"A Brief Biography of the Life of His Eminence Ayatollah Khamenei, the leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran." khamenei.ir.10 July 2006. Institute for Preserving and Publishing Works by Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei. 31 Oct. 2007 < http://www.khamenei.ir/EN/home.jsp >.
This is a website I found using google. It was built and maintained by a institute in the Iranian government and as such alot of the information I found in it I consider unreliable. It is a website on the Supreme Leader of Iran. He is essentially a shadowy dictator. The man behind the curtain. Most of what we see is the President, Mahamoud Ahmadinejad. The supreme leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, is a heavy religious figure as his title of Ayatollah implies and he has a history with the Islamic Revolution serving under Khomenei. What I ended up picking out of the biography were statements of his activities with the Revolution as I figured they would be reasonably trueful. One thing I read that struck me in the biography, and which really pushed home to me the fact that this is a big propoganda website, was a sentence equating satanic activities to American.
Khamenei, Sayyed. "Ayatollah Sayyed Khamenei's Statement."25 Feb. 2006. Aspiring Shia. 1 Nov. 2007 < http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-IjbSK44icqKEbe9dJuBBUbA-?cq=1&p=42 >.
This is a speach that the Iranian Supreme Leader gave last year comenting on fighting that occured in Iraq which affected two holy Shiite shrines. I found this source backed up alot of things I found elseware. Particularly, Khamenei's anti Western and Israel leanings game out in the speach. He never refers to the U.S. directly instead refering to us as "occupying power" or "dominance seeking powers." In his speach the Ayatollah does call on Muslims not to combat each other and he states that Muslims should not be fighting Muslims. It's interesting seeing these words which came out of the horses mouth. When I look at pictures of the Ayatollah you might think he was just a sweet old Grandpa when in reality he is a Islamic revolutionary with a heavy background in military force and anti American leanings.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Saturday, October 27, 2007
D9HW7 Deadline Reflection
This week was pretty crazy. It was the first time I was really forced to pull my head out of research gathering and start to think about how I'm going to fit it all together. The biggest difficulty I found was putting it in the format of a pursuasive essay as opposed to an encyclopedia on the wide variety of topics I've been looking at. What it finally came down to was I looked at my research question, "Based on the Current Situation in Iran; What Are Some of The Likely Outcomes, And How Will They Effect The American People?” All my research has been into the first part, the current situation. This weeks assignments forced me to take a comprehensive look at everything I'd gathered and start putting it together into the second part of my question; what are the likely outcomes and how will they effect the American people. I realized that though I could go on forever about the various factors that make up the current situation that wouldn't really answer my research question. The format I finally settled on was going straight into what I think is likely to happen and what it will result in and using the current situation to explain my reasoning. Looking at other people's blogs and replying to them helped me get an idea of how my classmates were dealing with similar issues. I looked primarily at their outlines as that gave me the best overall view on how they were structuring their arguments.
I replied to:
Kathy Lacey
D#9, HW#6 Outline
Jared Zucker
D9, HW6, Outline
Coralee Harding
D#9, HW#6, Outline
Stephann Parizek
D9HW6 Outline Info
I replied to:
Kathy Lacey
D#9, HW#6 Outline
Jared Zucker
D9, HW6, Outline
Coralee Harding
D#9, HW#6, Outline
Stephann Parizek
D9HW6 Outline Info
D9HW4 Outline
I. Introduction
II. Two Basic Possibilities
1. Military Conflict
A. Likely Causes
- Hard Evidence of Iranian Foul play
• Specifically either evidence of nuclear weapons development or evidence linking top Iranian officials to support of terrorist groups in Iraq and else ware
• Hard evidence would give U.S. ability to muster U.N. and other support
- Lack of communication allows situation to deteriorate
• Currently U.S. and many other nations are largely refusing to meet with Iranian officials until they suspend uranium enrichment.
• Both sides getting more and more fed up with each other will eventually lead to conflict. No talking= conflict.
- Small scale strikes spiral out of control
• Troop buildup occurring in Persian Gulf preparing for possible military strikes. Same is happening on Iranian side
• Iran states they will return any aggression
• If punches start flying things will get out of hand and the region will be drawn into conflict
B. Likely Occurrences
- U.N. and Arabic Nations will likely stay largely out of conflict unless evidence of severe hard play
• GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) wary of Iran but warier of joining a conflict which could destabilize the region. In the event of conflict will likely hunker down and hold on for the ride.
• U.N., while more united than usual, still suffers from splits on this issue primarily due to Russia and China’s close economic ties to Iran. U.N. military operations have rarely worked out well.
- Primary reliance on U.S. troops and resources
• Without large-scale assistance from U.N. or other Arabic states the conflict will likely rely on U.S. with perhaps some assistance from coalition and possibly EU or NATO.
• If just a brief conflict could be fine but if turns into longer, larger scale situation like Iraq it will cause problems
- Stretching of U.S. resources
• Still bogged down in Iraq and economy is already suffering. Similar situation in Iran could overstretch our resources.
• Likely large bulk of military would have to be put on deployment until conflict resolved. (Could be years)
• Could result in a draft
- Influx of Insurgents into Iran
• Many middle of the road persons drawn into extremism by massive western based conflict
• Iranian military, specifically Basij and IRGC, geared to fight an insurgency
C. Likely Outcomes
- Both Iraq and Iran Operations likely unsuccessful. Mass pullout. Situation much like Vietnam. All following consequences.
• List various consequences
• Overstretching of military forces and general resources would add up and result in the U.S. pulling out. All other coalition forces would follow.
• Vietnam
- Would result in massively reinforced and funded extremists now free to focus on West.
• Lots of pissed off and angry Arabs, with all their experience, newfound numbers and backing
• Though many would likely be caught up in following struggle many would be available to refocus attacks in Europe and U.S.
- Region likely destabilized.
• Withdrawal of U.S. and coalition forces will leave power vacuums, which could result in bloody conflicts.
• Would result in chaos in which terrorism would thrive
D. Important to note
• Possible that coalition occupation in Iran could be shorter and more efficient due to lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan
• This is situation as is. Thousand different things.
2. Requirements for Peace
- Open communications and keep them open
• The key to peaceful resolution is open, meaningful talks backed by a threat of violence
• Lack of communication was disastrous in Iraq and would repeat with Iran
• Current situation getting nasty because two sides aren’t talking
- Better border operations
• Sincere joint effort by both governments to secure Iranian border and crack down on weapons
• Stepped up operations to counter Iranian support for insurgencies
- Increased Cooperation
• The Iranian and U.S./Coalition Governments need to work closely to resolve issues
- Sincere effort on both sides to resolve outstanding issues could do wonders
- No observed effort on either side will result in increased perceived conviction of guilt
• Iran isn’t doing something behind our back. If they are it must stop.
- Any hard evidence of Iranian guilt in the areas of nuclear proliferation or insurgent support operations will make everything a new ball game.
- If evidence is found and Iran doesn’t immediately cease said operations then military conflict is pretty much assured.
III. What we need to be doing now.
- Repeat keep communications open
- Stepped Intel operations
• This is almost certainly already being done
• Many difficulties with getting good intel on Iran
• Open communications would likely make intel gathering easier
- Gather resources/allies
• It is critical to be prepared in the case of conflict and the sooner preparations are begun the better
• Efforts are already being made in U.N. and other International organizations
• Gathering support internationally critical to taking some of the burden of U.S. in case of conflict.
- Let everybody do what they do best
• The U.N. is likely our best shot at a watchdog for Iran’s nuclear intentions. The IAEA is pretty much the only inspectors the Iranians will put up with. They do however need to be monitored.
• U.S. and coalition forces need to start operations specifically to counter weapons and support coming into Iraq and Afghanistan from Iran.
- Operations to secure weapons and other support coming across Iranian border
• Specifically U.S. and Iraqi forces
• Iran ally of many parts of current Iraqi government
• Balance needs to reached
• Heavy customs and security operations on Iranian border
• Joint operations preferable
• Perhaps a no man’s zone or security fence
- Watch for hard evidence
• If conflict occurs hard evidence of Iranian foul play could be the key to gathering support for military operations.
• U.N. and Coalition need to focus on their respective areas.
• Critical: hairline trigger. Especially concerning nuclear weapons.
IV. Conclusion
II. Two Basic Possibilities
1. Military Conflict
A. Likely Causes
- Hard Evidence of Iranian Foul play
• Specifically either evidence of nuclear weapons development or evidence linking top Iranian officials to support of terrorist groups in Iraq and else ware
• Hard evidence would give U.S. ability to muster U.N. and other support
- Lack of communication allows situation to deteriorate
• Currently U.S. and many other nations are largely refusing to meet with Iranian officials until they suspend uranium enrichment.
• Both sides getting more and more fed up with each other will eventually lead to conflict. No talking= conflict.
- Small scale strikes spiral out of control
• Troop buildup occurring in Persian Gulf preparing for possible military strikes. Same is happening on Iranian side
• Iran states they will return any aggression
• If punches start flying things will get out of hand and the region will be drawn into conflict
B. Likely Occurrences
- U.N. and Arabic Nations will likely stay largely out of conflict unless evidence of severe hard play
• GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) wary of Iran but warier of joining a conflict which could destabilize the region. In the event of conflict will likely hunker down and hold on for the ride.
• U.N., while more united than usual, still suffers from splits on this issue primarily due to Russia and China’s close economic ties to Iran. U.N. military operations have rarely worked out well.
- Primary reliance on U.S. troops and resources
• Without large-scale assistance from U.N. or other Arabic states the conflict will likely rely on U.S. with perhaps some assistance from coalition and possibly EU or NATO.
• If just a brief conflict could be fine but if turns into longer, larger scale situation like Iraq it will cause problems
- Stretching of U.S. resources
• Still bogged down in Iraq and economy is already suffering. Similar situation in Iran could overstretch our resources.
• Likely large bulk of military would have to be put on deployment until conflict resolved. (Could be years)
• Could result in a draft
- Influx of Insurgents into Iran
• Many middle of the road persons drawn into extremism by massive western based conflict
• Iranian military, specifically Basij and IRGC, geared to fight an insurgency
C. Likely Outcomes
- Both Iraq and Iran Operations likely unsuccessful. Mass pullout. Situation much like Vietnam. All following consequences.
• List various consequences
• Overstretching of military forces and general resources would add up and result in the U.S. pulling out. All other coalition forces would follow.
• Vietnam
- Would result in massively reinforced and funded extremists now free to focus on West.
• Lots of pissed off and angry Arabs, with all their experience, newfound numbers and backing
• Though many would likely be caught up in following struggle many would be available to refocus attacks in Europe and U.S.
