Chara G. Garmon
9/24/08
SOC 202
Global Crime
5:27 pm
On Saturday in Islamabad, Pakistan, the American chained Marriot hotel was bombed by Islamic militants. At least 40 people are dead and hundreds are wounded, and most of the hotel was destroyed completely by a fire that lasted for hours. Pakistan has recently adopted new civilian leadership and has continued having a strained relationship with the United States. This attack is aimed directly at the Pakistani leadership with a message of leaving the cutting ties with the U.S. Al Qaida and the Taliban have been targets of the U.S., and Pakistan has jumped on the bandwagon in order to protect its people. Islamic militants used this bombing as a warning to the government to not continue to pursue them. It was believed that the Marriot was an area where Americans or westerners in general and intelligence personnel were plotting against them. Ahmed Mukhtar, Pakistan’s Defense Minister, believes foreigners such as the Uzbek and Chechen members of al Qaida were responsible for the bombing. Pakistan continues to not back down when it comes to terrorists. The Taliban feels threatened and is afraid that Pakistan is more concerned about the interests of the U.S.
When I saw this story, I had to hop on it. The affect that these organizations can have on a government is just horrific. It’s almost as if the organizations run these countries versus the actual government. This particular situation is unfortunate because they’ve basically given the government an ultimatum. If the government does not choose to oblige, then more and more people will die. America is too close to this situation in my opinion; I feel we are causing more harm than good.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26811476
4 comments:
The entire article seemed like a personal opinion rather than the two separate entities that they are supposed to be. I didn't really understand the entire point to the message. At the end, you said you felt like we were overstepping our bounds (paraphrasing), but were we? It just seems to me that the article itself was written without taking into account the factual evidence behind it.
I liked it Chara. Very nice.
John, did you read the article itself? There's a link to it right under the text. My blog was indeed two separate entities as it was supposed to be. With all do respect, you were supposed to comment on the actual issue at hand or move on to the next person's and comment. Not criticize the way in which I completed the assignment.
Yes, we are suppose to be commenting on the article itself and not how a person chooses to write his or her article.
Post a Comment