Week 3 Blog Post

My topic definition statement: “America at war with Afghanistan: Should it continue or end?” A terrorist attack on The United States occurred on September 11, 2001 which resulted in The United States declaring war on Afghanistan on October 7, 2001. In this paper, I will discuss the pros and cons of the war, and I will also discuss the reasons why some people agree with continuing the war and the reasons why some people dissagree with continuing the war. In the end, I will try to find a middle ground to each opposing side. Will continuing with the war benefit or be a disadvantage to America? Is the war worth continuing even though it comes with a high financial cost to America? Has the war had enough benefits to be worth starting it in the first place?

One question from my previous blog post: Should US tax dollars be used to continue the war in Afghanistan that's been going on since 2001? A source I found that might answer that question is Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11 by Amy Belasco. This book discusses all the costs of the war since it started in 2001. It doesn't seem to give a specific opinion to answer the question, but knowing all the costs could help me form an opinion and help find a middle ground to the issue. Another question from my previous blog post: Would continuing with the war better the US? Although this is a broad question, I believe that I can find a source to help me form an answer to it. A source I would use is Ending the US War in Afghanistan: A Primer by David Wildman and Phyllis Bennis. In the summary for this book, it mentioned that the book discusses questions like whether or not the war in Afghanistan is a good war and whether or not adding more troops in Afghanistan will work. Reading their ideas and thoughts will definitely help me answer this question, and hopefully I can answer this question from both points of view on the war.

Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11:

APA style bibliographic entry:
Belasco, Amy. (2007). Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11. Pennsylvania: Diane Publishing Company.

Summary/Analysis: This source does not technically take a side on this issue. It discusses all the numbers of the costs of different aspects of the Afghan war over the years. It does ask questions to get the reader to make an opinion about different things like whether or not the country's money should be used to continue the war, but it does not give an opinion itself. It is mostly informational.

The book definitely has some authority, because it comes straight out with the facts and everything else, but it does not form it's own opinion. It is accurate with it's facts as far as I know, because all the numbers and facts seem right and correct to me. There were very good reviews of it, so that helps me make the conclusion that it is accurate. It is current, because it discusses costs up to 2011, but it stops at 2011, so it doesn't include everything from this year, so it's not as current as it could possibly be. It is objective, because it doesn't include any biased information or opinions and is mostly straight facts.

Ending the US War in Afghanistan: A Primer:

APA style bibliographic entry:
Wildman, David. (2010). Ending the US War in Afghanistan: A Primer. New York: Olive Branch Press.

Summary/Analysis: The source proves that the points on one side are supported by the source, because it discusses different issues involving the war and then supports that idea. It also completely discusses both sides, which will help me with my webtext. It discusses each topic and tries to prove it right or wrong thoroughly. It is also very informational and explains both sides.

It has authority, because it comes straight out with ideas and thoughts, but also discusses the issue completely with pros and cons. It is accurate with facts and information, but it discusses many issues that are two-sided, so you can't really say whether it's completely accurate. It all depends on your opinion. It is kind of objective, because it discusses issues thoroughly, but it does make opinions which goes off of the author's personal ideas and thoughts, which would not be objective.