Movie Project (about Hang Over 3 movie) Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Movie Project (about Hang Over 3 movie) - Essay Example However the Wolfpack team is abducted by a drug lord who later holds Doug as a security for the other friends to search for Chow who had disappeared with Marshall’s gold (IMDb np). The interpersonal concepts of communication revealed throughout the film are: failure and mending of relationships; tension relief mechanisms through humor. Also the theory of communication privacy management is used to explain the concept of interpersonal communication (Berger 415-447). This will be the pivotal concepts that this paper will focus on and analyze; then a description of their application in the film will be done and evaluation of their effectiveness or ineffectiveness in the plot of the movie; and analysis of the immediate and future application of these concepts in relationships. Relationship deterioration is the mainly apparent seen concept in the movie Hangover 3. According to Joseph DeVito (2008) his explanation of deterioration is â€Å"the stage (in a relationship) that sees the weakening of bonds between the parties and that represents the downside of the relationship progression,† (DeVito 212). This is clearly revealed in the introduction scenes of the movie. Alan purchases a giraffe and later inadvertently kills it in a bridge, which causes a vehicle jam. This news doesn’t concur well with his father who has always termed him as an irresponsible person. It may be seen that these two have not been having good relations from the past as his father reacts furiously. This scene simply shows us there is a breakdown of communication or simply relationship deterioration. This concept of deterioration of relationships is perfectly incorporated in the movie. As seen from the above scene its applicability is good and it follows the same trend in the rest of the movie. We not only see the bad relationship between Alan and his father, but also its severe consequences. The

Analysis Of A Prayer For Owen Meany English Literature Essay

Analysis Of A Prayer For Owen Meany English Literature Essay The economical/political social background of the story A Prayer for Owen Meany by John Irving had a huge impact on the characters and the plot of the story. John Irving  chose to write about Americas political state throughout the story to connect it to past tragic events which have occurred in the main characters life. His writing style makes us aware of his view on Americas society and he too, like the main character in this book moved from America to Canada. Owen Meany claimed himself to be the instrument of God. His parents told him he was a virgin death; could he be the baby Christ? John Irving presented Owen with characteristics which made him seem like he is not part of this world. Owen could have been a tragic hero.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Many unpleasant events occurred throughout Owens life even though he was a virtuous person. He died by saving the life of Vietnamese kids. This connects to Romeo and Juliet, because when they died, their death made the Capulets and Montagues stop the feud and it made them notice how it was stupid of them to keep the two apart and they started to settle their differences. Before Owen died, his family would hate the Catholics for an event which occurred in their families past history. However, Owen died helping a nun take children to the washroom and so everyone realized their hate for each other was nonsensical. The major knew Owen had been a hero (616). A tragic hero always has a huge impact on the characters and readers, and Owen changed everyones opinion about who he truly was. I guess we were wrong about your little friend (556). Owen motivated the rev to find his lost faith and now he spoke with belief and confidence at the funeral. Ow en was not just a hero to the United States Army- he was our hero (556). There was something about him that attracted everyone. Even Johns mother loved Owen just like her own son. Owen would never complain about others and he would just stay there and take in the pain which symbolized him as a martyr. When he saw a man on the streets, he would want to help him right away. WE SHOULD STOP AND HELP THAT MAN (25). He had qualities which most of us humans dont possess no matter how noble and devoted we are. He even played the baby Christ in a play and that compared him to one of Gods messengers. He would follow the holy book and always asked: Does it say so in the bible? (170). Owens strange small size and very high voice was a symbol as well. This demonstrated to us how he was not a normal human but something different. Owen never tried to change his voice, because he knew it was for a purpose and it came from God. He was represented as a leader. He also  controlled people older than him and he even demanded the Catholics  to sign petitions against themselves. He was not intimidated by the bigger boys because he had been smaller (228). Everyone would listen to him such as the priests and he corrected them about their philosophy. Owen played the Lord Jesus in another play which showed his connection to God.   