Vietnam 1900-1954

February 18, 2007 by · 3 Comments · Uncategorized

Through the beginning of the 20th century, a number of foundations were formed by the Vietnamese people including the Modernization Society and Vietnamese Restoration Society. In 1919, nearing the end of the first world war, Ho Chi Minh, then known as Nguyen Ai Quoc shows up at the Versailles Peace Conference trying to stop the colonizing of the French in Vietnam and demanded freedom for the Vietnamese people. Nguyen Ai Quoc the former president of the Vietnamese Communist Party and Democratic Republic of Vietnam. In 1920, Nguyen became founding member of the French Communist party. Communist International then summoned him to Moscow Russia three years later for training.

 

Also during 1919, the religion of Cao Dai, Cao meaning “High” and Dai meaning “Palace”, was adopted in the southern region of Vietnam. This religion contains elements from Christianity, Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism, and Islam. This occurance in separated beliefs among the Vietnamese only continued to divide the North and the South even more.

 

By 1927, the Vietnamese Nationalist party was formed in order to try and rid Vietnam of the French, who were still occupying their territory. The party was not designed to be peaceful at all, it was designed to be violent and overthrow the French regimes and to create a democratic republic in Vietnam. In February of 1930, the party lead an attack on military posts in Tonkin. The party was not coordinated and most of the leaders were captured or killed.

 

“World War II brought the Japanese to Vietnam. Japan had already been at war with China since 1937 and was anxious to take advantage of Germany’s victory over France to secure basis in Indo-China from which to strike the Burma Road and prevent supplied from reaching the Chinese.” (Tucker)

 

During World War II, the Vietnamese people faced oppression from not only France but Japan as well. In August of 1940, the Franco-Japanese treaty was signed giving the Japanese military facilities in northern Vietnam. The Japanese continued to use these areas until their surrender at the end of World War II and their surrender in August 1945. Before the Japanese surrendered, the country was divided at the 16th parallel. Throughout 1945 until 1947 there were many power struggles between the French, Japanese, and Vietnamese for the land the Vietnamese occupied.

 

In October 1949 Mao Zedong, a communist leader, defeated Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist Army in a Chinese Civil War. This victory leads to anti-communism in America. This overall results in containment for communist countries.

 

On May 8th 1954 the Geneva Convention was held in order to decide what should be done about Vietnam. The conference was attended by Britain, China, the United States, Soviet Union, France, and Vietnam. On July 21st the convention decided to divide Vietnam again at the 17th parallel. Elections were to be held in two years to restore Vietnam and reunify the country. After the French leave later that year, Ho Chi Minh returns from an eight year exile to take control of North Vietnam, the overwhelming communist part of the country. Bao Dai was put in place as the prime minister for South Vietnam. Also around this time, 90,000 communists leave South Vietnam and go to the North.

 

 Duiker, William. Historical Dictionary of Vietnam. United States: Scarecrow Press Inc., 1998.

Spencer, Tucker C. Vietnam. United States: The University Press of Kentucky, 1999.

Vietnam from 1000 AD to 1900

February 11, 2007 by · 2 Comments · Uncategorized

The <a href=”http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/Places/Place/325109″>first Mongol</A> attack on Vietnam occurred in 1257 with later attacks happening later in 1284 and 1287. The attacks were carried out by a leader known as 000Kublai Khan000. The first two attacks were both on the Thang Long Capital (modern day Hanoi). The Vietnamese had anticipated the tasks and evacuated the capital leaving no people for the Mongols to kill, only an empty city to ransack. On the Mongols third attempt in 1287, they were still not successful. The Vietnamese troops and General Tran Hung Dao used the same tactic Ngo Quyen used in 939. Kublai’s forces were defeated when iron tipped steaks were put into the ground. General Dao’s troops then lured the Mongols in like fish and waited for the tide to recede. Kublai’s entire fleet was destroyed, leaving only his army on foot to return home.

In 1428 Le Loi formed the Le Dynasty. The leader followed after Le Loi was Le Thanh Tong, who was considered to be the most influential emperor in Vietnam due to his contribution of poetry and writings. Tong’s army at its highest point had 200,000 men, while Tong ruled over the thirteen provinces within Vietnam’s territory. The Le Dynasty was not filled with good times. There was an ongoing Civil war between Trinh and the Nguyen provinces. The Civil wars lasted from 1627 until 1672. The year 1627 was France’s first engagement with Vietnam. Alexander Rhodes, a French missionary, travels to Hanoi, the capital of the socialists in Vietnam. There he helped the people adapt a written language adapted from characters in the Roman alphabet. This leads to an accurate history of the Vietnamese people instead of a history from only China’s perspective.

 

The Le Dynasty was defeated in 1788 creating the Nguyen Dynasty, the last Dynasty imperial dynasty in Vietnam. It started in 1771, when the Tay Son were upset at the corruption going on in the Nguyen courts. The brothers called for a distribution of land among the poor people. This caused uproar among local peasants, townspeople, and minority tribes. The Le Dynasty was successfully overthrown after the attack of Trinh Lords in the north. Nyugen Hue declared himself king and ascended the throne as an emperor. After the death of Nyugen Hue he was replaced by his brother Nguyen Anh in 1802, thus starting the Nguyen dynasty that lasted until its downfall in 1945. 

