Will Iraq finally hear an American Farewell?!

“The U.S. military is packing up to leave Iraq in what has been deemed the largest movement of manpower and equipment in modern military history — shipping out more than 1.5 million pieces of equipment from tanks to antennas along with a force the size of a small city.” – The Associated Press

American interference in Iraq’s domestic affairs has been extremely controversial from the start; today the American government remains unsure if the presence of U.S. troops is longer necessary. At first the Bush administration sought to intervene into Iraq’s government in an effort to avoid any more possible terrorist attacks against the USA, after the terrible Sept. 11 episode in 2001. Iraq was invaded after alleged claims that they possessed "large quantities" of weapons of mass destruction posing a future threat to the security of the nation. Subsequently, after mild success, troops remained in Iraq attempting to reform its government and “restore order” until the country was ‘suitable’ to govern itself. Now, thousands of citizens both Americans and Iraqis want the entanglement unraveled and the huge mess cleaned up.

At last has the U.S military planned to leave Iraq?! Why Brig. Gen. Heidi Brown, a deputy commander in charged of supervising the withdrawal, sure thinks so for he has been reported saying “The goal is to withdraw tens of thousands of troops and about 60% of equipment out of Iraq by the end of next March.” At this rapid pace it is obvious that the withdrawal will increase war costs by billions of dollars to move the American force out of Iraq, yet the cost is not definite at this time. For officials have declared that it is yet to be decided how much equipment will be returned back to the United States, donated to the Iraqis, or shipped off to Afghanistan. Nonetheless, the independent Government Accountability Office recently reported to Congress that the withdrawal would be a "massive and expensive effort" defining ‘expensive’ to be an additional $12 to $13 billion a year required two years after U.S. withdrawal, to maintain, repair, and replace the equipment returned from Iraq.

Since President Obama announced the deadline to remove combat troops, everything else has seemed to fall into place. Departures have already been scheduled throughout the course of the year; first out will be an Army combat ‘brigade’ (military unit) of approximately 5,000. Following it will be a ‘brigade’ that would make its exit by the end of the year only if the violence does not escalate. Accordingly, the Marine Corps would then leave, who already have accomplished to get more than half of its troops and equipment out. It has been estimated that by the time the president’s deadline is met, the 300 American bases and outposts that currently remain in Iraq will be reduced to about 50 or less.

However, due to the upcoming national elections of January 16, the military has considered keeping most of his 130,000 combat troops in Iraq. Until two months later after it would they “then rapidly [draw] down troops and equipment in the weeks that follow.” In fact Brown, confirmed their contemplation to delay the withdrawal plans after having said “the phase withdrawal of troops and equipment cold be halted at any time, if, for example, the Iraqi government asks U.S. troops to stay longer due to a resurgence in violence.”

This withdrawal has been planned for several years and yet it still remains a great enigma at times, with more than 1.5 million pieces of equipment that need to be shipped out. With every piece undergoing the: What? When? How? and Where to? process. Already the U.S. has tried to relieve itself from the burden by donating up to $15 million of such items, like desks, televisions, and air conditioners to the Iraqis; equipment “per base closure” considered too costly to be shipped out.

Brown’s final statement was “You don’t know who will win the government and how long it will take to seat the government.” In much simpler words he said a withdrawal is coming soon if not completely- at least partially, for it still remains unclear how long Iraq will take to ‘successfully’ establish a form of government and implement order. I guess after all, the question of when American troops will leave Iraqi soil remains to be determined by the behavior of its people and their so called “pleads” for U.S. help. But will the U.S. have enough money to continue helping Iraq clean up the mess?!

Dick Cheney and his so called "Good Policy"

"Former Vice President Dick Cheney says politics are driving the Justice Department's decision to investigate whether CIA interrogators abused terror suspects detained after the Sept. 11 attacks." - The Associated Press

Terror: a very great fear often utilized to intimidate an individual into "speaking."

At the recent news of CIA abuse accusations released by an internal CIA inspector general's report, President Barack Obama has assured interrogators that unless they did not follow legal guidelines they would not face any charges. Currently investigating the issue is Attorney General, Eric Holder, whom respectably admitted he realized how controversial his decision to initiate his "preliminary review" would be. He furthered declared that it is his sole obligation to review the alleged accusations.

Holder's actions in fact did attract much criticism, predominantly from former Vice President, Dick Cheney. Surprisingly enough Cheney did not only admit he personally was not a fan of Obama and his policies when he was elected and still stands firm to that opinion. But he also claimed that the Obama administration have taken the CIA justice issue into a personal matter of politics whom thought "well, we didn't like those opinions, [so] we're going to investigate those lawyers and perhaps have them disbbared."