- Region likely destabilized.
• Withdrawal of U.S. and coalition forces will leave power vacuums, which could result in bloody conflicts.
• Would result in chaos in which terrorism would thrive
D. Important to note
• Possible that coalition occupation in Iran could be shorter and more efficient due to lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan
• This is situation as is. Thousand different things.
2. Requirements for Peace
- Open communications and keep them open
• The key to peaceful resolution is open, meaningful talks backed by a threat of violence
• Lack of communication was disastrous in Iraq and would repeat with Iran
• Current situation getting nasty because two sides aren’t talking
- Better border operations
• Sincere joint effort by both governments to secure Iranian border and crack down on weapons
• Stepped up operations to counter Iranian support for insurgencies
- Increased Cooperation
• The Iranian and U.S./Coalition Governments need to work closely to resolve issues
- Sincere effort on both sides to resolve outstanding issues could do wonders
- No observed effort on either side will result in increased perceived conviction of guilt
• Iran isn’t doing something behind our back. If they are it must stop.
- Any hard evidence of Iranian guilt in the areas of nuclear proliferation or insurgent support operations will make everything a new ball game.
- If evidence is found and Iran doesn’t immediately cease said operations then military conflict is pretty much assured.
III. What we need to be doing now.
- Repeat keep communications open
- Stepped Intel operations
• This is almost certainly already being done
• Many difficulties with getting good intel on Iran
• Open communications would likely make intel gathering easier
- Gather resources/allies
• It is critical to be prepared in the case of conflict and the sooner preparations are begun the better
• Efforts are already being made in U.N. and other International organizations
• Gathering support internationally critical to taking some of the burden of U.S. in case of conflict.
- Let everybody do what they do best
• The U.N. is likely our best shot at a watchdog for Iran’s nuclear intentions. The IAEA is pretty much the only inspectors the Iranians will put up with. They do however need to be monitored.
• U.S. and coalition forces need to start operations specifically to counter weapons and support coming into Iraq and Afghanistan from Iran.
- Operations to secure weapons and other support coming across Iranian border
• Specifically U.S. and Iraqi forces
• Iran ally of many parts of current Iraqi government
• Balance needs to reached
• Heavy customs and security operations on Iranian border
• Joint operations preferable
• Perhaps a no man’s zone or security fence
- Watch for hard evidence
• If conflict occurs hard evidence of Iranian foul play could be the key to gathering support for military operations.
• U.N. and Coalition need to focus on their respective areas.
• Critical: hairline trigger. Especially concerning nuclear weapons.
IV. Conclusion
D9HW5 Cluster
I've ragging for awhile on the complexity of the issue I'm dealing with. Now, once again, it has become apparant to me. I've divided my paper into several sections in order to attempt to answer my research question. As I began listing the applicable areas of my research to each one I realized that pretty much every area applied to every section. An international situation like this consists of thousands of factors all interwoven together to create our present day reality. Just a few changes in the weave can have an astounding effect on the reality. As a result as I clustered the information I found that it was hard to pindown just particular areas to use to answer my various questions. I found that the conclusions I was reaching were the result of the combination of my aquired knowledge on the subject. A big theme in my conclusions was simply looking at international politics. I looked at past actions by the U.S., Iran, and the rest of international community and from those made a good deal of my guesses as to what their future actions would be. I also looked into the reasons for their past decisions and from those decided on some ideas as to what could be changed to positively influence their future decisions. Another difficulty that I found was fitting in opposing arguments. I've looked at alot of opposing arguments in my research. The problem I think is that these arguments were on smaller issues and since what I'm doing is pulling together all these small issues to get a look at the big one I'm leaving alot of these arguments in the dust. I'm going to have to take special care throughout my paper to refer to opposing viewpoints wherever I can.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
D9HW6 Research Outline
Current Situation in Iran
I. Iranian Government
A. Structure
Faqih/Supreme Leader (Chief of State) (Essentially elected dictator)
- Must be religious but more importantly politically capable
- Elected by popularly elected religious nationalist “Assembly of Experts”
- Appoints Chief of Judiciary and controls directly
Assembly of Experts (Kind of like electoral college)
- Popularly Elected
- Tested for religious learning and commitment to Islamic Republic
- Must be approved by Guardians Council
President (Replaced Prime Minister) (Second Man) (Public spokesman)
- More power than before
- Subject to faqih in all critical state, security, and foreign policy matters
Guardian Council (just under faqih)
- Religious overseeing council
- 12 appointed (supreme leader) members divided equally between clerics and lay scholars.
- Judicial review and veto power
- Conservative religious watchdog
- Judges the qualifications of those who stand for election to legislative bodies
Discretionary Council
- Resolves disputes between Guardian Council, parliament, and executive branch
- Thirty members appointed by supreme leader
- Resolves issues between ruling powers
• Supreme Leader has enormous power
• Remarkably kin to U.S. in that checks-n-balances and democratic. Chief difference non-separation of church and state and great power to one person.
• Very doubtful anything happens without faqih go ahead or he would crack down on it.
Current Leadership
President → Mahamoud Ahmadinejad
- Extremely anti-West and anti-Israel
- Very overconfident
- May not have support of Iranian government
Current Government
Four Professed Goals at Start
1. Social Justice (opinion)(likely no)
2. Economic Self Sufficiency (failed)
3. Good Economy (opinion/not much change/likely worse)
4. Freedom from Influence of Foreign Powers (Likely succeeding but causes other areas to suffer.
Main View From Revolution: Militant
- Political and cultural revolution
- Theocratic state ruled by and for the clerics
- Violence legitimate means to the ultimate goal
- Supreme Leader
• There are liberal minds which would likely support westernized society but repressed by government.
• Possible Dual reality: Public rigid/Private western
II. Iranian Military
* Roughly Four Branches
* Estimated around 550,000- 600,000
1. Pasdaran (Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps
- Established by the clerics, first loyalty to the clerics
- Transformed zealot revolutionary militias into military force accountable only to clerics
• 125,00 Strongish
• Secures revolutionary regime
• Provides training support to terrorist groups abroad
• Formed in 1978 revolution
• Operates independently of Regular Armed Forces (though lots of joint operations)
- Constitution gives IRGC responsibility of “preserving the Revolution”
- Also serves as enforcers for Islamic codes/moralities
- Iranian SS
- Runs certain businesses and social institutions
Military Capabilities
- Consists of ground, naval, and aviation troops (well rounded)
- Air forces negligible, most new aircraft go to regular Air Force
- Navy mostly small guerilla patrol boats
- Political influence as well
* Essentially Iran’s Proxy Training and support force
2. Regular Army
- First loyalty to country and government
- About 350,000
Composition
1. Four Corps
2. Four Armored Divisions
3. Six Infantry Divisions
4. Two commando brigades
5. One Airborne Brigade
6. Other smaller independent formations:
- Several small armor units
- An Infantry Brigade
- An Airborne Brigade
- Two or Three special forces brigades
- Five artillery brigade/regiments
- Coastal defense units
- Air Defense Groups
- Between four and six army aviation units
- Logistics and supply units
- Different organization in each division
- Some not well equipped
- Decent Number of Tanks
- High Number of combat helicopters
3. Iranian Navy
• Smallest service
• About 20,000 men mostly riflemen and marines
• Five Major Zones
1. Three on Persian Gulf (Main)
2. One on Caspian Sea (tiny)
3. One on Indian Ocean
• Three battalions of marines
• Entirely of Foreign Origin
• Largest Hovercraft fleets in the world (shallow Persian Gulf waters)
• Suffered a great deal after withdrawal of Western suppliers (spare parts and maintenance)
• Mostly supplied by Eastern sources now: Russia, China
• Mostly small, high speed boats
• Poorly equipped and largely out of action
• Large number of sea mines
4. Iranian Air Force
• Also hard hit by military sanctions
• Around 100,000 personnel
• Started with decent air force but heavily degraded
• Most planes and equipment come from Russia and China
Defense Industry
• Small: mostly ground force equipment
• Growing Air production
• Still Largely Reliant on Foreign Market
• New turn toward Russia and China markets for arms (big demand)
• All services negatively effected by withdrawal from western resources specifically Air Force and Navy
• Considered Unorganized
• Attempts to make up for lacking areas with good missile and rocket capabilities
• Basij- Essentially National Guard. Trained by Revolutionary Guards so would probably fight like insurgency. Could be very dangerous in an occupation.
Supreme National Security Council
• Institution established with an aim to watch over the Islamic Revolution and safeguard the IRI’s national interests as well as sovereignty and territorial integrity.
• Iranian Constitution lays out three responsibilities of SNSC
1. Determine defense/security policies within the framework of general policies laid down by the faqih.
2. Coordinates all activities related to defense/security.
3. Decides how all resources will be used for facing threats (international and domestic.
• President is Chairman of council and subcommittees
• Faqih makes all final calls
Members of SNSC
1. Heads of Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary
2. Chief of the Supreme Command Council of the Armed Forces
3. Official in charge of the Plan an Budget Organization (head treasurer)
4. Two representatives of faqih
5. Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minister of the Interior, and Minister of Intelligence
6. A minister concerned with the subject and the highest authorities of the Army and the IRGC
• Reports show that military commanders are not idiots and have been known to ignore unsound advice from inexperienced religious/SNSC reps.
• Two chains of command below SNSC
1. Admin
2. Operational
III. Relationship Between Iran And Nearby Countries
Tension with Israel
Reasons
1. Support of Hezbollah
2. Promised Destruction
3. Stated no intention to attack Israel
Recent War Between IDF and Hezbollah
1. Iran emboldened. Seeing tactics work. (Other Arabs see as well)
2. Might be pissed because Hezbollah fired off most rockets
Arab Resentment Toward West
1. Israel
- Basic eviction of Palestinians and emplacement of Israel is very unpopular amongst Arabs
- Continued Western support of Israel seen bitterly by many Arabs
- Blame on U.N. for creation
2. Perceived Social Corruption of West
3. Western Attempts to Control Middle East
- 1953 coup in Iran of prime minister seen with hostility by many Iranians
4. Perceived “anti-Muslim Crusade” by U.S. and allies.
Arabs Toward Iran
• Many Arab Neighbors of Iran do Not See United States as a Threat
Gulf Cooperation Council (Kind of a Middle East NATO)
- Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE
- Weary of Iran for several reasons
1. History of Exporting Revolution makes governments nervous
2. Nuclear capability would give increased leverage in regional policy, intimidation
3. Environmental Concerns involving destabilizing nuclear disasters
4. Don’t want a Israel-Iran conflict. Can’t demand stop to Iran when Israel
5. U.S. military action unpopular with nationals. Possibility of lashing out at neighbors
• Israel will not likely allow Iran to gain nukes without fight
• In case of conflict other Arab states likely neutral, at least officially
• Fall of Taliban and Saddam creates power vacume
• Danger of Israeli and Iran conflict
IV. U.N. Attitude Toward Iran
September 25- Iranian President Vows to Ignore Security Council Measures
1. Stated agreement has been reached with IAEA and matter is now closed. (Definitely Not)
2. Stated will not follow resolutions of Security Council claiming it is a pawn of the “Arrogant Powers”
3. West seeking broader sanctions
4. Ahmadinejad makes big attack on U.S. culture.
5. Still wishes to see Israel gone though claims through peaceful means. (yeah right)
September 27- Iranian-IAEA agreement details.