 

In 1846, there was a formation of a joint Vietnamese and Thai people to protect Cambodia from any invaders. This treaty among the two may have lead to the persecution of multiple priests who came over to the eastern end of Asia, which was largely filled with Buddhists who did not like his teachings. The priest was from France and in response France sent an invading army along with a Spanish fleet. The attack took place in the Da Nang harbor located along the middle of modern day Vietnam. Another factor in the attack may have been Napoleon III’s Second Empire, occurring from 1852 to 1870. Another of France’s motive was to colonize the territory. The attack took place in the Da Nang harbor located along the middle of modern day Vietnam. The French also took siege of Saigon, a fishing town near Laos and Cambodia. The French left behind 1,000 men but the Vietnamese came back with 12,000 men to besiege the French in a town they were trying to control. This siege went on for almost a year lasting from March 1860 to January 1861. Much fighting was over in the Vietnamese territory by the end of 1860. The leader of northern Vietnam, Emperor Tu Duc, decided it would be best to settle the issues with France, thus creating the Treaty of Saigon, signed in 1862. The treaty ceded the provinces of Bien Hoa, Dinh Tuong and Gia Dinh, all of which were located in the south, to France. French commerce was obtaine by the opening of three ports, and French missionaries coming to spread their faith among the already widely Buddhist society. Another Treaty of Saigon was signed in 1874, giving control to France of the remaining provinces. Another treaty signed in 1884, gave France the rights to divide Vietnam into three parts; Tonkin, located through the Red River Delta from the Chinese border to the province of Thanh Hoa and Annam, known as central Vietnam. The Cochin China was a French colony made up of a six Vietnamese provinces in the south by the area of the Mekong River Delta.

 

 

 

 Duiker, William. Historical Dictionary of Vietnam. United States: Scarecrow Press Inc., 1998.

 

Spencer, Tucker C. Vietnam. United States: The University Press of Kentucky, 1999.

 

Vietnam from BC to 1000 AD

February 4, 2007 by · No Comments · Uncategorized

The founder of the first Vietnamese kingdom was believed to be Trieu Da in 208 BC, who had broken away from the Chinese emperor Ch’in. Trieun Da conquered the Vietnamese King Au Lac in order to take control of the land. Trieu Da then built a capital and declared himself emperor in the southern land of Nam Viet, known as modern day Vietnam and China. In 111 BC the powerful Han Dynasty from China and its ruler Emperor Wu overtook Vietnam. This brought the start of a thousand years of Chinese rule in the northern part of Vietnam. The remaining Vietnamese inhabited the Hindu Cham kingdoms.

 

During 40 AD two sisters led a rebellion against the Chinese. Thi Sach, a Chinese nobleman, and his wife Trung Trac led a rebellion against the Chinese. The couple defeated a series of Chinese leaders occupying Vietnamese land, leaving them in control of land. Trung Trac established a court and was recognized as queen by Vietnamese nobles. Trung Trac and Trung Nhi, Trac’s close companion and sister, lead a revolt against the Chinese government. The Han dynasty did not think much of the two sisters. Ma Yuan, one of the best generals from China, was sent to defeat the sisters. In 42 AD, after Ma Yuan’s troops felt resistance from the Vietnamese people, he decided it was time for a break until the rainy season was done. The Trung sisters thought it would be the perfect opportunity to defeat Ma Yuan, but they thought wrong. Thus, leading to the Battle of Lang Bac. The Vietnamese were inexperienced in handling a battle with experienced troops causing them to be defeated easily. The Vietnamese resistors were slaughtered in battle. Trung Trac and Trung Nhi were beheaded.

 

In 939 AD, their was another attempt by the Vietnamese to overthrow the Chinese. Ngo Quyen defeated a Chinese ruler near Mount Tan Vien. The Battle of the Bach Dang River was shown to be a successful maneuver the Vietnamese.

“Quyen won a major victory by sinking wooden poles into the mud at the mouth of the river. When the tide fell, the Chinese fleet was impaled on the poles and destroyed.”(Duiker)

This extended the Vietnamese control more as they attempted to take land they felt was rightfully theirs.

 

 

Duiker, William. Historical Dictionary of Vietnam. United States: Scarecrow Press Inc., 1998.

Spencer, Tucker C. Vietnam. United States: The University Press of Kentucky, 1999.

 

 

State of the Union 2007

January 28, 2007 by · 6 Comments · Uncategorized

The rite of custom brings us together at a defining hour — when decisions are hard and courage is needed. We enter the year 2007 with large endeavors underway, and others that are ours to begin. In all of this, much is asked of us. We must have the will to face difficult challenges and determined enemies — and the wisdom to face them together. Some in this chamber are new to the House and the Senate — and I congratulate the Democrat majority. Congress has changed, but not our responsibilities. Each of us is guided by our own convictions — and to these we must stay faithful. Yet we’re all held to the same standards, and called to serve the same good purposes: To extend this nation’s prosperity; to spend the people’s money wisely; to solve problems, not leave them to future generations; to guard America against all evil; and to keep faith with those we have sent forth to defend us. We’re not the first to come here with a government divided and uncertainty in the air. Like many before us, we can work through our differences, and achieve big things for the American people. Our citizens don’t much care which side of the aisle we sit on — as long as we’re willing to cross that aisle when there is work to be done. Our job is to make life better for our fellow Americans, and to help them to build a future of hope and opportunity — and this is the business before us tonight.

How touching…

 A future of hope and opportunity begins with a growing economy — and that is what we have. We’re now in the 41st month of uninterrupted job growth, in a recovery that has created 7.2 million new jobs — so far. Unemployment is low, inflation is low, and wages are rising. This economy is on the move, and our job is to keep it that way, not with more government, but with more enterprise. Next week, I’ll deliver a full report on the state of our economy. Tonight, I want to discuss three economic reforms that deserve to be priorities for this Congress.

 First, we must balance the federal budget. We can do so without raising taxes. What we need to do is impose spending discipline in Washington, D.C. We set a goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009, and met that goal three years ahead of schedule. Now let us take the next step. In the coming weeks, I will submit a budget that eliminates the federal deficit within the next five years. I ask you to make the same commitment. Together, we can restrain the spending appetite of the federal government, and we can balance the federal budget.

That is good…but isn’t their a saying that goes like ‘You always dig yourself out of debt, just to dig yourself right back in.’ I imagine this will help lower taxes in the long run, which I like since I now have to pay them.