Nonetheless, Cheney's accuastions remain mere speculation and opinion unlike the reports that claim that several CIA interrogators "went beyond Bush administration rules" using cruel tactics such as water boarding, "a simulated drowning technique" against detainees. So far it has been reported that at least three 'high level suspects' were subjected to water bordering several times. Another CIA report uncovered other cases were interrogators threatened detainees with a handgun and an electric drill.

Cheney referred this cruel and vicious methods intended to make the suspects 'talk' as a "good policy". Using the same repeated idea of 'the end justifies the mean' by claiming that those techniques were "directly responsible for the fact that for eight years, we had no further mass casualty attacks against the United States."

From this breakthrough news even bigger issues may elevate, think about it, what if detainees were so frighten by interrogators that they admitted to comitting the charges that were held against them even if innocent, only to save their life or that of their family?! So therefore I must applaud Eric Holder, for his efforts towards seeking justice, for those government officials who abused their power must not go unpunished even if it was years ago.

Will Kennedy’s Legacy be "Honored"?!

“When President Obama and Congress return next month to confront tough choices on health reform, will Sen. Edward Kennedy's death be the catalyst for finally achieving what he called the cause of his life, health care for all? It's possible, but we don't know yet exactly how.” –Politics Daily

The recent news of the death of Massachusetts Senator Edward M. Kennedy, whom at the age of 77 lost the battle against brain cancer late Tuesday night, has impacted millions beyond belief. He was the last surviving brother of one of the most dominant families in American politics, a man who will be remembered as one of the most effective lawmakers in history, recognized as “The Lion of the Senate.”

To much dismay his death has left an even bigger concern unresolved, the struggle for a healthcare reform, to which he referred to as “the cause of his life.” Kennedy passed away and will no longer participate alongside the Democratic Party as they enter a new phase to witness the final judgment. Before Kennedy died, the party had a 60-vote majority in the Senate, just enough to stop a ‘filibuster’ from the Republican Party. Now that number is down by one to 59 votes. However, Massachusetts loyal Democrats are attempting to persuade their opposition to grant a request Mr. Kennedy made, in which he urged that Governor Deval Patrick, a Democrat, were allowed to appoint a temporary successor upon his death, to assure the state’s representation in Congress would not be interrupted. The temporary senator would only serve until a special election in January and would not run for permanent seat. Yet not many seem to favor the idea.

But can the Democrats afford to operate with 59 votes as opposed to its original 60?! Not really, 1 sole vote makes a significant difference especially in these cases says Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, when “So many of these votes may come down to one vote." So the big question is should Massachusetts go for five or six months without a senator?! If so, then who would take the blame if Kennedy's health care vision fails by one vote?!

Much more, a ‘multitude’ of people are urging that the reform be passed quickly as a tribute to Kennedy, in respect to his dedication and long fought dream for the healthcare reform. Now this is a crucial time for Obama, he has quite a lot on his plate at the moment, including education, war, both energy and financial reforms, and healthcare. Now on the health reform he will have to step up, take a stronger leadership and decide whether he will only proceed with the support of the Democratic Party or reach some kind of common ground with the Republicans. Will he ‘invoke’ Kennedy’s memory during the discussion of the issue and if so how much?! "Obama is certainly in a position to make that a stronger factor. But you have to be careful how you use that. If it's too blatantly political, you lose people instead of gaining them” said a Democratic strategist.

So finally, I guess my strongest curiosity is: Will Kennedy’s principles and vision of America influence the Healthcare Reform even after death?!

Sonia Sotomayor more than just a Hispanic Political icon, a pragmatic Associated Justice.

“ Justice Sonia Sotomayor is getting into the swing of being a member of the Supreme Court.” –The Associated Press

Back in November of 2008 when Barack Obama was declared the first African American president of the United States, his victory denoted a historic landmark for all African Americans in the country, filling them with intense joy and pride. Months later when he took presidency, on May 2009, President Barack Obama announced his nomination of Sonia Sotomayor for Supreme Court Justice, delivering great optimism to the Hispanic community. Shortly after the nomination was approved Sotomayor, of 55 years old, was sworn into office in August of 2009 and become the first Latina Supreme Court Justice, a momentous account that would mark American history for many years to come. To antagonists she seemed to embody “judicial activism” while to supporters like myself find her to epitomize the American Dream, a dream we all nourish our hopes and goals with.

