Despite World Apathy, A “Grass Root” Organization Can Still Make Major Changes.

If in the United States, a child goes missing or is abducted, there is action. The police are notified, news stations flash pictures of the child and sometimes the profile of the abductor. If the abductor is found, the public does what is necessary to put the person behind bars.

On the other side of the earth, in the northern districts of Uganda, over 30,000 children have been abducted and unlike America nothing has been done. America has not been involved with this issue because our government feels as if it is not our duty to play the role of the “big brother”, but is the United Nations duty. So the world closed it eyes on the crisis in Uganda and the bloodshed continued.

Almost every family in Northern Uganda has been affected by a man named Joseph Kony. Instead of police forces trying to find the children, in Uganda the children flee from other abducted children who have been trained by Kony to kill. Villages have been destroyed, families killed, and the government of Uganda really has done nothing, nor has the world.

Instead the world and namely the United States has stood by for twenty years, while Kony has been taken innocent children and brainwashed them with fear and drugs to kill others. Joseph Kony says that his beliefs are based on the Ten Commandments, but his actions break every single one of them. A whole generation of children in Northern Uganda has grown up with Kony and his army. These children have lost their souls by seeing and committing the crimes as directed by Kony. It has been viewed by the world as just “another African problem.”

In this country the public may have been unaware of the gravity and the horror of this situation. The main “grass root” organization that can be attributed to making Americans and our President aware is the group called, “Invisible Children”. The non-profit organization was established in 2003 by three young filmmakers who went to Africa to film a story. Instead they soon found out the horror of Uganda and vowed to help its victims. “Invisible Children”, through its hard work and effort has forced the politicians of America to stop ignoring this issue.



Finally on May 19th, 2009, President Obama signed the LRA or Lord’s Resistance Army Bill, which stated that the U.S. would recommit to help diminish the Lord’s Resistance Army, and help Ugandans rebuild their communities. “We have seen your reporting, your websites, your blogs, and your video postcards -- you have made the plight of the children visible to us all,” President Obama said. “Your action represents the very best of American leadership around the world, and we are committed to working with you in pursuit of the future of peace and dignity that the people of who have suffered at the hands of the LRA deserve.” Perhaps it is this century’s perfect example of a “grass root” organization changing the world.

The Mistake of the Domino Theory Repeated Today?

The Domino Theory was first developed under President Eisenhower. The theory states that, if the first domino is knocked over, the rest will fall in turn. Eisenhower applied this theory to South-East Asia and argued that if South Vietnam was taken by communists, then the other surrounding countries in the region would follow, such as Cambodia, Thailand, Burma, Malaysia, and Indonesia. The Domino Theory was accepted and used by Presidents John F. Kennedy, Lynden Johnson, and Richard Nixon. It was the main justification for sending troops to fight in Vietnam. The politicians placed fear into the public by not only justifying the theory but convincing Americans that if not stopped, the Asian communism would be fought on our doorstep. As a result of this, 58,183 American soldiers died in Vietnam, about 1.3 million Vietnamese soldiers died, and 4 million Vietnamese civilians were killed or wounded. Today, people are still dying as a result of the chemical warfare used there, and it cost the American tax payers in a total of about 165 billion dollars.

It can be argued that the Domino Theory was developed primarily for convincing and frightening the public to support the war, because most Americans wanted to avoid communism at all costs. Today, it is hard to believe that any politician at that time believed this theory. Despite that fact, it appears that the theory was once again used recently and erupted from the Bush Doctrine. Just like the Domino Theory, President George W. Bush played on the fear of the public, due to the September 11^th tragedy. He exaggerated the threat of Iraq on the U.S., like Eisenhower did in the past with Vietnam. Eisenhower threatened that communism would spread to our country, especially Hawaii and Bush warned American citizens that terrorists would strike on American soil. Both of these past Presidents used this aggressive theory not simply to contain the enemy, but to justify strikes to swiftly defeat the enemy. The unbelievable, is that once again, the public has seemed to buy into without remembering our past history on this concept. The “non-thinking” media driven, self absorbed, Americans have seem to have seem to once again make the same mistake. The Bush Doctrine has once again divided the world into good and evil and endorsed the “either you or with us or you are terrorists” as told to Congress on September 20^th, 2001 by Bush. We now have our domino theory to justify our war strategy.

It has become clear to me that we will once again not learn from our mistakes. It is thirty years since American troops were forced to retreat and escape Vietnam. Was the Domino Theory correct? Did the other countries fall to communism when America retreated? Vietnam is still under communist control; however the surrounding countries mentioned by Presidents did not fall to communism. Despite the fact that Vietnamese is communistic, it has pursued a capitalistic economy. The Vietnamese people seem to be very satisfied their government today. At the end of the war, 85% of people living in Vietnam lived in poverty. Today, that figure is about 15%.

Today most Americans regret our involvement in Vietnam, yet once again have embraced the same theory. Like Vietnam, I fear that the outcome of the Middle East War that is present today will follow the same footsteps. The Domino Theory today as in the past shows no awareness of the history, culture, and politics of other nations. The Domino Theory of today may result in only one domino falling, and unfortunately it may be us.

Word Count: 589

The Patriot Act: A Stealth Repeat of Japanese Internment Camps?

Japanese Internment camps were a violation of the rights of citizens based on public panic and discrimination. The unfortunate fact is that the government could be repeating history with its current version of abusing civil rights, the use of the Patriot Act.