Next, there is the matter of earmarks. These special interest items are often slipped into bills at the last hour — when not even C-SPAN is watching. (Laughter.) In 2005 alone, the number of earmarks grew to over 13,000 and totaled nearly $18 billion. Even worse, over 90 percent of earmarks never make it to the floor of the House and Senate — they are dropped into committee reports that are not even part of the bill that arrives on my desk. You didn’t vote them into law. I didn’t sign them into law. Yet, they’re treated as if they have the force of law. The time has come to end this practice. So let us work together to reform the budget process, expose every earmark to the light of day and to a vote in Congress, and cut the number and cost of earmarks at least in half by the end of this session.

And, finally, to keep this economy strong we must take on the challenge of entitlements. Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid are commitments of conscience, and so it is our duty to keep them permanently sound. Yet, we’re failing in that duty. And this failure will one day leave our children with three bad options: huge tax increases, huge deficits, or huge and immediate cuts in benefits. Everyone in this chamber knows this to be true — yet somehow we have not found it in ourselves to act. So let us work together and do it now. With enough good sense and goodwill, you and I can fix Medicare and Medicaid — and save Social Security.

Spreading opportunity and hope in America also requires public schools that give children the knowledge and character they need in life. Five years ago, we rose above partisan differences to pass the No Child Left Behind Act, preserving local control, raising standards, and holding those schools accountable for results. And because we acted, students are performing better in reading and math, and minority students are closing the achievement gap. Now the task is to build on the success, without watering down standards, without taking control from local communities, and without backsliding and calling it reform. We can lift student achievement even higher by giving local leaders flexibility to turn around failing schools, and by giving families with children stuck in failing schools the right to choose someplace better.

I think taking a child out of a failing school is good, however there is a problem. If that school is already failing and parents start taking their children out of that school, it would probably not help the school to take out children who’s parents care that much about their child’s education.  If the parent is involved enough within the school to know it is failing, then the parent should probably be helping with ideas to turn the school around.

We must increase funds for students who struggle — and make sure these children get the special help they need.

Uhm…exactly how are we going to determine if a child is struggling or if they just do not care?

And we can make sure our children are prepared for the jobs of the future and our country is more competitive by strengthening math and science skills. The No Child Left Behind Act has worked for America’s children — and I ask Congress to reauthorize this good law.

 A future of hope and opportunity requires that all our citizens have affordable and available health care. When it comes to health care, government has an obligation to care for the elderly, the disabled, and poor children. And we will meet those responsibilities. For all other Americans, private health insurance is the best way to meet their needs. But many Americans cannot afford a health insurance policy.

And so tonight, I propose two new initiatives to help more Americans afford their own insurance. First, I propose a standard tax deduction for health insurance that will be like the standard tax deduction for dependents. Families with health insurance will pay no income on payroll tax — or payroll taxes on $15,000 of their income. Single Americans with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $7,500 of their income. With this reform, more than 100 million men, women, and children who are now covered by employer-provided insurance will benefit from lower tax bills. At the same time, this reform will level the playing field for those who do not get health insurance through their job. For Americans who now purchase health insurance on their own, this proposal would mean a substantial tax savings — $4,500 for a family of four making $60,000 a year. And for the millions of other Americans who have no health insurance at all, this deduction would help put a basic private health insurance plan within their reach. Changing the tax code is a vital and necessary step to making health care affordable for more Americans.

I actually like that idea…it sounds like it would work. I think it would be good if Americans insured by the government would have to apply through the local government to get some sort of card or other form of authorization in order for them to get benefits. This would insure that the people getting these benefits are actually American citizens.

 My second proposal is to help the states that are coming up with innovative ways to cover the uninsured. States that make basic private health insurance available to all their citizens should receive federal funds to help them provide this coverage to the poor and the sick. I have asked the Secretary of Health and Human Services to work with Congress to take existing federal funds and use them to create “Affordable Choices” grants. These grants would give our nation’s governors more money and more flexibility to get private health insurance to those most in need.

No…go with the first plan…

There are many other ways that Congress can help. We need to expand Health Savings Accounts. We need to help small businesses through Association Health Plans. We need to reduce costs and medical errors with better information technology. We will encourage price transparency. And to protect good doctors from junk lawsuits, we passing medical liability reform. In all we do, we must remember that the best health care decisions are made not by government and insurance companies, but by patients and their doctors.

Extending hope and opportunity in our country requires an immigration system worthy of America — with laws that are fair and borders that are secure. When laws and borders are routinely violated, this harms the interests of our country. To secure our border, we’re doubling the size of the Border Patrol, and funding new infrastructure and technology. Yet even with all these steps, we cannot fully secure the border unless we take pressure off the border — and that requires a temporary worker program. We should establish a legal and orderly path for foreign workers to enter our country to work on a temporary basis.

Okay, workers coming from Mexico generally don’t want to be here for short period of time, they want to live here. Using a temporary worker program will most likely just make it easier for them to stay here longer by using different names everytime they apply for a worker pass of some sort. Maybe when they apply, ask them if they intend to stay for a certain period of time or live here. Then have them apply for a green card or citizenship.

As a result, they won’t have to try to sneak in, and that will leave Border Agents free to chase down drug smugglers and criminals and terrorists. We’ll enforce our immigration laws at the work site and give employers the tools to verify the legal status of their workers, so there’s no excuse left for violating the law. We need to uphold the great tradition of the melting pot that welcomes and assimilates new arrivals. We need to resolve the status of the illegal immigrants who are already in our country without animosity and without amnesty. Convictions run deep in this Capitol when it comes to immigration. Let us have a serious, civil, and conclusive debate, so that you can pass, and I can sign, comprehensive immigration reform into law.

 Extending hope and opportunity depends on a stable supply of energy that keeps America’s economy running and America’s environment clean. For too long our nation has been dependent on foreign oil. And this dependence leaves us more vulnerable to hostile regimes, and to terrorists — who could cause huge disruptions of oil shipments, and raise the price of oil, and do great harm to our economy.