Now just recently it seems Sotomayor made her very first public decision as an associated justice, voting unsuccessfully alongside the “court’s liberal bloc” Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, and Stephen Breyer to delay the execution of an Ohio death row inmate. Now I am not so familiar with the court case, but it was said that Jason Getsy, the inmate of 33 years old, was sentenced to death after shooting Ann Serafino of 66 years old back in 1995 in Hubbard, Ohio. Jason Getsy wanted to stop his execution that was programmed for Tuesday, August 18. Getsy had asked the Supreme Court on Monday to allow him to challenge Ohio’s current lethal injection system to be as a “cruel and unusual” punishment in an attempt o spare his life. However the court’s other remaining judges voted to deny the inmates claim.

Later that day, after loosing the death appeal case, it was reported by the Supreme Court that Sotomayor did not participate in the preceding ‘evidentiary hearing’ of the day. The hearing for death row inmate Troy Davis, whom was condemned for allegedly killing an off-duty police officer. Again, not much details of this case were provided yet it was said by his lawyers that they held evidence that proved their client, Troy Davis, did not commit the murdered he is being charged with.

Sotomayor will sit on her first Supreme Court hearing on a “key campaign finance” case this upcoming September 9 because apparently the new term doesn’t officially start until October 5 (Associated Press).

In the court’s 220 year history Sonia Sotomayor has become the first Hispanic and third female justice. For this admiring accomplishment she achieved no matter the multitude of obstacles she faced, as a woman, as a Latina, as a citizen, and as human being I believe Sotomayor should not be looked upon as “judicial activist” solely for Hispanics, but as a defender of justice and equality for all Americans. Don’t you?! So now I suggest we look into Sotomayor's victories and recognize her accomplishments, not count her failures.

Will Congress “Bolster” School Nutrition in an Effort to Fight Child Obesity?!

“President Obama has proposed a $1-billion increase for the Child Nutrition Act, which lawmakers will consider for renewal this fall. Decades-old nutritional standards may be updated.” -The LA Times

Since World War II America has been renowned to be one of the most wealthiest, technological, and progressive countries in the world. So considering that, shouldn't it also be one of the healthiest too?! It could be, but the unfortunate truth is that America has become home to the most obese people in the world. We live in a nation plagued with obesity produced by the poor choice of diet and lifestyle of society. Americans, especially children and young adolescents, have now become some of the unhealthiest individuals currently living. Yet there is no mystery behind this epidemic according to our First Lady, Michelle Obama, who says the children in the country are "not eating right and not moving their bodies at all" citing school nutrition as part of the problem. In fact, “a fifth of U.S. children are either overweight or obese” states the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a statistic that is apparent in just about every schoolyard around the country.

Now, to many nutrition advocates our affable Michelle Obama’s comments ignite mere optimism, whom hope Congress will “bolster” the school lunch program, considering the facts and evidence when renewing the Child Nutrition Act, which will soon expire on September 30.

President Obama’s recent $1-billion increase proposal for Children Nutrition Act programs will improve the coverage on the government’s reimbursements to school districts for daily school year meals; summer and after school programs; food served at many day-care facilities for children and adults; and the Special Supplemental Nutrition program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC). For solely in 2007 it was reported that the act provided food to more than 8 million people, an act that currently costs about $15 billion a year.

A portion of the proposed bill would allow the Department of Agriculture to update the “decades old-standards” foods that contain high amounts of fat and sugar that students buy at stores, vending machines, and ‘la ca rte’ cafeteria carts within school grounds. Because about “two thirds of states have either ‘weak or no policies’ regarding junk food” points out Margo Wootan, nutrition policy director at the Center of Science in the Public Interest. With the exception of California or more precisely Los Angeles, when in 2002 The Los Angeles Unified School District banned soda (but not sport drinks) and cut most sale of junk food, putting limits on the fat and sugar food sold on school campuses could contain.

Several other proposals have been unraveled from the discussion of the Children Nutrition Act, one asks to “streamline” the qualification requirements to increase the number of students who receive free meals. Another suggests a $1 per child per day raise in the reimbursement districts receive for each free lunch they serve in order to stimulate schools to serve more fresh produce and whole grains.

I personally must say that as a student I do not find the current school lunch very appetizing whatsoever (with the exception of the fruit), I’d rather withstand my stomach grumbling, pleading for food, during class and wait until 3:30 pm to access a fast and cheap source of food, the very famous Flaming Hot Cheetos and my refreshing soda alongside. Now I am very aware of how damaging it is to my health, but I also don't believe that a school lunch with high amounts of artificial ingredients and hormones that has been stored for days and later microwaved is any much healthier. School lunch is a an excellent place to begin combatting the obesity problem maybe by improving school lunch, it could appeal to many others like myself and drive us away from the unhealthy snacking on junk food we all know and love. So I must say this new proposal sounds like a great start, however, my biggest concern is: Can America afford to be healthy now, in the middle of an economic crisis?!