Owen was even known as the voice, because he represented everyones opinions and beliefs in the high school. Owen was exceptional, and all his differences portrayed him as Gods instrument. He didnt die unexpectedly without ever knowing. But since the day he was born, he knew his whole life ahead of him and he knew that  everything which happened to him was planned to happen, even his death. Therefore, he is related to a tragic hero because it was written in his destiny from the start. One important message the author tried to convey throughout the book was how strong the friendship between Owen and John was. Owen was the reason John got far in life and the author used many symbols and motifs to express it. After Johns mother died, Owen took her dressmakers dummy from John. DONT STARE AT THE DUMMY. ITS NOT GOOD FOR YOU (183). Owen knew the dummy would remind him of Tabitha. Not just did Owen take the dummy, but he took the baseball. The baseball symbolized the instrument of his mothers death. He also took Johns Armadillo which Dan had given to him, but he returned it after removing the claws. Without the claws, the armadillo could not be stable. All these items he took away from Owen were a motif throughout the book which represented how they both had lost something important, which they loved. In the beginning of the book, they mention Watahantowet who was an armless Indian Sagamore who owned land but lost it. This was also a reoccurring motif in the novel represe nting how they had less power and they were helpless. It even showed the pain caused by events which occurred in their life. At the end, Owen cut off Johns index finger to help John avoid joining the Vietnamese war. This shows us how John trusted Owen and placed confidence in him by knowing he had done the right thing. It seems as if Owen took a lot from John through his life. But, these examples showed us how he helped him and gave him more then what he took away. When Owen took the dressmakers dummy, John took Owens baseball cards which he loved. This conveyed how Owen wanted to communicate the feeling of loosing something important. Even at the end of the story, Owen died with his arm being blasted off. Once again, another motif of amputation of body parts represented pain and loss due to tragic incidents which occurred. When Tabitha passed away, to John and Owen, it was just like them losing an arm or breaking a leg. But to Owen, it also symbolized how he was gods instrument and his hands were being controlled by him. Owen tried to guide John. He repeated ninth grade for him and went to the same university as John and refused the offer to Harvard. John would always say: I learned it from you (502). This also creates a balance act, because on one side would be Johns most prized possessions and his only memory of his mother taken away from him. But on the other side would be the loss Owen went through for John such as living away from his parents and the meaning behind everything he took from John. Owen was a loyal and brave hero to John. He helped alleviate the losses in Johns life. In the story A Prayer for Owen Meany, the author John Irving conveys different messages. Many of the themes are connected to spirituality and portray life lessons you should follow. One important theme is based on fate, which is the belief  of the idea that your destiny is controlled by a certain force or power.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   One of the messages communicated is how everything happens for a reason, and the author shows us how strong the power of  fate is. In the novel, everything which occurred in Owens life was no coincidence. Owen believed that coincidence was a stupid, shallow refuge sought by stupid shallow people who were unable to accept the fact that their lives were shaped by a terrifying and awesome design (186). Within the previous quote, there is a metaphor which gives you an idea about how coincidences throughout your life arent arbitrary, but everything is written in your destiny and its as if your life is planned out. One example which supports that metaphor is the time during Johns mothers wedding. There was a huge storm and the author used pathetic fallacy to connect it to a horrible incident which was about to occur. It was very windy and  rainy; and Johns mother was hit by a hailstone on her head. This was a sign foreshadowing another upcom ing incident which would occur with her. When Owen was in bed feeling sick, he was walking to Tabithas room for comfort and it seemed as if he saw an angel. SOMEONE STRANGE IS IN HER ROOM. COME SEE! I THINK ITS AN ANGEL (79). This linked to another future event. It foreshadowed how Tabitha was going to die soon, because an angel of death represents taking away the soul. During Owens baseball games, he was never allowed to play. But once his coach let him get on the field, however he could never swing a pitch. As he was about to hit the ball, Johns mother was walking by. Ironically, Owen swung the bat with a good deal of force that the ball hit his mother and killed her. Owen believed that he saw the angel of death the night before, and stopped it from accomplishing its task for God. Since it was time for his mother to die, he had to finish  the task. Another tragic event which occurred in Owens life was the day he was playing football with John. He kicked the ball very far and the ir neighbours dog, Sagamore, ran after it. As Sagamore ran, he ran into a diaper truck and sadly died. The significance of this event  was a message from God demonstrating to Owen how he is the instrument of God, and he is controlled by Him. He is now given the power from God, and it motivates him in the future. Once, Owen was asked to play the ghost