It’s in our vital interest to diversify America’s energy supply — the way forward is through technology. We must continue changing the way America generates electric power, by even greater use of clean coal technology, solar and wind energy, and clean, safe nuclear power. We need to press on with battery research for plug-in and hybrid vehicles, and expand the use of clean diesel vehicles and biodiesel fuel. We must continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol — using everything from wood chips to grasses, to agricultural wastes.

We made a lot of progress, thanks to good policies here in Washington and the strong response of the market. And now even more dramatic advances are within reach. Tonight, I ask Congress to join me in pursuing a great goal. Let us build on the work we’ve done and reduce gasoline usage in the United States by 20 percent in the next 10 years. When we do that we will have cut our total imports by the equivalent of three-quarters of all the oil we now import from the Middle East.

To reach this goal, we must increase the supply of alternative fuels, by setting a mandatory fuels standard to require 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels in 2017 — and that is nearly five times the current target. At the same time, we need to reform and modernize fuel economy standards for cars the way we did for light trucks — and conserve up to 8.5 billion more gallons of gasoline by 2017.

Well, I think car companies are already figuring out many ways to cut the use of fuel in their designs in order to appeal to more people…at least it seems that way to me.

Achieving these ambitious goals will dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but it’s not going to eliminate it. And so as we continue to diversify our fuel supply, we must step up domestic oil production in environmentally sensitive ways. And to further protect America against severe disruptions to our oil supply, I ask Congress to double the current capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

America is on the verge of technological breakthroughs that will enable us to live our lives less dependent on oil. And these technologies will help us be better stewards of the environment, and they will help us to confront the serious challenge of global climate change.

I like “global climate change” better than “global warming”.

A future of hope and opportunity requires a fair, impartial system of justice. The lives of our citizens across our nation are affected by the outcome of cases pending in our federal courts. We have a shared obligation to ensure that the federal courts have enough judges to hear those cases and deliver timely rulings. As President, I have a duty to nominate qualified men and women to vacancies on the federal bench. And the United States Senate has a duty, as well, to give those nominees a fair hearing, and a prompt up-or-down vote on the Senate floor.

For all of us in this room, there is no higher responsibility than to protect the people of this country from danger. Five years have come and gone since we saw the scenes and felt the sorrow that the terrorists can cause. We’ve had time to take stock of our situation. We’ve added many critical protections to guard the homeland. We know with certainty that the horrors of that September morning were just a glimpse of what the terrorists intend for us — unless we stop them.

With the distance of time, we find ourselves debating the causes of conflict and the course we have followed. Such debates are essential when a great democracy faces great questions. Yet one question has surely been settled: that to win the war on terror we must take the fight to the enemy.

From the start, America and our allies have protected our people by staying on the offense. The enemy knows that the days of comfortable sanctuary, easy movement, steady financing, and free flowing communications are long over. For the terrorists, life since 9/11 has never been the same.

 Our success in this war is often measured by the things that did not happen. We cannot know the full extent of the attacks that we and our allies have prevented, but here is some of what we do know: We stopped an al Qaeda plot to fly a hijacked airplane into the tallest building on the West Coast. We broke up a Southeast Asian terror cell grooming operatives for attacks inside the United States. We uncovered an al Qaeda cell developing anthrax to be used in attacks against America. And just last August, British authorities uncovered a plot to blow up passenger planes bound for America over the Atlantic Ocean. For each life saved, we owe a debt of gratitude to the brave public servants who devote their lives to finding the terrorists and stopping them.

Every success against the terrorists is a reminder of the shoreless ambitions of this enemy. The evil that inspired and rejoiced in 9/11 is still at work in the world. And so long as that’s the case, America is still a nation at war.

In the mind of the terrorist, this war began well before September the 11th, and will not end until their radical vision is fulfilled. And these past five years have given us a much clearer view of the nature of this enemy. Al Qaeda and its followers are Sunni extremists, possessed by hatred and commanded by a harsh and narrow ideology. Take almost any principle of civilization, and their goal is the opposite. They preach with threats, instruct with bullets and bombs, and promise paradise for the murder of the innocent.

Our enemies are quite explicit about their intentions. They want to overthrow moderate governments, and establish safe havens from which to plan and carry out new attacks on our country. By killing and terrorizing Americans, they want to force our country to retreat from the world and abandon the cause of liberty. They would then be free to impose their will and spread their totalitarian ideology. Listen to this warning from the late terrorist Zarqawi: “We will sacrifice our blood and bodies to put an end to your dreams, and what is coming is even worse.” Osama bin Laden declared: “Death is better than living on this Earth with the unbelievers among us.”

We all know terrorists are bad, but I think Bush just kind of brought down the mood a bit with those two paragraphs. Maybe a little less next time…

 These men are not given to idle words, and they are just one camp in the Islamist radical movement. In recent times, it has also become clear that we face an escalating danger from Shia extremists who are just as hostile to America, and are also determined to dominate the Middle East. Many are known to take direction from the regime in Iran, which is funding and arming terrorists like Hezbollah — a group second only to al Qaeda in the American lives it has taken.

The Shia and Sunni extremists are different faces of the same totalitarian threat. Whatever slogans they chant, when they slaughter the innocent they have the same wicked purposes. They want to kill Americans, kill democracy in the Middle East, and gain the weapons to kill on an even more horrific scale.

In the sixth year since our nation was attacked, I wish I could report to you that the dangers had ended. They have not. And so it remains the policy of this government to use every lawful and proper tool of intelligence, diplomacy, law enforcement, and military action to do our duty, to find these enemies, and to protect the American people.

This war is more than a clash of arms — it is a decisive ideological struggle, and the security of our nation is in the balance. To prevail, we must remove the conditions that inspire blind hatred, and drove 19 men to get onto airplanes and to come and kill us. What every terrorist fears most is human freedom.