On December 7^th 1941, the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. The citizens feared another attack on the west coast. War persisted and discrimination of the Japanese people started to occur. Various state representatives of the government seized the opportunity of the panic and put pressure on President Roosevelt to take action against Japanese-Americans.

Without trials, history of time spent in U.S., proof of being spies, or any other considerations, the Japanese-Americans were forced to leave land, homes, business, and most possessions and move to isolated areas called “camps” that were all within 48 hours of travel. Many lost all they had worked for by having to sell their land and belongings cheap. In these “camps”, the Japanese were forced to live in barracks and use general areas for washing, eating and laundry. Some families were separated, many died from inadequate medical care and the high emotional stress of the situation, but the most hurtful was that the Japanese-Americans were seen as enemies of the country. Many families were forced to live in a 15ft by 15ft living area with only a thin sheet separating them from the families next to them.

The camps were usually in desolate areas and they had to cope with severe temperature changes. In order to control the Japanese, every internee over 17 years old was given the “loyalty test” by having to answer the following:

1. Are you willing to serve in the armed forces of the U.S. when ordered?

2. Will you swear unqualified allegiance to the U.S. and give up all loyalty to Japan and the Japanese emperor?

Failure to answer “yes” could cause a Japanese citizen to be sent to Tule Lake facility in the Rocky Mountains where harsh treatment was endured.

In December 1944, Public Proclamation #21 which became effective in January 1945 allowed the Japanese to return to homes that were no longer there. Some Japanese viewed the internment camps as concentration camps. Some quietly rebuilt their lives, but all were affected. Years later, the government gave the Japanese individuals that had been sent to the internment camps, monetary compensation for the country’s shameful mistake.

But did American citizens and government learn so that this type of action where citizen are locked up without trials and discrimination leads to hatred and panic? Honestly, I think not.

After the attack of September 11^th, the government enacted the Patriot Act. With this act, many civil rights were taken away. Again, like Roosevelt order 9066, it was based on fear, and panic. With the Patriot Act, the government has given itself many rights and taken away many from its citizens in the name of protecting us from terrorism.

But at least we have not set up camps? How about Guantanamo Bay? It has been proven that some innocent people are still locked up today, that were not terrorists. If America was again attacked, and we isolate a culture like we did with the Japanese, I believe we could easily repeat history of the Japanese internment camps. The arguments in favor for this action would be the same that were argued and used to develop the Japanese Internment Camps during World War II. We could be only missing the bobbed wire surrounding the camps in the steps to repeat the history of violating all of our civil rights.

Word Count - 610

Appeasement Policy Always Leads to War.

The definition of Appeasement means giving in to someone on the basis that their demands seem reasonable and justified. It can also be described as giving a bully what he wants. This policy of appeasement leads to Hitler's rise in power and the beginning of World War II. The appeasement policy of World War II is an excellent example of how this policy has and will continue to lead to wars.

In the 1930's many government officials in both Britain and France felt that the Treaty of Versailles had placed hardships on Germany that seemed unfair. Sensing this, Hitler decided to start to build up his army. The major politicians of Britain and France ignored the breach of the Treaty of Versailles and felt that Germany had a right to protect itself. Britain even made a navel agreement with Germany including its right to a navy as big as 35% of the British navy. Politicians also argued a stronger Germany would prevent the spread of communism to the west. In conclusion, they gave in to appease Hitler.

Noticing appeasement on his side, Hitler moved his troops into the Rhineland. The appeasement of this act from Hitler was that France did nothing to stop this breach of the Treaty of Versailles. Politicians justified that Rhineland belonged to Germany and why shouldn’t German troops be stationed there?

Then Neville Chamberlain, felt that by giving in to Hitler's demands, the world would avoid another war. He was not the only one who felt this way, Europe was just begging to recover from World War I, America was recovering from the Great Depression, and no one wanted to get in another World War. Additionally, many nations took an isolationist point of view.

In 1938, the Munich Agreement gave Germany back Sudetenland. At the time, appeasement was viewed as a success and an excellent example of securing peace through appeasement rather than war. Taking full advantage of the mood and realizing no one was going to stop him; Hitler broke the terms of the Munich agreement and invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia. This enlightened all that the policy of the appeasement had failed terribly and World War II would soon begin.

So why did this seemingly fair policy of negotiation fail so horribly and why if used today will it cause a war? It failed because Hitler like all power hungry leaders had no intention of being stopped or appeased. He, like others with his same intent, was going to take what he wanted. If others wanted to give it to him freely like Britain and France, he would of course shake their hands and take what he wanted. The policy of appeasement gave him what he wanted rather than having to fight for it easily.

Later when France and Britain realized his game and threatened him, Hitler simply called their bluff. They were unable to deliver and he took control.

The policy of appeasement in my opinion is simply a way to avoid having to deal with a bully. If you give a bully what he wants, it is extremely rare that a bully will not come back for more. It has been proven again and again whether on the schoolyard between children or negotiations between countries. The only way to defeat a bully is to stand firm against him. If Britain and France would have held firm, there is a very good chance that Hitler would not have been able to be as aggressive. At the least, the world could have been better prepared for Hitler’s plan. The policy of appeasement between the Great Wars is a great example of the creation of a World War. Politicians and countries who try the appeasement policy will find that they could end up in similar circumstances as the countries in World War II.

Word Count - 638