- Essentially this agreement states the plan and order for the IAEA and Iran to resolve all of their outstanding issues in terms of unanswered questions.
- The agreement states that after the process outline within is finished the IAEA will have no further problems with the Iranian nuclear program.
- This essentially means, assuming the Iranians follow through and/or aren’t doing something behind the IAEA’s back, that the U.N. and U.S. lose their credibility in attacking Iran economically, militarily, and politically.
- Report might not hold back U.S. claiming rumors of foul play
• Prior to IAEA found Iran to be holding back and behaving suspiciously
• Fear that other countries will follow example
• Split in support between economic supporter of Iran, primarily Russia and China, which has traditionally paralyzed U.N.
• However, Iran’s cheating of the NPT has created a more unified opinion within the U.N. (treaty)
U.N. Structure
General Assembly
- All nations have 1 vote.
- Overseeing Operations
- Considering non-binding resolutions on international issues
- Elects members of Security Council (not nations)
Security Council
- Maintaining International Peace
- Authorizing Economic and Military Sanctions
- Approving Use of Force to restore peace
- Choices of nations to ensure that every council decision was supported by globe’s strongest nations.
Large Reasons for Ineffectiveness of U.N.
- Different Superpowers supporting opposing sides
- One superpower vetoes parts of intervention and missions become to narrowly defined.
- Many Instances of American or NATO led aggressive plans getting the job done where U.N. doesn’t: Kosovo, Bosnia,
- Going into Iraq without U.N. approval severely discredited
- Many peacekeeping missions are abandoned after minimal losses
More Effective Method of Peacekeeping
1. Superpower goes in and puts down opposition
2. Peacekeepers come in after to keep the peace
• Suggestions for Permanent Peace Keeping Force to make peacekeeping operations better funded and more able to rapidly respond.
• Opponents state wouldn’t work unless backed by superpowers and when superpowers are aligned it’s unnecessary anyway.
IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) (UN Nuclear Watchdog)
- Nations seeking nuclear capabilities must follow certain safeguards and allow IAEA inspections to ensure lack of weapons development.
- Many nations doing it in secret or in spite of.
- Too openhanded.
V. U.S. Attitude Toward Iran
• U.S. policy of not negotiating with those it considers terrorists has not always held true.
• Important to bear in mind that radicals are a minority
• Past attempts to resolve issues indicate that some Iranians at least wish to go into talks with the U.S.
• Current situation in Middle East has emboldened Iran
Intelligence on Iran
• Difficult do to atmosphere in Iran
• Several Methods Known
1. Iranians in other Arab Countries
2. General Intelligence from other countries
3. Intelligence from American Allies in and around region
4. Captured Insurgents or Iranian detainees
5. Iranian Exiles (Chalabis)
Criticism
• Scattered
• U.S. Intel failure in Iraq
• Closely resembles said lack of intel
• Difficulty Understanding Iranian decision making apparatus
• Hard to tell who has a hand in what
• Important is officials making good policy decisions based on limited intelligence
VI. Iranian Influence on Iraq
Iranian Goals in Iraq
- Iran has close ties to many prominent Shia militias in Iraq
5 Theoretical Iranian Goals for Iraq
• Prevent the emergence of an Iraq dominated by Arab-Sunnis that might threaten Iran.
• Promote Iran’s economic and religious interests in Iraq (several Shia holy shrines are located in Iraq).
• Prevent the emergence of a separate independent Kurdish state in northern Iraq. Such a state might encourage the Kurds in Iran to follow suit.
• Prevent a decisive US victory. Such an outcome would improve the US image in the Middle East and could encourage Washington to repeat the experience of “regime change” in Iran. Keeping American troops fighting in Iraq reduces the chances of a US attack on Iran.
• Prevent a full-scale civil war in Iraq. Such a war would threaten the Shia influence inside Iraq, destabilize Iran, and antagonize surrounding Sunni-Arab states.
• Iranian President states chaos in Iraq is bad for Iran as it is their neighbor and Shiite government already in place. States U.S. is looking for a scapegoat.
• Iraq severely uncomfortable with tensions
VII. Iran’s Nuclear Program
• See Iranian-IAEA agreements in U.N. view of Iran section
• Iran has shown a tendency to defy U.N. and IAEA mandates as well as a history of supporting terrorist groups which combines to make everyone nervous about their nuclear intentions
• U.N. waiting on November IAEA report
• Development of nuclear weapons is not strategically very intelligent for Iran right now which makes their behavior all the more troubling
• Iran has defied the NPT treaty which it signed which demands that countries seeking nuclear power must be transparent
VIII. Effect of International Pressure on Iran
• Hard to tell with lack of knowledge of life in Iran
Several Possible Theories
1. Iranian government fully committed to winning international standoff
2. Reemergence of liberal power in response to failure of current government
3. Iran being backed into corner makes more dangerous and prone to rash action
Possible Outcomes
I. Conflict (Could become necessary)
II. Peace (Obviously preferred option)
Effects on American People
I. If peace not much of effect. Focus still on Iraq
II. Many consequences if conflict such as
- Higher deficit
- Suffering of Economy
- Draft
- Increased international anger towards Americans
This will be difficult to read, but the syllabus said post it so here it is. My word version is a lot prettier and easier to look at. This was a useful step because I had to go through my research notes so far and start pulling out the main points. The result is this condensed version of my research notes which are more than twice as long as this. My next steps will be structuring my paper's argument using this information.
I. Iranian Government
A. Structure
Faqih/Supreme Leader (Chief of State) (Essentially elected dictator)
- Must be religious but more importantly politically capable
- Elected by popularly elected religious nationalist “Assembly of Experts”
- Appoints Chief of Judiciary and controls directly
Assembly of Experts (Kind of like electoral college)
- Popularly Elected
- Tested for religious learning and commitment to Islamic Republic
- Must be approved by Guardians Council
President (Replaced Prime Minister) (Second Man) (Public spokesman)
- More power than before
- Subject to faqih in all critical state, security, and foreign policy matters
Guardian Council (just under faqih)
- Religious overseeing council
- 12 appointed (supreme leader) members divided equally between clerics and lay scholars.
- Judicial review and veto power
- Conservative religious watchdog
- Judges the qualifications of those who stand for election to legislative bodies
Discretionary Council
- Resolves disputes between Guardian Council, parliament, and executive branch
- Thirty members appointed by supreme leader
- Resolves issues between ruling powers
• Supreme Leader has enormous power
• Remarkably kin to U.S. in that checks-n-balances and democratic. Chief difference non-separation of church and state and great power to one person.
• Very doubtful anything happens without faqih go ahead or he would crack down on it.
Current Leadership
President → Mahamoud Ahmadinejad
- Extremely anti-West and anti-Israel
- Very overconfident
- May not have support of Iranian government
Current Government
Four Professed Goals at Start
1. Social Justice (opinion)(likely no)
2. Economic Self Sufficiency (failed)
3. Good Economy (opinion/not much change/likely worse)
4. Freedom from Influence of Foreign Powers (Likely succeeding but causes other areas to suffer.
Main View From Revolution: Militant
- Political and cultural revolution
- Theocratic state ruled by and for the clerics
- Violence legitimate means to the ultimate goal
- Supreme Leader
• There are liberal minds which would likely support westernized society but repressed by government.
• Possible Dual reality: Public rigid/Private western
II. Iranian Military
* Roughly Four Branches
* Estimated around 550,000- 600,000
1. Pasdaran (Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps
- Established by the clerics, first loyalty to the clerics
- Transformed zealot revolutionary militias into military force accountable only to clerics
• 125,00 Strongish
• Secures revolutionary regime
• Provides training support to terrorist groups abroad
• Formed in 1978 revolution
• Operates independently of Regular Armed Forces (though lots of joint operations)
- Constitution gives IRGC responsibility of “preserving the Revolution”
- Also serves as enforcers for Islamic codes/moralities
- Iranian SS
- Runs certain businesses and social institutions
Military Capabilities
- Consists of ground, naval, and aviation troops (well rounded)
- Air forces negligible, most new aircraft go to regular Air Force
- Navy mostly small guerilla patrol boats
- Political influence as well
* Essentially Iran’s Proxy Training and support force
2. Regular Army
- First loyalty to country and government
- About 350,000
Composition
1. Four Corps
2. Four Armored Divisions
3. Six Infantry Divisions
4. Two commando brigades
5. One Airborne Brigade
6. Other smaller independent formations:
- Several small armor units
- An Infantry Brigade
- An Airborne Brigade
- Two or Three special forces brigades
- Five artillery brigade/regiments
- Coastal defense units
- Air Defense Groups
- Between four and six army aviation units
- Logistics and supply units
- Different organization in each division
- Some not well equipped
- Decent Number of Tanks
- High Number of combat helicopters
3. Iranian Navy
• Smallest service
• About 20,000 men mostly riflemen and marines
• Five Major Zones
1. Three on Persian Gulf (Main)
2. One on Caspian Sea (tiny)
3. One on Indian Ocean
• Three battalions of marines
• Entirely of Foreign Origin
• Largest Hovercraft fleets in the world (shallow Persian Gulf waters)
• Suffered a great deal after withdrawal of Western suppliers (spare parts and maintenance)
• Mostly supplied by Eastern sources now: Russia, China
• Mostly small, high speed boats
• Poorly equipped and largely out of action
• Large number of sea mines
4. Iranian Air Force
• Also hard hit by military sanctions
• Around 100,000 personnel
• Started with decent air force but heavily degraded
• Most planes and equipment come from Russia and China
Defense Industry
• Small: mostly ground force equipment
• Growing Air production
• Still Largely Reliant on Foreign Market
• New turn toward Russia and China markets for arms (big demand)
• All services negatively effected by withdrawal from western resources specifically Air Force and Navy
• Considered Unorganized
• Attempts to make up for lacking areas with good missile and rocket capabilities
• Basij- Essentially National Guard. Trained by Revolutionary Guards so would probably fight like insurgency. Could be very dangerous in an occupation.