– societies where men and women make their own choices, answer to their own conscience, and live by their hopes instead of their resentments. Free people are not drawn to violent and malignant ideologies — and most will choose a better way when they’re given a chance. So we advance our own security interests by helping moderates and reformers and brave voices for democracy. The great question of our day is whether America will help men and women in the Middle East to build free societies and share in the rights of all humanity. And I say, for the sake of our own security, we must.

In the last two years, we’ve seen the desire for liberty in the broader Middle East — and we have been sobered by the enemy’s fierce reaction. In 2005, the world watched as the citizens of Lebanon raised the banner of the Cedar Revolution, they drove out the Syrian occupiers and chose new leaders in free elections. In 2005, the people of Afghanistan defied the terrorists and elected a democratic legislature. And in 2005, the Iraqi people held three national elections, choosing a transitional government, adopting the most progressive, democratic constitution in the Arab world, and then electing a government under that constitution. Despite endless threats from the killers in their midst, nearly 12 million Iraqi citizens came out to vote in a show of hope and solidarity that we should never forget.

 A thinking enemy watched all of these scenes, adjusted their tactics, and in 2006 they struck back. In Lebanon, assassins took the life of Pierre Gemayel, a prominent participant in the Cedar Revolution. Hezbollah terrorists, with support from Syria and Iran, sowed conflict in the region and are seeking to undermine Lebanon’s legitimately elected government. In Afghanistan, Taliban and al Qaeda fighters tried to regain power by regrouping and engaging Afghan and NATO forces. In Iraq, al Qaeda and other Sunni extremists blew up one of the most sacred places in Shia Islam — the Golden Mosque of Samarra. This atrocity, directed at a Muslim house of prayer, was designed to provoke retaliation from Iraqi Shia — and it succeeded. Radical Shia elements, some of whom receive support from Iran, formed death squads. The result was a tragic escalation of sectarian rage and reprisal that continues to this day.

This is not the fight we entered in Iraq, but it is the fight we’re in. Every one of us wishes this war were over and won. Yet it would not be like us to leave our promises unkept, our friends abandoned, and our own security at risk. Ladies and gentlemen: On this day, at this hour, it is still within our power to shape the outcome of this battle. Let us find our resolve, and turn events toward victory.

We’re carrying out a new strategy in Iraq — a plan that demands more from Iraq’s elected government, and gives our forces in Iraq the reinforcements they need to complete their mission. Our goal is a democratic Iraq that upholds the rule of law, respects the rights of its people, provides them security, and is an ally in the war on terror.

In order to make progress toward this goal, the Iraqi government must stop the sectarian violence in its capital. But the Iraqis are not yet ready to do this on their own. So we’re deploying reinforcements of more than 20,000 additional soldiers and Marines to Iraq. The vast majority will go to Baghdad, where they will help Iraqi forces to clear and secure neighborhoods, and serve as advisers embedded in Iraqi Army units. With Iraqis in the lead, our forces will help secure the city by chasing down the terrorists, insurgents, and the roaming death squads. And in Anbar Province, where al Qaeda terrorists have gathered and local forces have begun showing a willingness to fight them, we’re sending an additional 4,000 United States Marines, with orders to find the terrorists and clear them out. We didn’t drive al Qaeda out of their safe haven in Afghanistan only to let them set up a new safe haven in a free Iraq.

The people of Iraq want to live in peace, and now it’s time for their government to act. Iraq’s leaders know that our commitment is not open-ended. They have promised to deploy more of their own troops to secure Baghdad — and they must do so. They pledged that they will confront violent radicals of any faction or political party — and they need to follow through, and lift needless restrictions on Iraqi and coalition forces, so these troops can achieve their mission of bringing security to all of the people of Baghdad. Iraq’s leaders have committed themselves to a series of benchmarks — to achieve reconciliation, to share oil revenues among all of Iraq’s citizens, to put the wealth of Iraq into the rebuilding of Iraq, to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation’s civic life, to hold local elections, and to take responsibility for security in every Iraqi province. But for all of this to happen, Baghdad must be secure. And our plan will help the Iraqi government take back its capital and make good on its commitments.

My fellow citizens, our military commanders and I have carefully weighed the options. We discussed every possible approach. In the end, I chose this course of action because it provides the best chance for success. Many in this chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq, because you understand that the consequences of failure would be grievous and far-reaching.

If American forces step back before Baghdad is secure, the Iraqi government would be overrun by extremists on all sides. We could expect an epic battle between Shia extremists backed by Iran, and Sunni extremists aided by al Qaeda and supporters of the old regime. A contagion of violence could spill out across the country — and in time, the entire region could be drawn into the conflict.

For America, this is a nightmare scenario. For the enemy, this is the objective. Chaos is the greatest ally — their greatest ally in this struggle. And out of chaos in Iraq would emerge an emboldened enemy with new safe havens, new recruits, new resources, and an even greater determination to harm America. To allow this to happen would be to ignore the lessons of September the 11th and invite tragedy. Ladies and gentlemen, nothing is more important at this moment in our history than for America to succeed in the Middle East, to succeed in Iraq and to spare the American people from this danger.

This is where matters stand tonight, in the here and now. I have spoken with many of you in person. I respect you and the arguments you’ve made. We went into this largely united, in our assumptions and in our convictions. And whatever you voted for, you did not vote for failure. Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq, and I ask you to give it a chance to work. And I ask you to support our troops in the field, and those on their way.

The war on terror we fight today is a generational struggle that will continue long after you and I have turned our duties over to others. And that’s why it’s important to work together so our nation can see this great effort through. Both parties and both branches should work in close consultation. It’s why I propose to establish a special advisory council on the war on terror,

Why do we need “a special advisory council on the war on terror?” He already created a department that would take care of that?

made up of leaders in Congress from both political parties. We will share ideas for how to position America to meet every challenge that confronts us. We’ll show our enemies abroad that we are united in the goal of victory.