of the future in the play A Christmas Carol. No one knew why he was given that role and it only had a few lines which Owen disliked. But, as he was reading a name on a grave during his performance, he saw his own name and a date. IT WAS MY REAL NAME. IT SAID THE WHOLE THING. (254). The name revealed to him that he was going to be the ghost of the future and it gave away when his death would occur. Later, Owen had a dream. It was not just a nightmare, but it symbolized how God wanted him to accomplish an important task before he died. God  gave him instructions to his next task. I TRUST THAT GOD WILL HELP ME BECAUSE WHAT IM SUPPOSED TO DO LOOKS VERY HARD (400). The reason Owen was given that specific role to play was another way God wanted to show him how his death should occur. Throughout the novel, Johns mother would never tell him who his real father was. He never knew, until Owen died. Owen revealed to John who his real father was, in his afterlife. This shows us the reason why his mother never told him, because there was another way God wanted him to discover the truth. The way Owen was born had a special purpose to it too. His parents said that he was a virgin birth and therefore they disgraced Catholics.  As a result,  that created a feud. No one knew why he was born that way. Nevertheless, he was born unique and he served a purpose in life by helping so many people. Owen believed that there was a purpose to everything that happened-that god meant for the story of his life to have some meaning to it and god picked Owen(540). One motif in the book was Owen and John practising their basket-ball shot ov er and over again. They would try to break their record of scoring in 2 seconds. Later, they used this skill in an important part of the novel.   When the grenade was thrown at John, he caught it the same way Owen and him practised and they passed it to each other to stop it from exploding. Therefore, many disasters and tragic events occur in our lives and sometimes we dont deserve it. However, not only till the end do you receive the desired results you wanted from your hard work in life. Our life is like a pattern and we cannot control some circumstances,  however there is a reason for why they occur. The author had a way of communicating ideas which kept the book realistic but interesting. John Irving used various types of literary elements to convey his thoughts. The form he wrote in created a mood and tone which connected you to his characters. Owen had dreams which revealed his future tasks God wanted him to accomplish. He then went through many struggles to complete them for God. His dreams related to different stories of messengers of God written in holy books. One example is Abraham, and how he was told to sacrifice his son in his dream. This is related to Owens connection to God and how Owen isnt just a normal human. Another example in the book was how Owen had to cut off Johns index finger. This revealed how he gave the sacrifice by risking a chance of hurting his friend for God. Owen was also born a virgin birth and that is why he wasnt close with his parents due to the fact they told him this news when he was 10! But, he was born highly intelligent and even his physical looks were unique. Jesus was also born the same way with special abilities. This showed us an example of how the author brought in different ideas and fit them into the book to relate the characters to important figures and he used many allusions. Th e author also used many symbols, such as the armadillo, baseball and red dress which created examples of motifs throughout the book, which I have mentioned in the previous journals. John Irving wrote the story effectively and this caused the readers to become attached to the character of Owen Meany. The setting of the story which was during the early 1950s effects decisions the characters made. Johns mother decided to get a television when Owen was fifteen and this created an excitement. The television taught them more about the society rather than what they had seen. At that time, Christianity was also very important in the culture. However, as years went by, more immigrants started to settle in and the result was the loss of Americas identity. That is why this book is based around the theme of religion and many religious ceremonies occurred. Everyone believed in miracles and their life was dependent on faith. The author added a believable effect to the story by giving the characte rs realistic traits. Even though Owen Meany was Gods instrument and could be compared to a deferential and intelligent angel, he changed a lot. As he grew older, the people he grew up with changed him and he did start to smoke like most teenagers. As John and Owen matured, their feelings for Hester developed strongly. The thoughts through their minds would be of what males experience of the general public today. Owen was not completely pure, but he was a character which most of us would try to be like and he if we too did know him, he would have influenced us greatly. The author did not write chronologically, but put different pieces together of Johns life which revealed to us secrets throughout the end of the book. There was a thorough plot development in the book but sometimes the author dragged it on and you would want him to get to the point. It was a well written novel with many different morals and themes the author tried to get across: Religion, Friendship, Family, War, Faith and Death.

