Reference no: EM132305354

First; In 2-3 paragraphs (each), answer two of the prompts.Your answers should rely on our readings, class lectures/discussions, your own insights, or additional research/reading done on your part. If you directly quote one of the course readings, please be sure to provide the author and page number of the quotation (in parentheses).

If you give a detailed or substantive paraphrase of a course reading or other material that you believe is central to your argument, be sure to indicate the source/author in parentheses. If you quote or paraphrase an outside source, please provide author, article/book title, and page number if possible. I will not be strict on requiring you to cite an article or reading but it would help to be clear so that respondents are provided sufficient context to respond. You may choose to mainly focus on your own interpretations, understandings, or questions.

That is fine; I just ask you think carefully and respond clearly. Be creative. Discussion and dialogue are, at their best, rhetorical social practices that avoid sophistry and strive toward achieving greater understanding, discovery, clarity, and even puzzlement.

Second; In 1-2 paragraphs (each), respond to at least two posts by fellow students. A response must include more than highlighting points of agreement. Provide additional examples, make a counterclaim, propose a question, or give some other response that would move the conversation forward. You may respond to more than 2 posts and/or continue a conversation but that is not a requirement.

1-Do you think the George W. Bush administration took the "lesser evil" approach advocated for by Michael Ignatieff in their execution of the "War on Terror"? If so, how? If not, why not? What would it mean to take a lesser evil approach? Is it the right approach?

2-Does Donald Rumsfeld contradict himself in the documentary Unknown Knowns? How so? How do you explain this/these contradiction(s)? Is it necessary because of the chaos of events and our inability to be prescient? Is it because of character flaws or defects? Is it due to structural factors? Bad or naturally declining memory? Intentional for political purposes? Something else? Explain.