And one of the first steps we can take together is to add to the ranks of our military so that the American Armed Forces are ready for all the challenges ahead. Tonight I ask the Congress to authorize an increase in the size of our active Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 in the next five years. A second task we can take on together is to design and establish a volunteer Civilian Reserve Corps. Such a corps would function much like our military reserve. It would ease the burden on the Armed Forces by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them. It would give people across America who do not wear the uniform a chance to serve in the defining struggle of our time.

Americans can have confidence in the outcome of this struggle because we’re not in this struggle alone. We have a diplomatic strategy that is rallying the world to join in the fight against extremism. In Iraq, multinational forces are operating under a mandate from the United Nations. We’re working with Jordan and Saudi Arabia and Egypt and the Gulf States to increase support for Iraq’s government.

The United Nations has imposed sanctions on Iran, and made it clear that the world will not allow the regime in Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons. With the other members of the Quartet — the U.N., the European Union, and Russia — we’re pursuing diplomacy to help bring peace to the Holy Land, and pursuing the establishment of a democratic Palestinian state living side-by-side with Israel in peace and security. In Afghanistan, NATO has taken the lead in turning back the Taliban and al Qaeda offensive — the first time the Alliance has deployed forces outside the North Atlantic area. Together with our partners in China, Japan, Russia, and South Korea, we’re pursuing intensive diplomacy to achieve a Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons.

We will continue to speak out for the cause of freedom in places like Cuba, Belarus, and Burma — and continue to awaken the conscience of the world to save the people of Darfur.

American foreign policy is more than a matter of war and diplomacy. Our work in the world is also based on a timeless truth: To whom much is given, much is required. We hear the call to take on the challenges of hunger and poverty and disease — and that is precisely what America is doing. We must continue to fight HIV/AIDS, especially on the continent of Africa. Because you funded our Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the number of people receiving life-saving drugs has grown from 50,000 to more than 800,000 in three short years. I ask you to continue funding our efforts to fight HIV/AIDS. I ask you to provide $1.2 billion over five years so we can combat malaria in 15 African countries.

I ask that you fund the Millennium Challenge Account, so that American aid reaches the people who need it, in nations where democracy is on the rise and corruption is in retreat. And let us continue to support the expanded trade and debt relief that are the best hope for lifting lives and eliminating poverty.

When America serves others in this way, we show the strength and generosity of our country. These deeds reflect the character of our people. The greatest strength we have is the heroic kindness, courage, and self-sacrifice of the American people. You see this spirit often if you know where to look — and tonight we need only look above to the gallery.

Dikembe Mutombo grew up in Africa, amid great poverty and disease. He came to Georgetown University on a scholarship to study medicine — but Coach John Thompson got a look at Dikembe and had a different idea. Dikembe became a star in the NBA, and a citizen of the United States. But he never forgot the land of his birth, or the duty to share his blessings with others. He built a brand new hospital in his old hometown. A friend has said of this good-hearted man: “Mutombo believes that God has given him this opportunity to do great things.” And we are proud to call this son of the Congo a citizen of the United States of America.

After her daughter was born, Julie Aigner-Clark searched for ways to share her love of music and art with her child. So she borrowed some equipment, and began filming children’s videos in her basement. The Baby Einstein Company was born, and in just five years her business grew to more than $20 million in sales. In November 2001, Julie sold Baby Einstein to the Walt Disney Company, and with her help Baby Einstein has grown into a $200 million business. Julie represents the great enterprising spirit of America. And she is using her success to help others — producing child safety videos with John Walsh of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Julie says of her new project: “I believe it’s the most important thing that I have ever done. I believe that children have the right to live in a world that is safe.” And so tonight, we are pleased to welcome this talented business entrepreneur and generous social entrepreneur — Julie Aigner-Clark.

Three weeks ago, Wesley Autrey was waiting at a Harlem subway station with his two little girls, when he saw a man fall into the path of a train. With seconds to act, Wesley jumped onto the tracks, pulled the man into the space between the rails, and held him as the train passed right above their heads. He insists he’s not a hero. He says: “We got guys and girls overseas dying for us to have our freedoms. We have got to show each other some love.” There is something wonderful about a country that produces a brave and humble man like Wesley Autrey.

Tommy Rieman was a teenager pumping gas in Independence, Kentucky, when he enlisted in the United States Army. In December 2003, he was on a reconnaissance mission in Iraq when his team came under heavy enemy fire. From his Humvee, Sergeant Rieman returned fire; he used his body as a shield to protect his gunner. He was shot in the chest and arm, and received shrapnel wounds to his legs — yet he refused medical attention, and stayed in the fight. He helped to repel a second attack, firing grenades at the enemy’s position. For his exceptional courage, Sergeant Rieman was awarded the Silver Star. And like so many other Americans who have volunteered to defend us, he has earned the respect and the gratitude of our entire country.

In such courage and compassion, ladies and gentlemen, we see the spirit and character of America — and these qualities are not in short supply. This is a decent and honorable country — and resilient, too. We’ve been through a lot together. We’ve met challenges and faced dangers, and we know that more lie ahead. Yet we can go forward with confidence — because the State of our Union is strong, our cause in the world is right, and tonight that cause goes on. God bless.

See you next year. Thank you for your prayers.

See you next year??? It sounds like something a friend would say, not the President in a speech…

The Taffy Man

January 21, 2007 by · 1 Comment · Presidents

William Taft was born in 1857 in Ohio to a pair of demanding parents that expected the best from him. William followed his father by attending Yale and graduating second in his class. Taft then went on to study law at the University of Cincinnati. The law student also recieved many law internships and jobs during his years before the Presidency.

Between 1887 and 1900, Taft held a variety of judicial positions that included judge of Cincinnati Superior Court and member of the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. President McKinley apponted Taft as the president of commission to oversee the newly won Philippine Islands. Taft did want to take the position, but was pushed my many people including his wife whom would later push him into the Presidency. After becoming governor of the islands, Taft used bloody tactics to pacify the rebellious islanders. He successfully held the position for three years and twice turned down President Roosevelt’s offer of a position to the Supreme Court. William Taft did not know his rejection of the position would change not only his life, but the lives of many American’s.