The Tlingit and Grizzly Bear House-Partition Screen :: Essays Papers

The Tlingit and Grizzly Bear House-Partition Screen The region of the northwest coast was blessed with an abundance of natural recourses for human existence and made it possible for the area to thrive. As a result of this unusual abundance, the area could sustain large populations and a complex social order for many Indian groups. Because of the level of sustainability, the cultures had more time for artistic and intellectual activities and endeavors and over time, art became very important and vital to the complex social structures of the groups of the northwest coast. One such group, the Tlingit, used art to create and portray its rights, privileges, and talents inherited to them and became symbols of tribal importance. As they lived in extended family tribal canoe houses, they used art to decorate and empower their tribe in their social structures and often commissioned elaborate artwork in order to create jealousy within the groups. Because the Tlingit culture believed that they were all descendants of animals, the subject matter of most Tlingit art is a highly stylized representation of their ancestor animal. Though religious belief was integrated into Tlingit artwork, it remained an iconographic representation of a tribe’s lineage serving many roles such as power and protection. The Grizzly bear house partition screen is one such example of important, symbolic Tlingit art. The partition screens were used both symbolically as well as served as a dividing screen for the chief separating his living quarters from the rest of his tribal house. This example is made in an unusually grand scale of 15 x 8 feet and is carved in bold low relief from cedar and was later painted. It artistically and symbolically represents Chief Shakes extended family’s origin, the grizzly bear, with smaller heads of the bear making up other parts of its body such as the eyes, ears, chest, as well as many other sections of the piece. The smaller heads create a highly symmetrical design within the piece as well as further symbolize the important image of the bear. Carved out of the reproductive area of the bear is the doorway for the chief, additionally creating an important symbolic representation of their chief being birthed from the grizzly bear every time he enters and lea ves his sacred quarters. This work exhibits mostly all the characteristics cited by Stockstad as it provided background information into understanding the Tlingit culture and their beliefs.

Anderson Leadership Management Contribution to Success or Failure

Analyze the leadership and management at Arthur Andersen and evaluate its contribution to the company’s success and failure. Leadership has been defined as the individual traits, behavior, interaction patterns, role relationships, follower perceptions, the influence over the followers, task goals and organizational culture (Yuki, 1989). Through the years, the firm Arthur Anderson has gone through many leaders and their style and leadership and behavior has affected the firm in certain ways.From the beginning when the leadership role was in the hands of Arthur Anderson, he placed very strong emphasis on ethics and demanded honest accounting from all his employees despite the conflict of interest amongst some of his clients. His pacesetting leadership style requires all new partners and employees to undergo a series of mandatory trainings annually to ensure that all of them were able to remain focused on the company’s philosophy and values.Pacesetting leadership style dem ands the followers to do as the leader says and such a leadership style produces positive results only if the team is already motivated and skilled. Which in this case, Arthur Anderson has it covered. However, when used extensively, it could overwhelm and stifle the team’s innovation which was what we observed of the firm when analysts view the training process as â€Å"making of androids†. The stifling of innovation may not be such a huge issue at this point as creativity and innovation was not what Arthur Anderson was looking for in his team but instead, structure and following the books.Furthermore, while leading the team, he had a directive leadership behavior which refers to assigning team members specific tasks, clarifying expectations on their work and setting rules and regulations to be followed etc. This behavior pattern has been known to initiate structure which is the goal of Arthur Anderson which explains the success of his leadership during his time. When Arthur Anderson passed on, Leonard Spacek took over the rein of leadership and made use of the authoritative leadership style by coming up with a new logo that he thinks â€Å"epitomized the common vision† that he has or the firm. This style of leadership is effective when the team needs a new vision as circumstances have changed which was true as the firm now has to readjust themselves to the leadership of Spacek instead of Anderson. Such style of leadership inspires entrepreneurial spirit and vibrant enthusiasm for firm which proves success. As the years went by, the leaders that followed up had their priorities wrong and lost focus of what was built throughout the years. The rules and standards set were gradually removed from the system.Eg: the mandatory 2 year audit practice was removed. Such leaders will model the wrong behaviors and will inevitably spread themselves too thin and organizations are at the greatest risk when leaders lose their focus and led to the failure of Anderson. Leaders who are self-serving will also cause the downfall of a firm as it would cause the team to have no confidence in him. For example, Kapnick was reportedly said to have wanted to head both departments by himself and it could have been one of the reasons why the other partners lost trust in him causing him to resign.