Supreme National Security Council
• Institution established with an aim to watch over the Islamic Revolution and safeguard the IRI’s national interests as well as sovereignty and territorial integrity.
• Iranian Constitution lays out three responsibilities of SNSC
1. Determine defense/security policies within the framework of general policies laid down by the faqih.
2. Coordinates all activities related to defense/security.
3. Decides how all resources will be used for facing threats (international and domestic.
• President is Chairman of council and subcommittees
• Faqih makes all final calls
Members of SNSC
1. Heads of Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary
2. Chief of the Supreme Command Council of the Armed Forces
3. Official in charge of the Plan an Budget Organization (head treasurer)
4. Two representatives of faqih
5. Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minister of the Interior, and Minister of Intelligence
6. A minister concerned with the subject and the highest authorities of the Army and the IRGC
• Reports show that military commanders are not idiots and have been known to ignore unsound advice from inexperienced religious/SNSC reps.
• Two chains of command below SNSC
1. Admin
2. Operational
III. Relationship Between Iran And Nearby Countries
Tension with Israel
Reasons
1. Support of Hezbollah
2. Promised Destruction
3. Stated no intention to attack Israel
Recent War Between IDF and Hezbollah
1. Iran emboldened. Seeing tactics work. (Other Arabs see as well)
2. Might be pissed because Hezbollah fired off most rockets
Arab Resentment Toward West
1. Israel
- Basic eviction of Palestinians and emplacement of Israel is very unpopular amongst Arabs
- Continued Western support of Israel seen bitterly by many Arabs
- Blame on U.N. for creation
2. Perceived Social Corruption of West
3. Western Attempts to Control Middle East
- 1953 coup in Iran of prime minister seen with hostility by many Iranians
4. Perceived “anti-Muslim Crusade” by U.S. and allies.
Arabs Toward Iran
• Many Arab Neighbors of Iran do Not See United States as a Threat
Gulf Cooperation Council (Kind of a Middle East NATO)
- Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE
- Weary of Iran for several reasons
1. History of Exporting Revolution makes governments nervous
2. Nuclear capability would give increased leverage in regional policy, intimidation
3. Environmental Concerns involving destabilizing nuclear disasters
4. Don’t want a Israel-Iran conflict. Can’t demand stop to Iran when Israel
5. U.S. military action unpopular with nationals. Possibility of lashing out at neighbors
• Israel will not likely allow Iran to gain nukes without fight
• In case of conflict other Arab states likely neutral, at least officially
• Fall of Taliban and Saddam creates power vacume
• Danger of Israeli and Iran conflict
IV. U.N. Attitude Toward Iran
September 25- Iranian President Vows to Ignore Security Council Measures
1. Stated agreement has been reached with IAEA and matter is now closed. (Definitely Not)
2. Stated will not follow resolutions of Security Council claiming it is a pawn of the “Arrogant Powers”
3. West seeking broader sanctions
4. Ahmadinejad makes big attack on U.S. culture.
5. Still wishes to see Israel gone though claims through peaceful means. (yeah right)
September 27- Iranian-IAEA agreement details.
- Essentially this agreement states the plan and order for the IAEA and Iran to resolve all of their outstanding issues in terms of unanswered questions.
- The agreement states that after the process outline within is finished the IAEA will have no further problems with the Iranian nuclear program.
- This essentially means, assuming the Iranians follow through and/or aren’t doing something behind the IAEA’s back, that the U.N. and U.S. lose their credibility in attacking Iran economically, militarily, and politically.
- Report might not hold back U.S. claiming rumors of foul play
• Prior to IAEA found Iran to be holding back and behaving suspiciously
• Fear that other countries will follow example
• Split in support between economic supporter of Iran, primarily Russia and China, which has traditionally paralyzed U.N.
• However, Iran’s cheating of the NPT has created a more unified opinion within the U.N. (treaty)
U.N. Structure
General Assembly
- All nations have 1 vote.
- Overseeing Operations
- Considering non-binding resolutions on international issues
- Elects members of Security Council (not nations)
Security Council
- Maintaining International Peace
- Authorizing Economic and Military Sanctions
- Approving Use of Force to restore peace
- Choices of nations to ensure that every council decision was supported by globe’s strongest nations.
Large Reasons for Ineffectiveness of U.N.
- Different Superpowers supporting opposing sides
- One superpower vetoes parts of intervention and missions become to narrowly defined.
- Many Instances of American or NATO led aggressive plans getting the job done where U.N. doesn’t: Kosovo, Bosnia,
- Going into Iraq without U.N. approval severely discredited
- Many peacekeeping missions are abandoned after minimal losses
More Effective Method of Peacekeeping
1. Superpower goes in and puts down opposition
2. Peacekeepers come in after to keep the peace
• Suggestions for Permanent Peace Keeping Force to make peacekeeping operations better funded and more able to rapidly respond.
• Opponents state wouldn’t work unless backed by superpowers and when superpowers are aligned it’s unnecessary anyway.
IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) (UN Nuclear Watchdog)
- Nations seeking nuclear capabilities must follow certain safeguards and allow IAEA inspections to ensure lack of weapons development.
- Many nations doing it in secret or in spite of.
- Too openhanded.
V. U.S. Attitude Toward Iran
• U.S. policy of not negotiating with those it considers terrorists has not always held true.
• Important to bear in mind that radicals are a minority
• Past attempts to resolve issues indicate that some Iranians at least wish to go into talks with the U.S.
• Current situation in Middle East has emboldened Iran
Intelligence on Iran
• Difficult do to atmosphere in Iran
• Several Methods Known
1. Iranians in other Arab Countries
2. General Intelligence from other countries
3. Intelligence from American Allies in and around region
4. Captured Insurgents or Iranian detainees
5. Iranian Exiles (Chalabis)
Criticism
• Scattered
• U.S. Intel failure in Iraq
• Closely resembles said lack of intel
• Difficulty Understanding Iranian decision making apparatus
• Hard to tell who has a hand in what
• Important is officials making good policy decisions based on limited intelligence
VI. Iranian Influence on Iraq
Iranian Goals in Iraq
- Iran has close ties to many prominent Shia militias in Iraq
5 Theoretical Iranian Goals for Iraq
• Prevent the emergence of an Iraq dominated by Arab-Sunnis that might threaten Iran.
• Promote Iran’s economic and religious interests in Iraq (several Shia holy shrines are located in Iraq).
• Prevent the emergence of a separate independent Kurdish state in northern Iraq. Such a state might encourage the Kurds in Iran to follow suit.
• Prevent a decisive US victory. Such an outcome would improve the US image in the Middle East and could encourage Washington to repeat the experience of “regime change” in Iran. Keeping American troops fighting in Iraq reduces the chances of a US attack on Iran.
• Prevent a full-scale civil war in Iraq. Such a war would threaten the Shia influence inside Iraq, destabilize Iran, and antagonize surrounding Sunni-Arab states.
• Iranian President states chaos in Iraq is bad for Iran as it is their neighbor and Shiite government already in place. States U.S. is looking for a scapegoat.
• Iraq severely uncomfortable with tensions
VII. Iran’s Nuclear Program
• See Iranian-IAEA agreements in U.N. view of Iran section
• Iran has shown a tendency to defy U.N. and IAEA mandates as well as a history of supporting terrorist groups which combines to make everyone nervous about their nuclear intentions
• U.N. waiting on November IAEA report
• Development of nuclear weapons is not strategically very intelligent for Iran right now which makes their behavior all the more troubling
• Iran has defied the NPT treaty which it signed which demands that countries seeking nuclear power must be transparent
VIII. Effect of International Pressure on Iran
• Hard to tell with lack of knowledge of life in Iran
Several Possible Theories
1. Iranian government fully committed to winning international standoff
2. Reemergence of liberal power in response to failure of current government
3. Iran being backed into corner makes more dangerous and prone to rash action
Possible Outcomes
I. Conflict (Could become necessary)
II. Peace (Obviously preferred option)
Effects on American People
I. If peace not much of effect. Focus still on Iraq
II. Many consequences if conflict such as
- Higher deficit
- Suffering of Economy
- Draft
- Increased international anger towards Americans
This will be difficult to read, but the syllabus said post it so here it is. My word version is a lot prettier and easier to look at. This was a useful step because I had to go through my research notes so far and start pulling out the main points. The result is this condensed version of my research notes which are more than twice as long as this. My next steps will be structuring my paper's argument using this information.
D9HW3 Writing Reflection
To complete this assignment I first looked at my previous annotated bibliograpny assignments. I took out the ones that I knew I wasn't going to use and put the rest together into my draft. I then went through with a fine tooth comb and fixed the errors I could find, specifically with the citations. I also peer reviewed some classmates assignments as welll as read the reviews by other students on my own assignment. This gave me more ideas on how to improve my writing project. After taking all these things into account and putting my assignment through a spelling and grammar check I was finished. One thing I liked about my method here was my organization. As I did research I took notes and I kept those notes in an organized format. This helped me with this assignment primarily by showing where I was lacking in information and thus helped me decide what subject to research next. I don't really have any big concerns with this project outside of some formatting and other simple errors. If I had more time to work on this project I'd probably just spend it doing more research and adding more sources as my project is big and I need to do big research to get it right. One thing I definitely improved on here are my MLA citations (I hope). I spent alot of time learning about them and going through my own and others. Now my bibliography is done and I can focus primarily on my format and argument for WP3. Right now I'm trying to condense my notes and get them in order. I'm also trying to think through them so that I can proceed on with the last part of my research question which basically involve alot of educated guessing. I wish I had a little more time for this as I would have liked to fit in some more research.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
D8HW6 Deadline Reflection
This week was... wait for it... BUSY! Who would have thought. I don't know how many of these surprises my old heart can take. Looking through my classmates writing projects was informative but also a little shocking. It showed me the importance of self review of an assignment. It also showed me that it is important to read the assignment prompts in the syllabus and follow them or else you end up doing your assignment all wrong. The classroom discussions and activities were interesting as they gave me some insight into the thinking processes of some of my classmates as well as reminding me of the importance of structure in an argument. Reading and responding to my classmates blog postings helped me get an idea of their reaction to what we learned in class as well as giving me some useful information for WP2.
