TOM HANKS FLUNKS HISTORY (ww2)

summary :

the article talks about how tom hanks has been publizicing the new HBO serise the pasific. it says that tom hanks has the wrong idiea about the history and resons world war 2 took place . tome hanks stated that world war two was caused and underlied by racisem from the US people to the japoniesse in the way he says that it was a ethnic or cultral conflit puting aside pearl haurbor and the batan death march. hanks seams to think its a awr that was about rasicem although critcs say it was not becuase the chinees were on our side adn they were saposid yellow people soo the auther belives tome hanks can surly make great movies but has lost the pig picture when it comes to history

Opinion:

i persoanly belive that tom hanks is probly one of the best actors/directors of the recent history althogh after reading this editoraial i belive that tome hanks isnt that great of a director if he is not knoing what the back ground of this new tv mini series of the pasific is all about in the basick concept of what the war was about. although every one can have there view on the war and how its started and why it whent on but i will say that tom hanks view does not seam to fit in to my book at all ...


link : http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/19/wwii-the-most-racist-generation/

MR. Stroud nice modeling last night haha and also i did watch the first episod of the pasific the other day ago and you are right it was pretty good !!

OBAMMA SHOULD THANK BUSH

SUmmary :

in this edditoral the auther talks about the recent ellections that just took place in iraq last weeekend and when most of the iraqi citizens votes and got he purple dye on their fingers. but the bigist deal about this ellection is the idea that the election was not a huge deal at all this tis due to the fact that becuase this was the third elction in iraq in recetn history most iraqis saw the election as some what routine to them and kinda non-shalount. but there was critizizsm to obama becuase when he commented on the ellection he talked about how his trop withdrawl plan is ritgh of scheduel but the what he failed to mention was the fact that the reason this election and troop with drawl is working is due the president bush and his policys that he started while he was president

opinon :

i beleive that presidetn obama should not just go forward and seamimlg not mention the resoan or methods behind the improvemtns in the new iraqi democracy. i also think that it dosent matter who started it and who gets credit to what has happend over in iraq i mean dose it realy matterer becuase its geting done and the ideas both presidents wanted are coming to life and the person who gets the ture credit should not matter that much

link http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/09/obama-should-thank-george-bush/

ready aim hold your fire

SUMMARY this article is about how in the war that is takingplace in afganistan the US troops are haveing much trouble in how to engage the ennimy this is beucase the genorals say the mission is the afganni peopel and nato says that the troops are there to kill and capture insurgents but the insurgents are the people soo it makes the takst very hard. there curent ruls of engagement are this "NATO forces cannot fire on suspected Taliban fighters unless they are clearly visible, armed and posing a direct threat. Buildings suspected of containing insurgents cannot be targeted unless it is certain that civilians are not also present. Air strikes and night raids are limited, and prisoners have to be released or transferred within four days, making for a 96-hour catch-and-release program" but when the enemy tants them by walking in plain site after they run out of ammuntion and throw there wepons down it can be infureating to theroops in the combat zones to due there jobs ...

OPINON. in my view i realy due understand the fact that its not right to kill civilans but we are in a WAR not a shooting range if we are to acomplish the mission in a timely manner and have to take down the terrist then i belive that there are nessiasay tradigydys that must take place i belive that if disragarding some engagement rules would endager civilians but impact the goal of get the terroist and taliban then take those risk becuase i know if i was a civilian and i knew that the rules of engagment said they weill shoot me if i am around a terroist well then i would try as best a s i could and move and stay way .. no im not the best informed about the afgani peoples situation and if they could move and espape or they have family members who are in the talliban but those are choices that they need to make if the value there personal life and not trying to get killed by the americans.

link http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/06/ready-aim-hold-your-fire/