might say that the gain of spreading democracy to another country is a gain to this countries[y's] national interest. However, this is not the case because are[our] national interest was not in jeopardy by Iraq according to the definition of national interest. National interest is a state’s security, pursuit of wealth, and preservation of culture. If you take a look at the last couple of national budgets the pursuit of wealth definitely does not apply [this statement doesn't accomplish anything]. Since there was no threat to our security or our way of life [as Iraq didn't have WMDs], that theory is disproved. To the contrary, the war in Iraq actually turned out to hurt our nation. The disruption of oil production and exportation in Iraq has negatively influenced the oil markets, weakening our economic standings. Another way that two are similar is that both were later acknowledged mistakes by the government. In the case of the Iraqi war a commission was set up to research the lack in credible evidence of w.m.d.’s. The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was apologized for officially by Bill Clinton in 1997, even though only seven of the survivors were still alive.
In conclusion these mistakes are very similar and George Bush should be the bigger man and fix the problem he started and not prolong it any longer then he has. [That's not very much of a conclusion. It's also too conversational]
[This paper is not very well supported. The writing is also poor, with mistakes in usage and several confusing paragraphs]
Deletions:
The war in Iraq is like the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, because both were unnecessary and wrong. The Iraq war was wrong because it was founded on the lie of it containing weapons of mass destruction, while the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was founded on the lie that nothing was wrong with the infected poor African American males. The lie continued until they couldn’t find w.m.d.’s anywhere, just like the other lie was continued until the New York Times exploited the lie. I think both events are both examples of the government breaking the rule “Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas,” or so use your property as not to injure your neighbor’s. In both examples, the government is using its power to hurt a neighboring country or fellow human beings.
The war in Iraq is similar to the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment in the fact that once there was no use for continuing the act, it still went on. This is evident when the w.m.d.’s were not found in Iraq, we no longer should have been there. Just like after Penicillin was found to cure Syphilis the experiment should have ended, but they continued to subject innocent people to the traumatic effects of untreated Syphilis. Now some of you may say that after taking over Iraq we couldn’t just leave it without a functional police force or government, but they could have reinstated the loyal Iraqi army under the control of the UN until elections could have been held. Others might say in the Syphilis trial was beneficial in learning about the long term effects of the disease. This is not the truth because after 1947 the disease was easily treated because antibiotics were widely available making the secondary effects pointless.
Both things are government funded mistakes that result in no gain to the American people, but as an economic loss to them. The Iraqi war presents a loss economically through the increased spending by the defense department to pay for missiles, troops, food, and the rebuilding of the things they destroyed. The Tuskegee trials, funded by the Public Health Service, provided an economic loss through funding the study, and also the subsequent lawsuit for the crime against the African-American men that were subject to unnecessary trauma. Some people might say that the gain of spreading democracy to another country is a gain to this countries national interest. However, this is not the case because are national interest was not in jeopardy by Iraq according to the definition of national interest. National interest is a state’s security, pursuit of wealth, and preservation of culture. If you take a look at the last couple of national budgets the pursuit of wealth definitely does not apply. Since there was no threat to our security or our way of life, that theory is disproved. To the contrary, the war in Iraq actually turned out to hurt our nation. The disruption of oil production and exportation in Iraq has negatively influenced the oil markets, weakening our economic standings. Another way that two are similar is that both were later acknowledged mistakes by the government. In the case of the Iraqi war a commission was set up to research the lack in credible evidence of w.m.d.’s. The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was apologized for officially by Bill Clinton in 1997, even though only seven of the survivors were still alive.
In conclusion these mistakes are very similar and George Bush should be the bigger man and fix the problem he started and not prolong it any longer then he has.
Edited on 2005-10-06 17:58:19 by PeterGraham
Additions:
The war in Iraq is like the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment.
The war in Iraq is like the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, because both were unnecessary and wrong. The Iraq war was wrong because it was founded on the lie of it containing weapons of mass destruction, while the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was founded on the lie that nothing was wrong with the infected poor African American males. The lie continued until they couldn’t find w.m.d.’s anywhere, just like the other lie was continued until the New York Times exploited the lie. I think both events are both examples of the government breaking the rule “Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas,” or so use your property as not to injure your neighbor’s. In both examples, the government is using its power to hurt a neighboring country or fellow human beings.
The war in Iraq is similar to the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment in the fact that once there was no use for continuing the act, it still went on. This is evident when the w.m.d.’s were not found in Iraq, we no longer should have been there. Just like after Penicillin was found to cure Syphilis the experiment should have ended, but they continued to subject innocent people to the traumatic effects of untreated Syphilis. Now some of you may say that after taking over Iraq we couldn’t just leave it without a functional police force or government, but they could have reinstated the loyal Iraqi army under the control of the UN until elections could have been held. Others might say in the Syphilis trial was beneficial in learning about the long term effects of the disease. This is not the truth because after 1947 the disease was easily treated because antibiotics were widely available making the secondary effects pointless.