I responded to:
Jeff Fitzwater
d8hw4
Coralee Harding
D#8, HW#6, Deadline Reflection
Kathy Lacey
D#8, HW#3, Peer Review Reflection
Brennan Dardis
Deadline #8 HW#5
I responded to:
Jeff Fitzwater
d8hw4
Coralee Harding
D#8, HW#6, Deadline Reflection
Kathy Lacey
D#8, HW#3, Peer Review Reflection
Brennan Dardis
Deadline #8 HW#5
D8HW Peer Review Reflection
I reviewed Heather Morris' and Tara Bates' annotated bibliographies. Reading and replying their drafts was interesting because it showed me that it's very easy to make dumb mistakes as with grammatical or structure. It definitely emphasizes to me the need to go through my own AB to make sure I get the kinks worked out. Unfortunately, once again, I have not gotten many peer reviews. The only person who reviewed my WP2 was Coralee (thank you Coralee). She pointed out some grammatical and structuring errors. She also advised that I write in such a way that I display confidence in my subject whenever possible which is critical for a argumentative essay. This kind of surprised me as I hadn't really put much though into it but it is good advice. The lack of peer reviews only emphasizes the need for me to review it myself.
D8HW2 and 5 Peer Review/ Grammar Assignment
I went to and reviewed the MLA citation tips as I still think this is a week spot for me. I then used this knowledge during my two peer reviews. A few points of confusion it cleared up were that different parts of citations need to be double spaces and all separated by a period. Also publications, books, journals and such need to be underlined.
I reviewed these Annotated Bibliographies:
Heather Morris
HeatherM_WP2_Draft
Tara Bates
Tara_WP2_draft
I reviewed these Annotated Bibliographies:
Heather Morris
HeatherM_WP2_Draft
Tara Bates
Tara_WP2_draft
D8HW4 Case Against Coldplay
In this essay the author essentially makes the statement that Coldplay is a horrible band. He then goes on to offer a wide variety of evidence to support his claim from insincerity to musical technicalities. He starts out, however, by stating all of Coldplay's claims to fame. He admits that the band has many good qualities, such as great musical skill, a good sound, and a breakaway from macho ism which is often looked on with contempt in today's culture. He states, however, that the band ends up combining to many good aspects until they turn into an unrealistic, insincere, overly self-pitying band.
In terms of an audience, music fans are obvious. However, his writing could also be directed at other bands in a sort of plea to not repeat the mistakes of Coldplay. This could very well be a part of his purpose, aside from the obvious which is to convince his readers that Coldplay is a bad band. The author, Jon Pareles, is quite obviously writing from a negative stance on his subject, but he shows an obvious knowledge of the history and intricacies of music. His is a desperate plea to a world where Coldplay is largely celebrated and he appeals to, specifically it seems, other's who are well versed in music.
In terms of ethos, character appeals, Pareles attacks Coldplay's use of styles used by previous bands. He also makes a point of stating that various aspects of the band's style indicate to him an insincerity in the lyrics which he believes is an insult to Coldplay's listeners. Using logos, or logical appeals, he has fewer cases against Coldplay as he freely admits that, for the most part, their skill is quite outstanding. He does however make a few strikes to things such as the lead singer over stretching his range and certain cliches in the lyrics. The author doesn't go to far with pathos, emotional appeals. To the contrary he asks the audience to look past pathos which he states is Coldplay's chief selling point. He tries to instill a bit of anger at the "insincerity" of Coldplay's members who, in his opinion, take advantage of feelings that they don't share in order to sell records. He also states that, while some sensitivity is fine, Coldplay overdoes it and ends up sounding like a bunch of whiny fools who can't hack life.
All in all the author makes a pretty effective argument. He appeals to all facets of our thinking process and impresses of with his knowledge of music. Personally I am with him on this one. I am not a Coldplay fan. Their music is just to fairyland for me and I'm not big on self pity, which is their main topic.
In terms of an audience, music fans are obvious. However, his writing could also be directed at other bands in a sort of plea to not repeat the mistakes of Coldplay. This could very well be a part of his purpose, aside from the obvious which is to convince his readers that Coldplay is a bad band. The author, Jon Pareles, is quite obviously writing from a negative stance on his subject, but he shows an obvious knowledge of the history and intricacies of music. His is a desperate plea to a world where Coldplay is largely celebrated and he appeals to, specifically it seems, other's who are well versed in music.
In terms of ethos, character appeals, Pareles attacks Coldplay's use of styles used by previous bands. He also makes a point of stating that various aspects of the band's style indicate to him an insincerity in the lyrics which he believes is an insult to Coldplay's listeners. Using logos, or logical appeals, he has fewer cases against Coldplay as he freely admits that, for the most part, their skill is quite outstanding. He does however make a few strikes to things such as the lead singer over stretching his range and certain cliches in the lyrics. The author doesn't go to far with pathos, emotional appeals. To the contrary he asks the audience to look past pathos which he states is Coldplay's chief selling point. He tries to instill a bit of anger at the "insincerity" of Coldplay's members who, in his opinion, take advantage of feelings that they don't share in order to sell records. He also states that, while some sensitivity is fine, Coldplay overdoes it and ends up sounding like a bunch of whiny fools who can't hack life.
All in all the author makes a pretty effective argument. He appeals to all facets of our thinking process and impresses of with his knowledge of music. Personally I am with him on this one. I am not a Coldplay fan. Their music is just to fairyland for me and I'm not big on self pity, which is their main topic.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
D7HW5 Deadline Reflection
This was a fairly small deadline which is good because I procrastinated ALOT this week (bad bad Alex). It was interesting going through all my sources again and it gave me a better idea of where I am in terms of reaching my research goals. One thing that is causing me confusion is that I believe that it says on the class blog that ENG 102 students don't need to turn drafts in to turnitin.com. If I'm wrong somebody fix me quick! Got my annotated bibliography draft on GoogleDocs and looking forward to those peer reviews as I'm sure it will need some good tweaking before I turn in the final draft. Reading other peoples postings and replies this week gave me a few new ideas for my paper but also alarmed me a bit because I saw a good deal of classmates saying they were turning their drafts into turnitin and hence the confusion.
I replied to:
Tara Bates
Deadline #7- reading reflection
Stephanne Parizek
D7HW2 Annotated Bibliography draft
Corallee Harding
D#7, HW#1, Reading Reflection
Jared Zucker
D7, HW3,WP#2 Annotated Bibliography Draft
Mike Whipple
D#7, HW#4, Submitting to Turnitin.com
I replied to:
Tara Bates
Deadline #7- reading reflection
Stephanne Parizek
D7HW2 Annotated Bibliography draft
Corallee Harding
D#7, HW#1, Reading Reflection
Jared Zucker
D7, HW3,WP#2 Annotated Bibliography Draft
Mike Whipple
D#7, HW#4, Submitting to Turnitin.com
D7HW3 Annotated Bib Draft
On Google Docs any reviews and input would be appreciated.
Annotated Bibliography
“Based on the current situation in Iran; what are some of the possible outcomes, and how will they affect the American people?” This is the question I have set out to answer. The situation with Iran is a current, hot issue with new developments happening almost weekly. Staying on top of it is difficult to say the least for to understand the issue you must understand a wide variety of things such as political power in Iran, to the U.N., to Israel. The primary issues with Iran right now are particularly; it’s support of terrorist organizations in the Middle East and worldwide and it’s developing nuclear program. Opinions on what should be done vary from war to increased Iranian control in the Middle East. To understand this issue one must go into the research with a “bird’s eye view,” so to speak and that is what I’ve tried to do.
"Iranian Military Guide." globalsecurity.org. 19 Feb. 2006. 8 Oct. 2007
I found this source using Google Search engine. It's basically a database giving a run down on the various branches of the Iranian military: Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, Army, Airforce, Navy. It also talks about the various political ministries and chains of command for the military. There is a long list of links to various articles used as sources for the database so I get the impression it's pretty legit. I also see a number of things here that I have seen with other sources. This database will be useful for me in that it should provide the meat and potatoes of my notes on the Iranian Military though I'll need to run through some backup sources to confirm some things. A few important points you see in the database. First, since the Revolution and western military embargoes the military has greatly suffered and is recovering slowly. Second, Russia and China have been making many of the recent arms deals with Iran. Three, a great deal of the bragging of Iranian military commanders to the press is likely a bunch of crap. The information on the military seems fairly unbiased in that I see a good mix of ups and downs.
Masci, David. "The United Nations and Global Security." CQ Researcher. 27 FEB 2004. 01 OCT 2007.
.
I found this article using CQ researcher. It is a general article on the U.N. with a specific focus on its history, failures, today, and possible changes. This article gave me a great deal of information that I needed to help me understand the U.N.'s policies and what kind of action they might take in the future. It brought to light what the U.N. is good at and what it isn't and that brings up some interesting ideas on what changes could be made. Specifically, the U.N. has been fairly successful in building infrastructures in new countries and as a forum for international disputes. Its economic sanctions can also be effective but only when they have the support of the majority (specifically the majority of the countries on the Security Council.) The big thing that the U.N. has not been very effective with is peacekeeping in specific reference to genocide and ethnic wars. However organizations such as NATO and the United states have been fairly effective in dealing with these issues due to the fact that they take a more aggressive stance in comparison to the U.N.'s narrowly defined, and essentially useless peacekeeping missions. This is a well rounded article with reference to both sides of the argument on the U.N. which I think is brought about from the large amounts of research put into this paper.
Hoge, Warren. "Iran's President Vows to Ignore U.N. Measures." The New York Times. 26 Sep. 2007. 02 Jan. 2007.
.
Fresh article written September 25th after Iranian President Mahamoud Ahmadinejad's visit to the U.N. I found this article in the online New York Times and have seen similar articles in other press institutions. Basically it outlines Ahmadinejad's adress to the U.N. It states that the Iranian government has reached an agreement with the IAEA (Internal Atomic Energy Agency) to answer questions that they had repeatedly refused to reveal to the agencies Nuclear Inspectors. Due to this President Ahmadinejad stated that the matter is "closed" and that his country will ignore any demands from the U.N. Security council. The President stated that his country see's the matter as existing in the IAEA's jurisdiction and that the Security Council is merely a pawn of the "arrogant powers." One thing I want to do after reading this article is find information on the deal Iran made with the IAEA and get the details, criticisms, and a realistic assessement of what it could accomplish.
"Communication dated 27 August 2007 from the Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Agency concerning the text of the "Understandings of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the IAEA on the Modalities of Resolution of the Outstanding Issues"." IAEA. 27 AUG 2007. 04 OCT 2007.
This is basically and outline of the agreement between the IAEA and Iran on August 27, 2007. I found this using usa.gov search engines. The agreement was made public so I was able to get a look at it. For quick understanding skip to the end at "General Understandings." Basically the agreement outlines the IAEA's and Iran's plan to resolve all of the IAEA's outstanding issues with the Iranian nuclear program. This is major as, assuming Iran follows through and that they aren't doing something behind the IAEA's back which is a reasonable suspicion, removes most of the U.N. and U.S.'s case against Iran concerning their nuclear program. If things go down as outlined in the agreement then the IAEA will no longer have any problems with Iran's nuclear programs. The IAEA is supposed to have a report to the U.N. in November on its progress.