“The busiet, hardest working, most effective Secretary of War that the United Stated Government has had in many years is William Howard Taft, yet he is the most accesible. Any one may go to see him, and he has time to listen to each one, but where the time comes from is a mystery. No one else has so much to so, unless it be Theodore Roosevelt…” (Dunn)

With Taft having been Roosevelt’s Secretary of War for a few years, he thought Taft would be a successor but Roosevelt thought wrong. In 1909, Taft was sworn in as the President of the United States. Taft defeated a three time nominee due to his overwhelming support from Theodore.

“Taft proved a less adroit politician than Roosevelt and seemed to lack the energy and personal magnetism of his mentor, not to mention the publicity devices, the dedicated supporters, and the broad base of public support that made Roosevelt so formidable.(wikipedia)”

Taft ignored the advice of Roosevelt and lowered tariffs, putting producers (manufacturars and farmers) against department stores. He made a bad move by encouraging reformers to fight for lower rates, while on the other hand cutting deals with conservatives to keep the rates high. Then he took credit from Senator Nelson Aldrich for the Payne-Aldrich Tariff Act.

Taft’s reign as President did not go completely to waste. He impossed a 1% tax on all corporate net income over $5000. This caused the fiscal year to grow $13.8 million dollars in two years. He also helped pass the 16th Ammendmant in 1909, which allowed individuals to be taxed. The domestic policy was also strengthened with the “Interstate Commerce Comission.” Through the ‘Dollar Diplomacy’, Taft was able to help strengthen the economics of less fortunate throughout Asian and Latin American countries by enforcing    

When dealing with business, Taft decided it was better to file 90 antitrust suits instead of winning them over with good rhetoric. This was a bad mistake and caused Taft to lose a lot of support from antitrust reformers and even former President Roosevelt. Taft also fired a close ally of Roosevelt, Gifford Pinchot. Taft filed 75 lawsuits for the prosecution of trusts.

Taft did make some big mistakes during his Presidency. His lawyer side came out a little too much with all of the court cases that he performed while in office. Maybe his pushy wife was to blame. She was the one who wanted him to become President in the first place. Perhaps it could have been he did feel he was fully capable of being President. Overall, he did not do a good job but I am not sure if any person could have lived up to the legacy that Roosevelt left behind. 

 ”He had never wanted the job, and did not ry very hard to get it. He dreaded each time he had to speak in front of an audience, and he felt he lacked the personality to be a leader. Yet somehow he had risen to the highest office in the land.” (Benson)

Benson, Michael. William H. Taft.United States:Twenty-First Century Books, 2004.  

Dunn, Robert Lee.William Howard Taft.United States:The Chapple publishing company, 1908.

Explosions of Atomic Proportions

January 14, 2007 by · 1 Comment · Blogroll

 Before World War II, there was no atomic weapons program in the United States. This event only happened in 1942 when the Manhatten Project was initiated. The project was started in fear that the Germans would develop the bomb first since they had already had the technology on how to build the bomb. As it turns out, the Germans never attempted to build an atomic bomb.

The first atomic bomb, named Trinity, was tested on July16th 1945 in Alamogordo, New Mexico. Nobody was entirely sure what would happen when the bomb was exploded, some even feared world destruction. Shortly after Trinity was tested, bombs were dropped in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Japan. The two blasts killed almost 100,000 people and thousands more from radiation sickness and related cancers.loose lips

The United States continued tests, but the majority of tests were from November 1958 through September 1961. The first thermonuclear test was conducted in 1952 and code named ‘Ivy Mike’. The bomb swept the island clean of anything that was on it. The largest thermonuclear explosion was the one named ‘Castle Bravo’. 

Many of the various projects taking place after World War II were to test the effects of atomic bombs. Nuclear Fallout was always a concern due to the fact it could possibly spread to people around the world. The Partial Test Ban Treaty was established in 1963 to help stop the occurence of nuclear fallout. This decreased the number of tests significantly. The last known nuclear test done by the United States was in 1992 and occured in Nevada, where the majority of the tests were done, approximately 911. 

 There were extensive tests done with nuclear weapons, but whetger or not they were worthwhile is a good question. The United States spent $14,000,000,000 on launch pads, silos, and facilities between 1957 and 1964. This cost does not include the actual bombs or man power needed to run these types of operations. While I believe it is a good idea to know what atomic bombs are capable of, including damage they can cause to the atmosphere, I don’t think there needed to be as many tests as there were. Atomic bombs have the capability to destroy anything that comes in contact with them, but would the United States or anyone want to use those as a sort of normal warfare tactic. Atomic bombs do not have very much use for common and a somewhat civilized means of war. War is not good in the first place any way someone looks at it, but does making using a nuclear bomb make it any better?

Reconstruction Final

December 13, 2006 by · 1 Comment · Blogroll

How well did Reconstruction work? 

Reconstruction was the time after the Civil War, when the rebuilding of the South was going to take place. Control was going to be a main focus, as well as helping slaves become adjusted to their new lives. The time period ran roughly from 1865-1877. Reconstruction did have some good points, but the bad outweighed the good. The slaves had to get used to their new lives as free people. Many had never stepped outside of the property of their owners. They did not know how to function in normal society. Most owners kept slaves from learning how to read or write. When slaves were freed from the shackles of the plantations, this meant they were thrown into a prison of civilization. They had no place to learn, eat, work, or live. The only skill many slaves had was to work in the fields.

In 1865, The Freedmen’s Bureau was established to help alleviate some of the strain slaves faced. It provided aid for medical needs, food, places to live, and built schools.

The Freedmen’s Bureau had inadequate funds, was unable to discontinue most poverty, and it failed to prevent the emergence of black codes. The bureau was terminated in 1872.