Hope: Inferiority Complex and Separate Ingredients Essay

I’ve always found that misconceptions can affect attitude. Sometimes we get too wrapped up in life’s details. The separate ingredients of culture and lifestyle captivate us so throughly that we lose our perspective on life itself. We scurry like mice through a hedge maze–the real beauty of life lies just beyond the bushes, and what is that beauty? Simplicity is what it is. As T. Allen Culpepper, the author of The Myth of Inferiority explains in his article, hope quickly grows dim when the obstecales of life throw their knock-out punches ( Culpepper, 300) Simplicity is the secret key that unlocks the shackles of confusion, and inferiority. and Confusion and inferiority is what we visualize so much of life to be? In some cases, and without hope, life nearly becomes as difficult as a Chinese fire drill. People need a new outlook; the outlook of faith, simple childlike faith. We need to hold onto hope. We should not allow low performance standards sloppy work, plagiarism, misseddeadlines, chronic absence, and other academic sins because so many people claimto have hard lives (Culpepper. pg. 300). Hope grows dim very fast when the strange twists of life throw their knock-out punches. After being badly beaten by pain or grief or loss, who cares about hope anyway? Who is excited about beginning again? The answer is almost nobody. Like a boxer who has taken eleven rounds of pummeling that last fall. to the canvas feels good. It feels good enough to keep a dizzy man down. Fighting four more rounds loses its luster, but why does he want so badly to get up? The answer is he still hopes to win. As Culpepper states, to lower our standards is to accept the false assumption that students at community colleges are inferior (Culpepper pg. 301). We are too easily buffaloed by our emotions. We immediately give in to the whims of our feelings therfore we can quickly lose our sense of worth. Millions of people like to be frightened by horror movies or scary tales. They relish reading anything with the element of suspense. Fictional suspense can be entertaining and healthy. However, we must not listen to the fictional fears our emotions so often create for us. We have to keep a real strongold in this life.

Private Schools Capital Campaigns

Private Schools Capital Campaigns Many schools want to keep their tuitions as low as possible to attract the most diverse student and parent body possible, so raising their tuition costs is not always an option.  Private schools do not cover all of their operating expenses from tuition payments; in fact, at many schools, tuition payments alone only cover about 60-80% of operating expenses, and therefore schools must also use  fundraising efforts  to cover their daily expenses. But what about special needs? Schools also need to raise money for future expenses, and to increase their endowments. Private schools typically have an Annual Fund, which is a set amount of money that the school raises each year to cover the costs of educating their students that are not met by tuition and fees. But what happens when theres an extenuating need for renovation of facilities or purchase of expensive equipment? Those needs are typically met by what is called a Capital Campaign, a fundraising effort designed to cover the massive expense of renovating their current buildings, constructing new buildings, greatly enhancing financial aid budgets and adding to their endowments. But what makes a Capital Campaign successful? Lets look at what one school did to lead one of the most successful Capital Campaigns in private schools. The Westminster Schools’ Capital Campaign The Westminster Schools, a co-ed Christian school in Atlanta, Georgia, for students in pre-first through twelfth grade, led one of the most successful private school capital campaigns in recent years. Westminster is one of only a few private schools that have managed to raise over $100 million as part of a capital campaign; the school has the largest endowment of any non-boarding school in the nation. Westminster Schools enrolls over 1,800 students on its 180-acre campus. About 26% of the students represent people of color, and 15% of students receive need-based financial aid. The school was founded in 1951 as a reorganization of the North Avenue Presbyterian School, a girls’ school. In 1953, the Washington Seminary, a girls’ school founded in 1878 that was the alma mater of Gone with the Wind author Margaret Mitchell, also merged with Westminster. Westminster Schools has long been a pioneer in Southeastern private schools, as it hosted a pilot program for advanced s tudies that eventually became Advanced Placement or AP coursework offered by the College Board, and it was also one of the first schools in the South to integrate in the 1960s. According to its press release, Westminster Schools launched a capital campaign in October of 2006 and completed it in January of 2011, having raised $101.4 million in the midst of a recession. The â€Å"Teaching for Tomorrow† campaign was an effort to secure the best teachers for the school in the years to come. More than 8,300 donors contributed to the capital campaign, among them current and past parents, alumni/ae, grandparents, friends, and local and national foundations. The President of the school, Bill Clarkson, credited the school’s focus on teaching with its success in raising funds. He believed that the campaign’s emphasis on excellence in teaching enabled the campaign to raise funds, even in difficult economic times. According to an article in the Atlanta Business Chronicle, $31.6 million from the Westminster Schools capital campaign will be dedicated to faculty hiring, $21.1 million to constructing a new junior