Toosi, Nahal. "Ahmadinejad, in US for UN General Assembly, Gets Blistering Reception From Columbia President." Associated Press. 09 SEP 2007. 09 SEP 2007.
.
This is hot off the presses ladies and gentlemen. The article covers Iranian President Ahmadinejad, who is in New York for the UN General Assembly, was invited to speak at Colombia University. He took alot of crap there from the university president, audience, and demonstraters outside. Some important highlights of his comments were 1. He dosen't deny the holocaust (which he reportedly has) He concedes that it occured but dosen't think it is applicable for the Palestinian situation. 2. His government has no intention to attack Israel (when elected he vowed to "wipe Israel off the map." and 3. He denies that homosexuals were publicly hanged in his country and asserts that there are no homosexuals in his country (possibility but doubtful and possible lie). On many other questions he skirted the issue such as Iranian weapon shipments to Iraq and Iranian support of terrorism. Many people fervently stated that Ahmadienjad should not have been invited to speak. These people are either war hawks, or ignorant. If you want to resolve a problem without conflict you have to talk to people, even the nasty ones. Also, before Ahmadinejad was given the floor the President of Colombia, who invited him in the first place, basically insulted him for an hour on stage. This, I believe, is extremely bad form. Don't get me wrong I don't like Ahmadinejad and think he's full of it in regards to many things but I also believe that for anyone, American or Iranian, to invite someone, saint or scum, somewhere and then verbally bash them before they even speak, especially in front of others, is extremely bad form and I would expect better from the president of such a prominent university.
Sokolski, Henry D., and Patrick Clawson. Strategic Studies Institute. Checking Iran's Nuclear Ambitions. Internet Edition. 01 JAN 2004.
This is an ebook I found on using the usa.gov site. It's essentially a report on the nuclear situation with Iran with multiple suggestions on what to do about it. This is a government publication so it's about as authentic as I'm going to find. It goes into depth on the political situation in Iran, U.S. Interaction with Iran, The Challenges of U.S. Military Action, and more. I'll need to square away some time to read through the entirety of this book and it will probably be important in my research as it covers such a wide range of factors critical to the situation in Iran. This book contains a great deal of opinions on what should be done to resolve the nuclear situation with Iran. The opinions are those of the authors, who work for SSI (an American Institution), and the opinions will likely reflect that.
Katel, Peter. "Middle East Tensions." 1627 OCT 2006 18 SEP 2007
.
I found this article using CQ researcher in the library database. Reading it you can see that it is very in depth and seems well researched. Due to this both sides of the issue are presented. The author doesn’t give many of his opinions but focuses on those of others. Also I have been finding confirmation of this material in other sources. All this combines to give me the impression that this is a reliable source. This article helps answer many questions about relationships between Middle East countries as well as useful bits on the Iran situation, Iranian government, and the Iranian military. Information from this source will definitely go into my research.
Bahgat, Gawdat. "Iran and the United States: The Emerging Security Paradigm in the Middle East." Parameters 15 MAY 2007 19 SEP 2007
.
This is an article from an army-sponsored journal that I found through usa.gov. While I may have my reservations about the army (haha) I still believe this to be a reliable source. Not least of all because I'm finding a lot of information in it corresponding with other sources. That is pretty much what I'm using this information for. To confirm and expand on information I've gotten from other sources. It outlines a lot of the reasons for tension between the U.S. and Iran and how we got there.
Kazemi, Farhad. "The precarious revolution: unchanging institutions and the fate of reform in Iran: Iranian politics is a system made by the clerics for the clerics, and for their supporters who possess a near monopoly on the spoils of the revolution and the country's resources." Journal of International Affairs 57.1 (Fall 2003): 81(15). Academic OneFile. Gale. Mesa Community College. 20 Sept. 2007
.
A very long, but extremely useful article. I found it using Academic OneFile in the library electronic resources. This article basically goes into great detail on the history and structure of the Iranian government, with a particular focus from the 1979 revolution and up. After reading this article I have a much better understanding of the workings of the Iranian government which is a strange mix of democracy, religious based systems, and dictatorship. Took awhile to get through but definitely worth it. Just from looking at the title you can get a basic impression of the author’s view on the Iranian Government but read with an open mind you find both good and bad aspects with Iran’s policies.
"Guards Have "Length And Breadth" of Gulf Covered: Iranian Commander." Agence France Press. 15 AUG 2007. 20 SEP 2007.
.
This is a fairly short article that I found at DefenseNews.com. The website seems pretty reliable and it's a pretty recent article but definitely must be taken with a grain of salt as the article is basically the commanding general for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard boasting of his military's capabilities. Some of his assertions seem possible and others seem very unlikely but I'll primarily be using this information to know where to check up on the Iranian Military with other sources. It is, essentially, an outline of some things I need to investigate.
In conclusion, the broad kind of research I’ve been doing on this subject has greatly increased by knowledge on a road variety of related subjects. As I become more knowledgeable I find it easier to draw conclusions between different areas as well as being able to look at a new source and tell if it has anything useful in it. Some of the things I’ve found have surprised me. For instance, I was previously under the mistaken impression that the conflict between Jews and Arabs was purely racially or religiously based, which is not true. The Arabs, specifically the Palestinians have legitimate cases against Israel which is not to say that Israel doesn’t have any of it’s own. One of the most difficult things here has been finding legitimate sources that give me information on the subject I’m looking for.
Annotated Bibliography
“Based on the current situation in Iran; what are some of the possible outcomes, and how will they affect the American people?” This is the question I have set out to answer. The situation with Iran is a current, hot issue with new developments happening almost weekly. Staying on top of it is difficult to say the least for to understand the issue you must understand a wide variety of things such as political power in Iran, to the U.N., to Israel. The primary issues with Iran right now are particularly; it’s support of terrorist organizations in the Middle East and worldwide and it’s developing nuclear program. Opinions on what should be done vary from war to increased Iranian control in the Middle East. To understand this issue one must go into the research with a “bird’s eye view,” so to speak and that is what I’ve tried to do.
"Iranian Military Guide." globalsecurity.org. 19 Feb. 2006. 8 Oct. 2007
I found this source using Google Search engine. It's basically a database giving a run down on the various branches of the Iranian military: Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, Army, Airforce, Navy. It also talks about the various political ministries and chains of command for the military. There is a long list of links to various articles used as sources for the database so I get the impression it's pretty legit. I also see a number of things here that I have seen with other sources. This database will be useful for me in that it should provide the meat and potatoes of my notes on the Iranian Military though I'll need to run through some backup sources to confirm some things. A few important points you see in the database. First, since the Revolution and western military embargoes the military has greatly suffered and is recovering slowly. Second, Russia and China have been making many of the recent arms deals with Iran. Three, a great deal of the bragging of Iranian military commanders to the press is likely a bunch of crap. The information on the military seems fairly unbiased in that I see a good mix of ups and downs.
Masci, David. "The United Nations and Global Security." CQ Researcher. 27 FEB 2004. 01 OCT 2007.
I found this article using CQ researcher. It is a general article on the U.N. with a specific focus on its history, failures, today, and possible changes. This article gave me a great deal of information that I needed to help me understand the U.N.'s policies and what kind of action they might take in the future. It brought to light what the U.N. is good at and what it isn't and that brings up some interesting ideas on what changes could be made. Specifically, the U.N. has been fairly successful in building infrastructures in new countries and as a forum for international disputes. Its economic sanctions can also be effective but only when they have the support of the majority (specifically the majority of the countries on the Security Council.) The big thing that the U.N. has not been very effective with is peacekeeping in specific reference to genocide and ethnic wars. However organizations such as NATO and the United states have been fairly effective in dealing with these issues due to the fact that they take a more aggressive stance in comparison to the U.N.'s narrowly defined, and essentially useless peacekeeping missions. This is a well rounded article with reference to both sides of the argument on the U.N. which I think is brought about from the large amounts of research put into this paper.
Hoge, Warren. "Iran's President Vows to Ignore U.N. Measures." The New York Times. 26 Sep. 2007. 02 Jan. 2007.
Fresh article written September 25th after Iranian President Mahamoud Ahmadinejad's visit to the U.N. I found this article in the online New York Times and have seen similar articles in other press institutions. Basically it outlines Ahmadinejad's adress to the U.N. It states that the Iranian government has reached an agreement with the IAEA (Internal Atomic Energy Agency) to answer questions that they had repeatedly refused to reveal to the agencies Nuclear Inspectors. Due to this President Ahmadinejad stated that the matter is "closed" and that his country will ignore any demands from the U.N. Security council. The President stated that his country see's the matter as existing in the IAEA's jurisdiction and that the Security Council is merely a pawn of the "arrogant powers." One thing I want to do after reading this article is find information on the deal Iran made with the IAEA and get the details, criticisms, and a realistic assessement of what it could accomplish.
"Communication dated 27 August 2007 from the Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Agency concerning the text of the "Understandings of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the IAEA on the Modalities of Resolution of the Outstanding Issues"." IAEA. 27 AUG 2007. 04 OCT 2007.
This is basically and outline of the agreement between the IAEA and Iran on August 27, 2007. I found this using usa.gov search engines. The agreement was made public so I was able to get a look at it. For quick understanding skip to the end at "General Understandings." Basically the agreement outlines the IAEA's and Iran's plan to resolve all of the IAEA's outstanding issues with the Iranian nuclear program. This is major as, assuming Iran follows through and that they aren't doing something behind the IAEA's back which is a reasonable suspicion, removes most of the U.N. and U.S.'s case against Iran concerning their nuclear program. If things go down as outlined in the agreement then the IAEA will no longer have any problems with Iran's nuclear programs. The IAEA is supposed to have a report to the U.N. in November on its progress.
Toosi, Nahal. "Ahmadinejad, in US for UN General Assembly, Gets Blistering Reception From Columbia President." Associated Press. 09 SEP 2007. 09 SEP 2007.
