Paper Rough Intro

**Red Team** · 30 Nov 11,, 22:08

Hey guys this is my rough introduction to my paper on the War on Terror, specifically on the success of the allied mission against terrorists worldwide. I'd appreciate any critical feedback. It is tailored to MLA format so there will be a few weird formalities in it. Enjoy!

Rough Intro:

The first decade of the Twenty-First Century introduced many shifts of power and political changes. With the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States quickly took on the role of the lone superpower; a nation both praised for its economic and societal prosperity and feared for its military might. As the nineteen-nineties drew to a close, debates on whether to utilize this newfound position solely for national defense or for role of international peacekeeping continued. These debates came to an abrupt end when on 11 September 2001, multiple terrorist attacks shook the nation, claiming hundreds of innocent lives. Acting as a contemporary Pearl Harbor, the US again found itself at war with a formidable foe: one that was and still is bent on the destruction of Western society and values. As it had before, the US was quick to respond, awakening its dominant military might into this new conflict, the aptly named "War on Terror." This war was to be fought not only in Afghanistan and eventually Iraq, but expanded to military actions all over the world, ranging from Africa to areas in Southeast Asia. As expected, the initial actions in the major theatres of war in Afghanistan and Iraq resulted in decisive and impressively executed military victories worthy of strategic praise. But as overconfident politicians reveled in the joy of victory, Al Qaeda and its allies regrouped, and began to project their still very profound influence and power. The US and its NATO partners, under attack from this revitalized enemy, began to take losses as Al Qaeda's and their allies' tenacity and strategic adaptivity kept up the fight, continuing for years onward. Today, we can see the effects of two major wars: a substantial rise in the national debt, a great loss of life, and the decline of diplomatic relations in the Middle East are but a few consequences of this decade long conflict. But yet, past the financial costs and personal tragedies of war, victory can still be found. A victory that must be maintained through controlled aggression, international cooperation and popular support.

**USSWisconsin** · 01 Dec 11,, 01:37

The first sentence mentions the 21st century, the second sentence refers to the 1990's. I think it would be better if you could fix that discontinutiy and make it lead in with a chronological statement. Perhaps another sentence could bridge the first two more smoothly. The first sentances are important impression makers, and this seemed a little discontiguous. I think that "decisive and impressively executed military victories worthy of strategic praise" may overstate the case, as the opposition was feeble and disorgainised - and the US forces were overwelming (it was quite one sided and a battlefield victory was very predicatable). The loss of life was certainly terrible, but relatively moderate compared to previous wars, perhaps another adjective (besides "great") would better describe it (all loss of life is tragic, but "great" loss of life is relative). And the battlefield victory was not universally popular, even in the US, particularly in the Iraq war where allegations of fraud over the alleged Iraqi WMD's were widespread.

These are intended to be constructive and helpful, and not to be insulting or derogatry, it is an ambitious topic, and you have a lot in that paragraph.

**Red Team** · 01 Dec 11,, 02:19

Actually I was having a mental block towards adjectives in some of the quotes you've mentioned. Also I can see how the first sentences may seem a bit awkwardly organized chronologically speaking...maybe inverting positions starting with the Cold War moving into the 1990s then so on could work better. That was pretty helpful advice, I'll see about making some necessary adjustments. Thanks.

**Doktor** · 01 Dec 11,, 14:05

You could have started with WWI

Are the cold war and 90's relevant to what you gonna write afterwards?

If you want to show some chronology of events you can do it with some info box or infograph (assuming you have the data to organize it)

**Red Team** · 01 Dec 11,, 14:38

Doktor, Cold War and 90s were meant as background, the parameters I was given for the intro was to be pretty general, set the backdrop for the next 10-12 pages of this nightmare ie. how the US was shortly before 9/11. So no info boxes or timelines till the body of the paper unfortunately.

I get to show the rough draft of what I have so far to my professor today > <