high building, $8 million to continuing the school’s commitment to diversity, $2.3 million to promote global awareness, $10 million for community service programs, $18.8 million to foster annual giving, and $9.3 million in unrestricted endowment funding. The school’s current strategic plan calls for an increased focus on globalization, including teaching its students to thrive in an interconnected world; on technology, including teaching its students to understand how to deal with the increasing complexity of technology; and on educational research and conducting studies to determine whether teachers are using the most effective methods of instruction and whether the school’s current methods of assessment are truly helping students learn. As the school passes its 60th anniversary, the success of its capital campaign is helping it achieve its strategic goals. Article edited by  Stacy Jagodowski  -  stacyjago

Send this Essays

Send this Essays Send this Essay Send this Essay As we mark the four-year anniversary of the American-led invasion of Iraq, we must consider all the evidence before us and come to an educated conclusion as to the best course of action for America to pursue.   I believe strongly that America must withdraw from Iraq.   This paper will outline the many factors that I believe lead to this conclusion.It is not overly pessimistic to focus on the reasons for going to war with Iraq, because understand the beginning of a story can better illuminate its most ideal conclusion.   The actual reason for invading Iraq, however, is something that historians will attempt to articulate for decades to come.   Different people have very different perceptions of why we invaded Iraq, but all of the reasons start at a common point: 9/11.We know, as a matter of widely-accepted fact, that Saddam Hussein and his government played absolutely no role in the 9/11 attacks.   We know this.   We also know, however, that if it w ere not for 9/11, we would not have invaded Iraq.   How do we account for this discrepancy? There was no causality; Iraq did not cause 9/11.   There was, however, some sort of correlation, which held that Iraq had something, something to do with the terrorist threat as it was manifested by al-Qaeda on 9/11.The Bush Administration attempted to illustrate this alleged correlation by saying that Saddam Hussein was a terrorist.   Since the people who attacked us were also terrorists, they were somehow related.   In terms of evidence that Saddam Hussein had been involved in specific acts of terrorism against the United States, however, there simply was none.There was also the fact that Saddam Hussein was a secular dictator who had spent most of his career torturing and killing religious radicals and Islamist terrorists of the sort that attacked America on 9/11.   America and Saddam Hussein had a common enemy in radical Islamists.   That is why America supported Saddam Hussein for many years.In addition, it was alleged that Saddam had stockpiled vast quantities of chemical and biological weapons (WMD) since 1998, when United Nations weapons inspectors had left Iraq.   Again, however, there was no hard evidence of these assertions, only rumors and an understandable lack of trust in Saddam Hussein’s word.The case for war held that after 9/11, we must overthrow Saddam Hussein before he gives his WMD to terrorists.   The flaw with this case was that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11, there was no evidence of his cooperating with Islamist terrorists targeting America, and there was no evidence that he had WMD.So, in terms of the threat that Iraq posed to the United States, the only case that existed rested on huge leaps of faith and logic.   The second component to the case for war was that Saddam must be overthrown due to his brutality to the Iraqi people and due to the lack of democracy in the Middle East.   It was assumed that a lack of dem ocracy caused terrorism.   Unlike the case for WMD or ties to 9/11, this case was very easy for the American government to make.   No reasonable person could deny that Saddam Hussein was one of the most murderous leaders of the late 20th century, a sadist and a thug who belonged in a prison rather than a presidential palace.This, in part, is how America got sucked into this war.   Even if one did not believe all of the president’s assertions about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed to the United States, the idea of overthrowing this mass murderer was very appealing to most Americans.   The problem was that there was very little attention paid to the job that America would have in Iraq after Saddam was overthrown.Broadly speaking, the reasons given for war were the destruction of WMD stockpiles, the crushing of alleged terrorist groups in Iraq, the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, and the democratization of Iraq.   With these goals in mind, we will assess how the Unite d States has fared at each one and what the best course of action going forward should be.As we discovered after invading Iraq, Saddam Hussein had actually destroyed his WMD stockpiles in 1991.   This should be a major cause of embarrassment and concern for America’s intelligence agencies, but it can also serve as a relief to us in some sense.   The WMD threat is gone.   Saddam destroyed that threat himself twelve years before we invaded to do it for him.   Mission accomplished.As for overthrowing Saddam Hussein, that also has been achieved.   Saddam Hussein has been overthrown, captured, and tried and executed by his countrymen.   By definition, whatever threat Saddam Hussein may have posed to the United States in now gone.   So, again, mission accomplished.   