This is hot off the presses ladies and gentlemen. The article covers Iranian President Ahmadinejad, who is in New York for the UN General Assembly, was invited to speak at Colombia University. He took alot of crap there from the university president, audience, and demonstraters outside. Some important highlights of his comments were 1. He dosen't deny the holocaust (which he reportedly has) He concedes that it occured but dosen't think it is applicable for the Palestinian situation. 2. His government has no intention to attack Israel (when elected he vowed to "wipe Israel off the map." and 3. He denies that homosexuals were publicly hanged in his country and asserts that there are no homosexuals in his country (possibility but doubtful and possible lie). On many other questions he skirted the issue such as Iranian weapon shipments to Iraq and Iranian support of terrorism. Many people fervently stated that Ahmadienjad should not have been invited to speak. These people are either war hawks, or ignorant. If you want to resolve a problem without conflict you have to talk to people, even the nasty ones. Also, before Ahmadinejad was given the floor the President of Colombia, who invited him in the first place, basically insulted him for an hour on stage. This, I believe, is extremely bad form. Don't get me wrong I don't like Ahmadinejad and think he's full of it in regards to many things but I also believe that for anyone, American or Iranian, to invite someone, saint or scum, somewhere and then verbally bash them before they even speak, especially in front of others, is extremely bad form and I would expect better from the president of such a prominent university.
Sokolski, Henry D., and Patrick Clawson. Strategic Studies Institute. Checking Iran's Nuclear Ambitions. Internet Edition. 01 JAN 2004.
This is an ebook I found on using the usa.gov site. It's essentially a report on the nuclear situation with Iran with multiple suggestions on what to do about it. This is a government publication so it's about as authentic as I'm going to find. It goes into depth on the political situation in Iran, U.S. Interaction with Iran, The Challenges of U.S. Military Action, and more. I'll need to square away some time to read through the entirety of this book and it will probably be important in my research as it covers such a wide range of factors critical to the situation in Iran. This book contains a great deal of opinions on what should be done to resolve the nuclear situation with Iran. The opinions are those of the authors, who work for SSI (an American Institution), and the opinions will likely reflect that.
Katel, Peter. "Middle East Tensions." 1627 OCT 2006 18 SEP 2007
I found this article using CQ researcher in the library database. Reading it you can see that it is very in depth and seems well researched. Due to this both sides of the issue are presented. The author doesn’t give many of his opinions but focuses on those of others. Also I have been finding confirmation of this material in other sources. All this combines to give me the impression that this is a reliable source. This article helps answer many questions about relationships between Middle East countries as well as useful bits on the Iran situation, Iranian government, and the Iranian military. Information from this source will definitely go into my research.
Bahgat, Gawdat. "Iran and the United States: The Emerging Security Paradigm in the Middle East." Parameters 15 MAY 2007 19 SEP 2007
This is an article from an army-sponsored journal that I found through usa.gov. While I may have my reservations about the army (haha) I still believe this to be a reliable source. Not least of all because I'm finding a lot of information in it corresponding with other sources. That is pretty much what I'm using this information for. To confirm and expand on information I've gotten from other sources. It outlines a lot of the reasons for tension between the U.S. and Iran and how we got there.
Kazemi, Farhad. "The precarious revolution: unchanging institutions and the fate of reform in Iran: Iranian politics is a system made by the clerics for the clerics, and for their supporters who possess a near monopoly on the spoils of the revolution and the country's resources." Journal of International Affairs 57.1 (Fall 2003): 81(15). Academic OneFile. Gale. Mesa Community College. 20 Sept. 2007
A very long, but extremely useful article. I found it using Academic OneFile in the library electronic resources. This article basically goes into great detail on the history and structure of the Iranian government, with a particular focus from the 1979 revolution and up. After reading this article I have a much better understanding of the workings of the Iranian government which is a strange mix of democracy, religious based systems, and dictatorship. Took awhile to get through but definitely worth it. Just from looking at the title you can get a basic impression of the author’s view on the Iranian Government but read with an open mind you find both good and bad aspects with Iran’s policies.
"Guards Have "Length And Breadth" of Gulf Covered: Iranian Commander." Agence France Press. 15 AUG 2007. 20 SEP 2007.
This is a fairly short article that I found at DefenseNews.com. The website seems pretty reliable and it's a pretty recent article but definitely must be taken with a grain of salt as the article is basically the commanding general for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard boasting of his military's capabilities. Some of his assertions seem possible and others seem very unlikely but I'll primarily be using this information to know where to check up on the Iranian Military with other sources. It is, essentially, an outline of some things I need to investigate.
In conclusion, the broad kind of research I’ve been doing on this subject has greatly increased by knowledge on a road variety of related subjects. As I become more knowledgeable I find it easier to draw conclusions between different areas as well as being able to look at a new source and tell if it has anything useful in it. Some of the things I’ve found have surprised me. For instance, I was previously under the mistaken impression that the conflict between Jews and Arabs was purely racially or religiously based, which is not true. The Arabs, specifically the Palestinians have legitimate cases against Israel which is not to say that Israel doesn’t have any of it’s own. One of the most difficult things here has been finding legitimate sources that give me information on the subject I’m looking for.
D7HW2 Annotated Bibliography
"Iranian Military Guide." globalsecurity.org.19 Feb. 2006. Global Security. 8 Oct. 2007 < http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iran/ >.
I found this source using Google Search engine. It's basically a database giving a run down on the various branches of the Iranian military: Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, Army, Airforce, Navy. It also talks about the various political ministries and chains of command for the military. There is a long list of links to various articles used as sources for the database so I get the impression it's pretty legit. I also see a number of things here that I have seen with other sources. This database will be useful for me in that it should provide the meat and potatoes of my notes on the Iranian Military though I'll need to run through some backup sources to confirm some things. A few important points you see in the database. First, since the Revolution and western military embargoes the military has greatly suffered and is recovering slowly. Second, Russia and China have been making many of the recent arms deals with Iran. Three, a great deal of the bragging of Iranian military commanders to the press is likely a bunch of crap. The information on the military seems fairly unbiased in that I see a good mix of ups and downs.
Bruno, Greg. "Intelligence on Iran Still Lacking." Council On Foreign Relations. OCT 2007: 11 Oct. 2007 < http://www.cfr.org/publication/12721/ >.
I found this article through links from CNN.com. The article is written on a predominantly Middle East affairs writer for the Council on Foreign Relations, which describes itself as a Nonpartison resource for information and analysis. As the title of the article implies the article features a fair bit of criticism on gaps in U.S. intelligence. However, it seems to have some well rounded and realistic claims. The difficulty with judging U.S. intelligence is the fact that most of it is not available to the public, with good reason. I found the article a must read due to the need to not repeat the intelligence failure which hit America so hard in Iraq.
Katel, Peter. "New Strategy in Iraq." CQ Researcher (Feb. 23 2007): 11 Oct. 2007 < http://library.cqpress.com.ezp.mc.maricopa.edu/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2007022300&type=hitlist >.
This is an article I found on CQ Researcher by an author who I have read other articles by and have found to be reliable. As with many of the CQ Researcher articles this is a dual sided portrayal of Iraq. As I'm doing my project on Iran, not Iraq, I focused on the parts of the paper that pertained to Iran. Some of the primary points I got out of the article is that, though it is easy to find weaponry and linking it to Iran, it's harder to link the delivery of those weapons to the higher ups in the Iranian Government. Coalition officials state that Iran is supporting insurgency in Iran to keep the U.S. busy and thus less likely to use military force against Iran. Some other reasons would include keeping Iraq, who was once a powerful enemy, from growing strong enough to challenge Iran again. Also there is the Iranians government claimed intention to spread Islamic revolution and a wish to get Western powers out of the Middle East. Iranian officials claim that they have no wish for instability in Iraq because why would they want an unstable nation so close to them.
I found this source using Google Search engine. It's basically a database giving a run down on the various branches of the Iranian military: Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, Army, Airforce, Navy. It also talks about the various political ministries and chains of command for the military. There is a long list of links to various articles used as sources for the database so I get the impression it's pretty legit. I also see a number of things here that I have seen with other sources. This database will be useful for me in that it should provide the meat and potatoes of my notes on the Iranian Military though I'll need to run through some backup sources to confirm some things. A few important points you see in the database. First, since the Revolution and western military embargoes the military has greatly suffered and is recovering slowly. Second, Russia and China have been making many of the recent arms deals with Iran. Three, a great deal of the bragging of Iranian military commanders to the press is likely a bunch of crap. The information on the military seems fairly unbiased in that I see a good mix of ups and downs.
Bruno, Greg. "Intelligence on Iran Still Lacking." Council On Foreign Relations. OCT 2007: 11 Oct. 2007 < http://www.cfr.org/publication/12721/ >.
I found this article through links from CNN.com. The article is written on a predominantly Middle East affairs writer for the Council on Foreign Relations, which describes itself as a Nonpartison resource for information and analysis. As the title of the article implies the article features a fair bit of criticism on gaps in U.S. intelligence. However, it seems to have some well rounded and realistic claims. The difficulty with judging U.S. intelligence is the fact that most of it is not available to the public, with good reason. I found the article a must read due to the need to not repeat the intelligence failure which hit America so hard in Iraq.
Katel, Peter. "New Strategy in Iraq." CQ Researcher (Feb. 23 2007): 11 Oct. 2007 < http://library.cqpress.com.ezp.mc.maricopa.edu/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2007022300&type=hitlist >.
This is an article I found on CQ Researcher by an author who I have read other articles by and have found to be reliable. As with many of the CQ Researcher articles this is a dual sided portrayal of Iraq. As I'm doing my project on Iran, not Iraq, I focused on the parts of the paper that pertained to Iran. Some of the primary points I got out of the article is that, though it is easy to find weaponry and linking it to Iran, it's harder to link the delivery of those weapons to the higher ups in the Iranian Government. Coalition officials state that Iran is supporting insurgency in Iran to keep the U.S. busy and thus less likely to use military force against Iran. Some other reasons would include keeping Iraq, who was once a powerful enemy, from growing strong enough to challenge Iran again. Also there is the Iranians government claimed intention to spread Islamic revolution and a wish to get Western powers out of the Middle East. Iranian officials claim that they have no wish for instability in Iraq because why would they want an unstable nation so close to them.
Friday, October 5, 2007
D6HW8 Deadline Reflection
This last week was a little hectic. I looked through the my peer reviews and went through and tweaked up my Research Proposal. I had trouble getting it into turnitin but I did share it with everyone on GoogleDocs. Now my attention is turning to writing project 2 and my main concern is getting my citations right. If anybody's found a real nailed down citation maker please do tell because I'm not crazy about combing them all out by hand. Reading and replying my classmates blogs was, as usual, pretty interesting. I got a few new ideas, some revisions to some previous ideas, and I hope I helped some of them out with some suggestions and comments.
I read and replied to:
Tara Bates
deadline #6 annotated Bibliographies
Coralee Harding
D#6, HW#6, Resource Selection
Stephanne Parizek
D6HW5 What Counts as Evidence?
Jared Zucker
D6, HW4, Annotated Bibliography
Brennan Dardis
Deadline #6 HW # 8
I read and replied to:
Tara Bates
deadline #6 annotated Bibliographies
Coralee Harding
D#6, HW#6, Resource Selection
Stephanne Parizek
D6HW5 What Counts as Evidence?
