Mingling in the MIddle East

One of the currently most-talked-about stories in the Middle East comes from Saudi Arabia. Recently, their government supported the sentence of 200 lashes for a 19 year old Shiite girl. She had been sitting in a car with a male friend last year when they were gang-raped by seven men. The Saudi Justice Ministry says that this girl deserved the 200 lashes and six months in prison because she was guilty of “illegal mingling”. In other words, she was being punished for sitting in a car with a man who was not part of her family. Something seems wrong here to me: the government is punishing this girl…when she was raped. How could sitting in a car with a guy be of any concern when you have a situation as terrible as this? I do not understand this phrase “illegal mingling”. It seems to him that if the Middle East had a bit more mingling in their country, between the sexes and the sects, they would be a much more peaceful area. All over this area, there is a current struggle between the Muslim sects and it centers on who can mingle with whom. In Iraq, the question is can the Iraqi Shiites and Sunnis mingle anymore, after all the blood that has been shed? If so, can this country be stable enough that we can get our troops out of there? In my opinion, this is really an issue that affects our country directly. “Mingling” seems like kind of a trivial verb, but on the contrary it is everything; it is the basis of all citizen relations in the Middle East. It never occurred to me that some more interaction could mean the end of war. One of the currently most-talked-about stories in the Middle East comes from Saudi Arabia. Recently, their government affirmed the sentence of 200 lashes for a 19 year old Shiite girl. She had been sitting in a car with a male friend last year when they were gang-raped by seven men. The Saudi Justice Ministry says that this girl deserved the 200 lashes and six months in prison because she was guilty of “illegal mingling”. In other words, she was being punished for sitting in a car with a man who was not part of her family. Something seems wrong here to me: the government is punishing this girl…when she was raped. How could sitting in a car with a guy be of any concern when you have a situation as terrible as this? I do not understand this phrase “illegal mingling”. It seems to him that if the Middle East had a bit more mingling in their country, between the sexes and the sects, they would be a much more peaceful area. All over this area, there is a current struggle between the Muslim sects and it centers on who can mingle with whom. In Iraq, the question is “Can Iraqi Shiites and Sunnis mingle anymore, after all the blood that has been spilled”. If so, can this country be stable enough that we can reduce our troops there? In my opinion, this is really an issue that affects our country directly. “Mingling” seems like kind of a trivial verb, but on the contrary it is everything; it is the basis of all citizen relations in the Middle East. It never occurred to me that some more interaction could mean the end of war.

America's big Drug Deal

I read this editorial that talked about Mexico’s and the United States’ efforts to battle huge amounts of illegal drugs that make it into the hands of American consumers every year. More specifically, the author felt that the Bush administration’s proposed $1.4 billion aid package is not enough to confront the problem. He feels that if Washington was serious about stamping out the northward-flowing cocaine, heroin and other drugs, its campaign must first stop the money and weapons coming from the south. This is what is financing and arming the cartels. Likewise, the author feels that the problem of American’s use of illicit drugs is not taken seriously. Federal financing for drug prevention and treatment programs has been steadily declining since 2005. In my opinion, the narcotics wouldn’t even be getting here if the demand didn’t already exist. The National Drug Intelligence Center estimates that Andean cocaine coming to the United States jumped from 220 tons in 2000 to 380 tons in 2006. I am putting the proposed aid package itself aside for a second, as well as its prospective effectiveness for this problem. In my opinion, it is a big deal that Mexico is coming to the United States for help for the first time. It marks a great transition in the relationship between the two countries and Washington wants to respond to it.

Veterans and their Short End of the Stick

I read this editorial that focused on the life of a veteran. Horribly enough, I had never really thought about this concept very much before. Turns out, not a lot of people do. Especially with the current war in Iraq, it is a terrible time to be a veteran. It is not that there is outright hostility toward returning military personnel today. In fact, both Congress and the White House praised the war as we approached Veteran’s day. However, it is not rare that soldiers who return from Iraq or Afghanistan or those who served in Vietnam or Korea are left to fend for themselves. They do not get much help from the government. Recent surveys shows an astonishing amount of our veterans were homeless at some point during 2006. Not many from Iraq or Afghanistan have turned up homeless so far, but aid groups expect a huge upsurge in coming years. Tens of thousands of reservists and National Guard troops were told that their jobs were protected and returned to be denied prompt re-employment or lost seniority or pay. In my opinion, we have to do all that we can to show these Veterans that they are appreciated. We do not have a mandatory draft in this country. Instead today’s wars have to be fought by a voluntary military. The larger public makes no larger sacrifice so the least we should do is support the troops when they return.

Girls Just Wanna...Vote

It seems that there has never been a time when women voters have had a greater opportunity to affect America’s future. The U.S. is in this war and there is an election coming up and to top it all off, we’ve got Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. She has totally heightened the interest of women voters. That is not to say that Hilary is why women are paying attention to the election. They would have been paying attention to this election anyways because of the war in Iraq, the instability we are facing regarding the economy as well as the changes in the Supreme Court and what that means for abortion and civil liberties. A national poll conducted for the Lifetime television network showed that nearly 40 percent of women feel that voting in the 2008 election will be more important than in previous years. The overwhelming majority of registered women say they plan to vote. Most aren’t committed to a particular candidate. Those potential votes are worth so much at this point. Most of the candidates don’t want to look at issues like pay equity or child care, or in other words anything that might be of particular interest to women. The Lifetime poll was part of the “Every Woman Counts” campaign, which encourages women to vote and speak out on important issues. The poll and an extensive series of interviews indicate that among women, Senator Clinton is not the clear choice just yet. I think it is safe to say that there is a great amount of variance when it comes to women’s opinion regarding Clinton. Some women are in love with her, others can’t stand her. I think this creates an internal conflict for those women who want a woman in the white house, but are not sure that Hilary is the one. Will they seem like they are not supporting their gender if they don’t support Hilary? Bottom line: You Go Girls!!!!!

Obama: Will Use Force if Necessary?

Last Saturday, Senator Obama announced that he would start confronting Hilary Clinton more directly and forcefully than he has in the past. Obama is trying to address the increasing concern among supporters that he lacks assertiveness and that this is the reason he has not been able to dominate Clinton in the presidential race so far. He feels that she has not been candid in describing her views on critical policy issues. Obama’s statement comes two months before the votes are cast for the Democratic nomination and after a long period in which his campaign has had to deny the perception that he does not have the forcefulness necessary for the presidency. In an interview, Mr. Obama said “now is the time” for him to set himself apart from Mrs. Clinton specifically. And its not that Obama wants to get in Hilary’s face, he said he wants to address how she has been obscuring her positions for political gain. Obama has been known to change the speeches written for him if he does not know for sure that he can live up to what he is saying. He feels he is more likely to win back the White House for the Democrats. When asked in the interview if Mrs. Clinton had been fully truthful with voters about what she would do as president, Mr. Obama answered no. He specifically mentioned her position on Social Security, Iraq and Iran.
Obama is very right to pinpoint proving his “forcefulness” as his priority. This will help him draw a distinction between his candidacy and his ideas about change and those of other candidates. In my opinion, he has only started to do that so far. His senior aides say that they have to spend a lot of their time taking calls from concerned supporters regarding Obama not challenging Mrs. Clinton more forcefully. If he doesn’t start to do so, he could lose the position of main opponent of Clinton to John Edwards and with that position gone, people will just stop paying attention to this candidate that has been able to hold on in this race for president. Do we think Obama has got that “big bad wolf” potential in him? Let me know your thoughts…..