The emergence of black codes was also a problem. Black codes regulated blacks from doing certain things, such as voting,  and living in a certain area. The codes were quickly sought out and eliminated. By 1866, the codes were no longer around. Racism still persisted among many of the former Confederate states.

The government tried to help the Reconstruction process by passing the Civil Rights act of 1866, the 14th amendment in June of 1866, and the 15th amendment in 1870. The Civil Rights act gave blacks the full rights of citizens. The 14th amendment gave blacks and whites equal rights regarding federal and state laws. A state could not become a part of the Union until it passed the 14th amendment as one of its own laws. The 15th amendment gave blacks the right to vote.

Reconstruction ended in 1877 due to a few reasons. Reconstruction had had a few good events, but they were not all that good. The bad was quickly overshadowing the good. By the end of 1877, it was as if reconstruction had never happened. It would take almost one hundred years for blacks to be recognized as true citizens of America.

“Here, long before their outright disenfranchisement arounf the turn of the century, black political rights progressivley eroded. Small numbers of blacks remained in the Southern legislature, and a few even won election to congress.” (Foner 249)

The entire reconstruction did place some former slaves on the right path to becoming citizens. But it would take a few years for them to get adjusted to life as free people. It would take many, many years to actually let them have equal rights as white people. Reconstruction was not overall a good thing, but it had intentions of being good. Reconstruction needed more local enforcement and a more targeted strategy to help blacks get on their feet when they did not know how to stand.

Foner, Eric. A Short History of Reconstruction. New York: Harper & Row, 1990.

Critique the Blogs

December 3, 2006 by · No Comments · Blogroll

The first blog I choose was Logan’s blog. It was informal and well written, kind of like editorial articles written in newspapers.There was also a lot of information within the blogs, including links from a variety of sources.  This style of writing made for a quick read that was also interesting.

Next, I looked at Dani’s blog. Well, her blog only has one actual entry and some of the links were not embedded. Though, the writing did have a nice flow to it. It might be a good idea if Dani kept up on her entries…

Tory’s latest blog entry grabbed me from the first sentence. It made me want to read more. The entry was well laid out and had a good story behind it.  Reading an entry about something within the media concerning Christianity was a nice change to what the media usually prefers to say about Christians.

 The fourth blog I critiqued was Aihelya’s. Her subjects were very good and not ones found in an average high schooler’s blog. The articles written on Islam and Christianity were very informative, but I found that they were just informative. There was not really an argument for or against one or the other.

The last blog I read was Megan’s. I found her entries on the Proposition’s well thought out and full of information. They showed the good and bad sides of the propositions. Of the proposition blogs, they had an opinion about whether or not that proposition would be a good choice or not.

Thanksgiving and King Tut

November 26, 2006 by · No Comments · This Day In History

On November 26, 1941 Franklin Roosevelt establishes the Thanksgiving holiday as the fourth Thursday in November. This holiday comes from when William Bradford invited indians to join in a three-day feast in 1621.

 This day also is when the tomb of King Tut was entered.  The oldest known board game, named Senet was found inside the tomb of this former king of Egypt. It has been of much argument, on what the Tut actually looked like. He was also fairly young when he died.

The Assassination of William McKinley

November 12, 2006 by · No Comments · Presidents

William McKinley was elected President of the United States in 1896. He began his Presidency on March 4, 1897. He had been a Republican representative in the House of Representatives from 1877 to 1890, the year he lost his seat to Jonathan H. Wallace after he authored the McKinley Tariff. McKinley also had experience as a lawyer and Union soldier.

William McKinley was attending the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, New York on September 6, 1901, the day he would be shot by Leon Czolgosz. McKinley was attending the World Fair in the Temple of Music, a building that was torn down less than two months after the event occurred.

Czolgosz was in line, slowly moving toward the President, for from four to five minutes. Behind him was a tightly-packed crowd which blocked retreat. On all side were alert guards, likely to detect the diabolical intention at any moment. A few steps away was the President—coming nearer, nearer—and there was to be the test of his resolution, there awaited success and death, or failure and disgrace…Edgar Allan Poe pictures the frozen horror of the victim of the swinging pendulum, who lay in chains and watched the knife approach his throat steadily lessening inches; but neither, as a nerve test, could be more excruciating than the assassin’s wait.” (Barry 20)

The President was shot twice at 4:07 pm on September 6th at the fair in Buffalo, New York. One of the bullets was removed but the second was still lodged inside of McKinley. The X-Ray machine was displayed at the fair, but at the time, was only thought to be a novelty item not something that may have saved the McKinley’s life. The operating table in the Emergency Hospital at the fair did not even have electrical lighting. A pan was used to reflect light onto the President’s wounds. It was thought that the President might get better but he went into shock.

On September 14, 1901 McKinley at 2:15am, died from his wound. McKinley was buried in Canton, Ohio. The man to replace McKinley was Theodore Roosevelt, one of the most popular American leaders of all time.

Czolgosz, McKinley’s assassin, had a trial on September 23rd. The trial lasted a total of 8 hours and 26 minutes from jury selection to verdict. Leon Czolgosz was electrocuted on October 29, 1901 and at his burial sulfuric acid was thrown in the coffin so that his body would dissolve within 24 hours. The gun that Czolgosz shot the President with, and bought for $4.50, is on display at the Pan-American Exposition Exhibit in Erie County Historical Society in Buffalo.

”McKinley was brilliant as a statesman and uniformly wise as a ruler. But it can be said with deliberate judgement that the most striking feature of his whole life was his warm, genial and generous nature. The last word can never be said, wrote a well-known writer, of such a man. To know William McKinley was to love him.” (Corning 3)

Barry, Richard H. The True Story of the Assassination of President McKinley at Buffalo. Robert Allan Reid; Buffalo, 1901.

Corning, A Elwood. William McKinley: A Biographical Study. New York: Broadway Publishing Company Co., 1907.