Jared Zucker
D6, HW4, Annotated Bibliography
Brennan Dardis
Deadline #6 HW # 8
Thursday, October 4, 2007
D6HW6 Source Eval
Getting a bit of deja vu here.
I decided to perform this eval on one of my sources I found on CQ Researcher. It is an article titled, "The United Nations and Global Security." My first step, evaluating the credibility of the sponsoring organization, is fairly simple. I'm reading a journal article I found on CQ Researcher which is two big positive points in favor of credibility. The article is essentially a research paper in itself and is extremely thorough and detailed and it is backed up by information I have heard in many other places. It has a bibliography a mile long. It's also well rounded and features opinions on both sides of the argument so it checks out, in my opinion, in terms of information accuracy. The source was written in 2004 and is primarily an article on the U.N. and it's abilities, strengths, and failures. The information contained in it is up to date and very pertinent to it's subject matter even if it wasn't written yesterday. The author, David Masci, is essentially a researcher and writer for CQ researcher. He has written an enourmous amount of articles on many different subjects and a great deal on the Middle East in particular. All in all I think this is a very credible source that will serve me well in my research efforts.
I decided to perform this eval on one of my sources I found on CQ Researcher. It is an article titled, "The United Nations and Global Security." My first step, evaluating the credibility of the sponsoring organization, is fairly simple. I'm reading a journal article I found on CQ Researcher which is two big positive points in favor of credibility. The article is essentially a research paper in itself and is extremely thorough and detailed and it is backed up by information I have heard in many other places. It has a bibliography a mile long. It's also well rounded and features opinions on both sides of the argument so it checks out, in my opinion, in terms of information accuracy. The source was written in 2004 and is primarily an article on the U.N. and it's abilities, strengths, and failures. The information contained in it is up to date and very pertinent to it's subject matter even if it wasn't written yesterday. The author, David Masci, is essentially a researcher and writer for CQ researcher. He has written an enourmous amount of articles on many different subjects and a great deal on the Middle East in particular. All in all I think this is a very credible source that will serve me well in my research efforts.
D6HW5 Types of Evidence
Most of the evidence I'll have access to in terms of my project will be secondhand evidence. I'm not in Iran, I'm not a member of the IAEA, I'm not a politician, I have no direct role in the Iran situation myself as of yet. I likely could if it goes south but that dosn't really help me out here. As such I must rely on secondhand knowledge: books, websites, magazine and journal articles, and so on. As I've been saying all along and as previous reading assignments have stated I'll just have to read critically and try and find multiple sources to back up my information. The only real firsthand evidence I'll have is interviews with various people. However it should be pointed out that some of these people will themselves be reliant upon secondhand information for their knowledge of the situation.
D6HW3 Writing Reflection
When writing the Research proposal I first read through the assignment prompt in the syllabus to see what I needed to include in the proposal. Next I jotted down a basic outline, or order in which I wanted to address the different requirements so that I would remember to make a logical order for my proposal. After I was finished I looked through the requirements one more time to make sure I hadn't forgotten anything. I think this worked pretty well for me in that the peer reviews stated, and in my own opinion, the draft ended up looking pretty good. I think it gave a good feeling of my enthusiasm for the project as well as giving the audience a basic idea of what's to come which is what I think of as the purpose for a research proposal. If I had more time I might have put more information from my research in there but I really don't think it neccesary as it's is a research "proposal" which implies pre-research. I think that the whole establishing a structure works extremely well and it's not something I employed much before this. It's not only useful when actually writing. I used it in deciding what steps I should take in my research. I made an outline of what it was that I specifically needed to research to accomplish my projects goals.
As for my next project, the Annotated Bibliography. One thing I'm going to need to do for that is run through the MLA citations and make sure I've got all those squared away. Also I think I'll want to organize them into a specific order based on what I used them for.
As for my next project, the Annotated Bibliography. One thing I'm going to need to do for that is run through the MLA citations and make sure I've got all those squared away. Also I think I'll want to organize them into a specific order based on what I used them for.
D6HW7 Grammar Assignment
I looked through the MLA formatting sections for web sources and books at owl.english.purdue.edu. I looked through these specifically because the next writing project is the annotated bibliographies and I want to make sure I have my citations in shape. After looking through the sections I went back through the citations for my annotated bibliographies from Deadline 5 and Deadline 6 and fixed the errors I saw there. Most of the errors I saw were lacks of periods between parts of the bibliography and spacing.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
D6HW4 Annotated Bibliography
Masci, David. "The United Nations and Global Security." CQ Researcher. 27 FEB 2004. 01 OCT 2007.
< http://library.cqpress.com.ezp.mc.maricopa.edu/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2004022700&type=hitlist&num=0& >.
I found this article using CQ researcher. It is a general article on the U.N. with a specific focus on it's history, failures, today, and possible changes. This article gave me a great deal of information that I needed to help me understand the U.N.'s policies and what kind of action they might take in the future. It brough to light what the U.N. is good at and what it isn't and that brings up some interesting ideas on what changes could be made. Specifically the U.N. has been fairly succeseful in building infrastructures in new countries and as a forum for international disputes. It's economic sanctions can also be effective but only when they have the support of the majority (specifically the majority of the countries on the Security Council.) The big thing that the U.N. has not been very effective with is peacekeeping in specific reference to genocide and ethnic wars. However organizations such as NATO and the United states have been fairly effective in dealing with these issues due to the fact that they take a more aggressive stance in comparison to the U.N.'s narrowly defined and essentialy useless peacekeeping missions.
Hoge, Warren. "Iran's President Vows to Ignore U.N. Measures." The New York Times. 26 Sep. 2007. 02 Jan. 2007.
< http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/26/world/26nations.html ex=1206417600&en=efe5f1a530316f2d&ei=5087&excamp=GGGNahmadinejadun. >
Fresh article written September 25th after Iranian President Mahamoud Ahmadinejad's visit to the U.N. I found this article in the online New York Times and have seen similar articles in other press institutions. Basically it outlines Ahmadinejad's adress to the U.N. It states that the Iranian government has reached an agreement with the IAEA (Internal Atomic Energy Agency) to answer questions that they had repeatedly refused to reveal to the agencies Nuclear Inspectors. Due to this President Ahmadinejad stated that the matter is "closed" and that his country will ignore any demands from the U.N. Security council. The President stated that his country see's the matter as existing in the IAEA's jurisdiction and that the Security Council is merely a pawn of the "arrogant powers." One thing I want to do after reading this article is find information on the deal Iran made with the IAEA and get the details, criticisms, and a realistic assessement of what it could accomplish.
"Communication dated 27 August 2007 from the Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Agency concerning the text of the "Understandings of the Islamic Republic ofr Iran and the IAEA on the Modalities of Resolution of the Outstanding Issues"." IAEA. 27 AUG 2007. 04 OCT 2007. < http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iran/agreementoutstanding.pdf. >
This is basically and outline of the agreement between the IAEA and Iran on August 27, 2007. I found this using usa.gov search engines. The agreement was made public so I was able to get a look at it. For quick understanding skip to the end at "General Understandings." Basically the agreement outlines the IAEA's and Iran's plan to resolve all of the IAEA's outstanding issues with the Iranian nuclear program. This is major as it, assuming Iran follows through and that they aren't doing something behind the IAEA's back which is a reasonable suspicion, removes most of the U.N. and U.S.'s case against Iran concerning their nuclear program. If things go down as outline in the agreement then the IAEA will no longer have any problems with Iran's nuclear programs. The IAEA is supposed to have a report to the U.N. in November on it's progress.
< http://library.cqpress.com.ezp.mc.maricopa.edu/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2004022700&type=hitlist&num=0& >.
I found this article using CQ researcher. It is a general article on the U.N. with a specific focus on it's history, failures, today, and possible changes. This article gave me a great deal of information that I needed to help me understand the U.N.'s policies and what kind of action they might take in the future. It brough to light what the U.N. is good at and what it isn't and that brings up some interesting ideas on what changes could be made. Specifically the U.N. has been fairly succeseful in building infrastructures in new countries and as a forum for international disputes. It's economic sanctions can also be effective but only when they have the support of the majority (specifically the majority of the countries on the Security Council.) The big thing that the U.N. has not been very effective with is peacekeeping in specific reference to genocide and ethnic wars. However organizations such as NATO and the United states have been fairly effective in dealing with these issues due to the fact that they take a more aggressive stance in comparison to the U.N.'s narrowly defined and essentialy useless peacekeeping missions.
Hoge, Warren. "Iran's President Vows to Ignore U.N. Measures." The New York Times. 26 Sep. 2007. 02 Jan. 2007.
< http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/26/world/26nations.html ex=1206417600&en=efe5f1a530316f2d&ei=5087&excamp=GGGNahmadinejadun. >
Fresh article written September 25th after Iranian President Mahamoud Ahmadinejad's visit to the U.N. I found this article in the online New York Times and have seen similar articles in other press institutions. Basically it outlines Ahmadinejad's adress to the U.N. It states that the Iranian government has reached an agreement with the IAEA (Internal Atomic Energy Agency) to answer questions that they had repeatedly refused to reveal to the agencies Nuclear Inspectors. Due to this President Ahmadinejad stated that the matter is "closed" and that his country will ignore any demands from the U.N. Security council. The President stated that his country see's the matter as existing in the IAEA's jurisdiction and that the Security Council is merely a pawn of the "arrogant powers." One thing I want to do after reading this article is find information on the deal Iran made with the IAEA and get the details, criticisms, and a realistic assessement of what it could accomplish.
"Communication dated 27 August 2007 from the Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Agency concerning the text of the "Understandings of the Islamic Republic ofr Iran and the IAEA on the Modalities of Resolution of the Outstanding Issues"." IAEA. 27 AUG 2007. 04 OCT 2007. < http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iran/agreementoutstanding.pdf. >
This is basically and outline of the agreement between the IAEA and Iran on August 27, 2007. I found this using usa.gov search engines. The agreement was made public so I was able to get a look at it. For quick understanding skip to the end at "General Understandings." Basically the agreement outlines the IAEA's and Iran's plan to resolve all of the IAEA's outstanding issues with the Iranian nuclear program. This is major as it, assuming Iran follows through and that they aren't doing something behind the IAEA's back which is a reasonable suspicion, removes most of the U.N. and U.S.'s case against Iran concerning their nuclear program. If things go down as outline in the agreement then the IAEA will no longer have any problems with Iran's nuclear programs. The IAEA is supposed to have a report to the U.N. in November on it's progress.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)