If our only goals in Iraq were the limited and pragmatic ones of removing Saddam and his weapons, we could have declared victory and withdrawn from Iraq years ago.   We have other goals, however.   Reference to the brief list above tells us that the two outstanding tasks in Iraq are democratizing the country and riding it of terrorists.We must weigh whether we should stay in Iraq against the possibilities of achieving these final two goals and the costs this will entail.   I believe that, for a variety of reasons, the costs involved in pursuit of these goals are far too great and uncertain to justify keeping the American military in Iraq.We know that the number of Islamist terrorists in Iraq has increased exponentially since the American invasion.   In four years, the American military has not been able to destroy or significantly weaken these groups.   The most well-known Islamist terrorist group in Iraq is Al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia, which did not exist prior to the American invasion.The fact that the invasion of Iraq created far more terrorists than it destroyed is not a reason to leave Iraq.   However, the fact that the American military has not been able to defeat th ese groups in four years of warfare makes it appear very unlikely that the American military has the solution to this problem.While the Islamist terrorist groups and the remnants of Saddam Hussein’s regime have killed thousands of American soldiers, most violence in Iraq is carried out by Iraqis on other Iraqis.   In other words, the war in Iraq is not primarily a war between terrorists and Americans; it is primarily a civil war between Iraqis.   In order to form a rational policy, Americans must understand that they are not at the center of this conflict; they are merely a side component to an Iraqi civil war.The rise of terrorist groups is directly related to the failure of democracy in Iraq.   After Saddam’s dictatorship was crushed, Iraq was opened to a flood of people and ideas, many of whom were hostile to the United States and to the idea of a democratic Iraq.   Again, the resistance to a democratic Iraq is not primarily driven by anti-Americanism; it is primarily driven by local factors.Iraq, like all Arab countries, was historically dominated by Sunni Muslims.   Since Iraq is the only major Arab state with a Shi’ite Muslim majority, a democratic Iraq by definition means an Iraq dominated by Shi’ites.   Many powerful forces in the Arab world, including most of Iraq’s neighbors, reject the idea of a Shi’ite-dominated Arab state.   This resistance does not revolve around anti-Americanism; it revolves around a split between Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims that evolved a millennium before the United States existed.My goal here is to illustrate that the problems plaguing Iraq are local problems, with roots and causes stretching back centuries, that the United States neither created nor can hope to control.   Overthrowing a government and disarming a country are tasks that the American military can accomplish.   They did so swiftly and surely in 2003.   Changing the hearts and minds of millions o f Iraqis and convincing them to live peacefully together in a democratic state that is friendly to American interests is not a task for the American military; it is a task for the Iraqi people, or for nobody at all.Since our own military and political leaders have acknowledged that there is no military solution to the problem in Iraq, the American military presence there simply incurs escalating costs with little or no prospect of reward.   We will now examine those costs and see how they point to the logic of withdrawal.In terms of the human costs, we know with great precision what the toll has been on the American side.   Approximately 3,200 Americans have died, with about 24,000 wounded.   The Iraqi toll is harder to gauge and depends in large part on how the numbers are extrapolated.   There is no doubt, however, that the toll of Iraqi dead is at the very least ten times the American toll, and in all probability far, far greater.There are two considerations to bear in mi nd with these figures.   Firstly, while 3,200 military deaths is quite few compared to other American wars, it is far too many when one takes into account the most likely reward for these sacrifices.   In other words, when the point of the sacrifice is convoluted and ambiguous, the losses carry far more weight than they do when the goals are clear and the cause is just.Secondly, the scores of thousands of Iraqis who have been killed must weigh on the conscience of the United States.   While most of these Iraqis may have been killed by their own countrymen rather than the American military, the American military created the power vacuum that allowed violence to explode throughout Iraq.   Most of the Iraqi dead are not America’s enemies killed by America’s military; they are innocent people who the American military has for years been unable to protect.The financial cost has also been astronomical.   Unlike the Gulf War of 1990-91, American did not have many al lies when it invaded Iraq, so it has paid for the war itself.   To make matters worse, it has paid for the war with borrowed money, passing the bill on to future generations of Americans.   As the direct costs approach half a trillion dollars, one is awed by the fact that officials in the Defense Department speculated before the war that it would pay for itself via Iraqi oil sales.   Again, as with the human cost, the issue is not so much the figures as it is the gain.   What have we gained with our $500 billion investment?American reconstruction efforts have failed on a variety of levels.   One of the most important factors in winning the trust of an occupied population is to provide them with the everyday necessities and utilities needed to go about their lives.   