Difference between revisions of "John Walsh Thesis Revision"
(→Page 9) |
(→Page 10) |
||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
= Page 10 = | = Page 10 = | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
= Page 11 = | = Page 11 = | ||
Revision as of 07:52, 10 April 2019
This page is an exercise in revising a massively plagiarized master's thesis by paraphrasing portions of the text that were either quoted without attribution (no citation) or quoted inappropriately (no quotation marks). In both cases we will re-write individual paragraphs and deposit the results here, by page number.
Here is a link to the New York Times article.
Instructions:
- Type on your personal notebook a piece of text (paragraph) from the page represented in the New York Times article of July 23, 2014.
- Edit to rephrase in your own words, avoiding close paraphrasing as much as possible.
- Cut and past results into this document on the proper page in the proper order, if possible.
- Do minor formatting or editing as needed.
- BONUS. If you are editing a passage without attribution, insert the reference.
Contents
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Although the Bush administration is not necessarily ready to commit to the costly and drawn-out process of rebuilding the nations, these countries in the middle east can still become democratic states. The idea that transforming these countries into democracies is a swift and easy process is simply false.[1]
A major problem that arises in attempting to transform Iraq into a proper democracy, is the amount of effort that would be required by the United States to employ nation building in the Middle East would be substantially larger than efforts since the United States employed their help after World War II specifically in reconstructing Japan and Germany[2].
Page 12
In order to establish and facilitate democracy, the international community must work side-by-side with leaders and citizens in the Middle East. The leaders and citizens of the Middle East must do most of the heavy lifting when it comes to working on the transition period.
Page 13
Being able to understand the weakness of past efforts with the Middle East is significant. American money is being spent on democracy programs in the Middle East with little positive impact, economic assistance has been given to Arab countries, but there are small odds that it will ever transpire into the administration that Bush had hoped for. The United States needs to be more clear in their goals and not support unresponsive reform programs. Intro: It is imperative for the United States (U.S.) to collaborate with other countries towards democracy in the Middle East region. The U.S. should work on their achievable diplomatic objectives over the next several decades. These goals would benefit others if they convince Arab states to take citizen rights into consideration, foster discussion for political changes, increase monetary support for emerging democratic leaders, develop a fair judicial system, and allow other political parties to grow. [3]
3. Influencing persons of all background about the promotion of democracy is crucial for westernization. Dialogue between these parties instead of solely between activists and pro-western governmental bodies is paramount.
4. The US should side not with those who perpetuate stagnation. Rather, groups that push the envelope in hopes of real reform. Pressuring Middle Eastern countries like Kuwait and Jordan to enact political restructuring is necessary to in steps toward eliminating superficial political contestation.
5. Each country on the path to democratization has its own issues and therefore must have a succinct, independent path from others. Smaller grassroots movements are good options for countries that would likely react negatively to drastic change in a small amount of time.
Page 14
To sum up, the issue lies in the fact that the US government is still learning about its actions in Iraq— while this is happening, Iraqi people are contending with the losses that war brought upon its country, all while taking directives from an imperialist American government forcing reconstruction by imposing democracy and American ideals. In the context of the US’s failures during the war and their inability to reconstruct Iraq afterwards, it is doubtful but possible that the Middle East could become friendlier to the idea of democracy. [4]
While the Bush administration wishes to see Iraq as a mature democracy, they acknowledge the low odds of this happening and the difficulty arising by getting involved in the Middle East. He has affirmed on numerous occasions that "The democratic progress we've seen in the Middle East was not imposed from abroad, neither will the greater progress we've seen in the Middle East was not imposed from abroad, and neither will the greater progress we hope to see. He has also warned that democratic development will not come swiftly, or smoothly, to the Middle East, any more than it did to America and Europe.
References
- ↑ Ottaway, Marina et al. http://carnegieendowment.org/files/Policybrief20.pdf "Democratic Mirage in the Middle East." Carnegie Endowment, Oct. 2002.
- ↑ Ottaway, Marina, et al. “Democratic Mirage in the Middle East.” Carnegie Endowment, Oct. 2002.
- ↑ Ottaway, Marina et al. http://carnegieendowment.org/files/Policybrief20.pdf "Democratic Mirage in the Middle East." Carnegie Endowment, Oct. 2002.
- ↑ Diamond, L. (2005). Lessons from Iraq. Journal Of Democracy, 16(1), 9-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jod.2005.0004