Both things are government funded mistakes that result in no gain to the American people, but as an economic loss to them. The Iraqi war presents a loss economically through the increased spending by the defense department to pay for missiles, troops, food, and the rebuilding of the things they destroyed. The Tuskegee trials, funded by the Public Health Service, provided an economic loss through funding the study, and also the subsequent lawsuit for the crime against the African-American men that were subject to unnecessary trauma. Some people might say that the gain of spreading democracy to another country is a gain to this countries national interest. However, this is not the case because are national interest was not in jeopardy by Iraq according to the definition of national interest. National interest is a state’s security, pursuit of wealth, and preservation of culture. If you take a look at the last couple of national budgets the pursuit of wealth definitely does not apply. Since there was no threat to our security or our way of life, that theory is disproved. To the contrary, the war in Iraq actually turned out to hurt our nation. The disruption of oil production and exportation in Iraq has negatively influenced the oil markets, weakening our economic standings. Another way that two are similar is that both were later acknowledged mistakes by the government. In the case of the Iraqi war a commission was set up to research the lack in credible evidence of w.m.d.’s. The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was apologized for officially by Bill Clinton in 1997, even though only seven of the survivors were still alive.
In conclusion these mistakes are very similar and George Bush should be the bigger man and fix the problem he started and not prolong it any longer then he has.
Deletions:
Analogy Draft- The war in Iraq is like the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment.
The war in Iraq is like the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, because both were unnecessary and wrong. The Iraq war was wrong because it was founded on the lie of it containing weapons of mass destruction, while the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was founded on the lie that nothing was wrong with the infected people. The lie continued until they couldn’t find w.m.d.’s anywhere, just like the other lie was continued until the New York Times exploited the lie. I think both events are both examples of the government breaking the rule “Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas,” or so use your property as not to injure your neighbor’s. In both examples, the government is using its power to hurt a neighboring country or neighboring human beings.
The war in Iraq is similar to the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment in the fact that once there was no use for continuing the act, it still went on. This is evident when the w.m.d.’s were not found in Iraq, we no longer should have been there. Just like after Penicillin was found to cure Syphilis the experiment should have ended, but they continued to subject innocent people to the traumatic effects of untreated Syphilis. Now some of you may say that after taking over Iraq we couldn’t just leave it without a functional police force or government, but they could have reinstated the loyal Iraqi army under the control of the UN until elections could have been held.
Both things are government funded mistakes that result in no gain to the American people, but an economic loss them. The Iraqi war presents a loss economically through the increased spending by the defense department to pay for missiles, troops, food, and the rebuilding of the things we destroyed. The Tuskegee trials funded by the Public Health Service provided an economic loss through funding the study, and also the subsequent lawsuit for the crime against the African-American men that were subject to unnecessary trauma. Some people might say that the gain of spreading democracy to another country is a gain to this countries national interest. However, this is not the case because are national interest was not in jeopardy by Iraq according to the definition of national interest. National interest is a state’s security, pursuit of wealth, and preservation of culture. If you take a look at the last couple of national budgets the pursuit of wealth definitely does not apply. Since there was no threat to our security or our way of life, that theory is disproved. To the contrary, the war in Iraq actually turned out to hurt our nation. The disruption of oil production and exportation in Iraq has negatively influenced the oil markets, weakening our economic standings.
Another way that two are similar is that both were later acknowledged mistakes by the government. In the case of the Iraqi war a commission was set up to research the lack in credible evidence of w.m.d.’s. The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments were officially apologized by Bill Clinton in 1997 even though only seven of the survivors were still alive.
Oldest known version of this page was edited on 2005-10-05 09:31:10 by PeterGraham []
Page view:
Analogy Draft- The war in Iraq is like the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment.
The war in Iraq is like the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, because both were unnecessary and wrong. The Iraq war was wrong because it was founded on the lie of it containing weapons of mass destruction, while the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was founded on the lie that nothing was wrong with the infected people. The lie continued until they couldn’t find w.m.d.’s anywhere, just like the other lie was continued until the New York Times exploited the lie. I think both events are both examples of the government breaking the rule “Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas,” or so use your property as not to injure your neighbor’s. In both examples, the government is using its power to hurt a neighboring country or neighboring human beings.
The war in Iraq is similar to the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment in the fact that once there was no use for continuing the act, it still went on. This is evident when the w.m.d.’s were not found in Iraq, we no longer should have been there. Just like after Penicillin was found to cure Syphilis the experiment should have ended, but they continued to subject innocent people to the traumatic effects of untreated Syphilis. Now some of you may say that after taking over Iraq we couldn’t just leave it without a functional police force or government, but they could have reinstated the loyal Iraqi army under the control of the UN until elections could have been held.
Both things are government funded mistakes that result in no gain to the American people, but an economic loss them. The Iraqi war presents a loss economically through the increased spending by the defense department to pay for missiles, troops, food, and the rebuilding of the things we destroyed. The Tuskegee trials funded by the Public Health Service provided an economic loss through funding the study, and also the subsequent lawsuit for the crime against the African-American men that were subject to unnecessary trauma. Some people might say that the gain of spreading democracy to another country is a gain to this countries national interest. However, this is not the case because are national interest was not in jeopardy by Iraq according to the definition of national interest. National interest is a state’s security, pursuit of wealth, and preservation of culture. If you take a look at the last couple of national budgets the pursuit of wealth definitely does not apply. Since there was no threat to our security or our way of life, that theory is disproved. To the contrary, the war in Iraq actually turned out to hurt our nation. The disruption of oil production and exportation in Iraq has negatively influenced the oil markets, weakening our economic standings.
Another way that two are similar is that both were later acknowledged mistakes by the government. In the case of the Iraqi war a commission was set up to research the lack in credible evidence of w.m.d.’s. The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments were officially apologized by Bill Clinton in 1997 even though only seven of the survivors were still alive.