Since the American invasion, oil output and electricity levels in urban centers are lower than they were under Saddam Hussein.   Unemployment is also rampant.   This is not to argue that America should no t try to fix the electricity; it is to argue that, after four years, why should we expect that they will suddenly be able to?As it became clear that the WMD stockpiles did not exist and that Saddam Hussein was permanently out of power, the original justifications for the war seemed to be evaporating.   Many came to feel that the WMD argument had been deliberately distorted; they felt they had been lied to.   For many Americans, however, there remained one satisfaction that it seemed impossible to reverse.   Whatever the mistakes made, the new Iraq could not possible be a worse place to live for Iraqi people than Saddam’s Iraq.   As we examine the costs that the Iraqis are paying, however, we can no longer be assured even of this.As noted above, Iraqis have less electricity now than under Saddam.   They are exporting less oil.   Under Saddam Hussein, the government had a monopoly on violence, which it used to brutalize and terrorize its own people.   However, the re was some semblance of order; one could walk down the street in Baghdad and not fear being blown up or beheaded while they shopped for groceries.   Now, although the brutal government is gone, Iraq is the most dangerous place on earth for the people who must live there.If there were no WMD, if Saddam is dead, if we have not improved the living standards or security of normal Iraqis in four years, and if Iraq is now engulfed in a civil war between Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims, why is the American military still in Iraq?   The administration holds that the democratically elected Iraqi government must be defended against terrorists, but this is to vastly oversimplify the nature of the problem and America’s ability to influence events.The elected Iraqi government is dominated by Shi’ite Muslims but, as noted above, the minority Sunni Muslims largely refuse to accept their legitimacy.   To most Iraqis, the civil war is not about democracy versus terrorism.   I t is about Sunni versus Shi’ite domination.   By supporting the Iraqi government, the United States is effectively siding with the Shi’ites against the Sunni in Iraq’s civil war.There are several dangers to this course of action.   Firstly, the American military should not be used to intervene directly in foreign nations’ civil wars.   This was one of the lessons of Vietnam.   Secondly, by siding with the Shi’ites, the Americans anger many of its traditional Sunni allies.   Thirdly, we have every reason to believe that the Shi’ites of Iraq are far more loyal to Iran than to the United States.   This should not surprise us, but it should make us pause before supporting them blindly.The administration insists on referring to Iraq as the central front of the war on terror.   When doubt is cast on this assertion, officials point out that Osama bin Laden himself has made this claim.   This approach is damaging for several reasons.    Firstly, we should not allow Osama bin Laden to dictate the context of our actions and thereby create a paradigm whereby leaving Iraq means surrendering in the war on terror.   Secondly, it ignores the fact that the American invasion made Iraq a nexus of international terror groups.   Thirdly, it is incredibly dismissive and contemptuous towards the Iraqi people.If this war, called Operation Iraqi Freedom, is really about what’s best for the Iraqi people, then America has made a grave error.   Certain politicians may claim that it is better to fight the enemy in Baghdad than in New York, but what does this mean for Iraqis and other Arabs and Muslims, whose hearts and minds we must win in order to win this war?   The American invasion caused the implosion of the Iraqi state, the opening of its borders, and a flood of literally hundreds and hundreds of suicide bombers into Iraq.   If part of our â€Å"war on terror† involves creating a magnet for terrorist s in other peoples’ countries, is this really in our best interest?   Do we decrease terrorism by drawing the terrorists into the neighborhoods of people we claim to be â€Å"liberating†?   The American invasion and occupation has made Iraq a haven for terrorists; does this decrease or increase the chances that Iraqi-based terrorist will attack the United States?The American war in Iraq must be stopped on behalf of two constituencies: the American people and the Iraqi people.   Both have been the losers in this war.   America lost the trust of many long-time allies, the moral high ground in the war on terror, hundreds of billions of dollars, massive amounts of military equipment, thousands of men and women, and a great deal of prestige and respect.The Iraqi people undoubtedly gained something, in that they are now free from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein.   However, they have subsequently lost much more.   Their standard of living has not improved noticeably , their capital city is the most dangerous in the world, and their society is being torn apart by civil war.If this war is costing the American and Iraqi people so much with so little gain, it must be ended.   The aftermath of an American withdrawal would surely lead to more chaos and bloodshed in Iraq.   The only point is staying, however, is if America can positively guide the conflict to a resolution.   Unfortunately, we have four years worth of evidence that suggests that Iraq’s problems are far beyond the capabilities of America to fix.   Indeed, they may even be beyond the capabilities of Iraq itself.