Discussion on essay-1-1-post-here-by-2-28

[Colin C.]

Eng 101 #3226
O’Connell


Barbara Ehrenrich’s 1997 Blood Rites misconstrues the meaning of
ritualistic and often primative practices in preparing a young man for
war. We as a country are often proud and greatfully understanding to
the transformations gone through by young men and women to defend the
ideals of the United States, as their sacrifice is mention in Bush’s
Christmas speech. War is often viewed as uncivilized but though
hopefully uneccesary often resorted to as a last resort to uphold the
morals established by this country. Right and wrong is often is
established without means of religion, so why must war be viewed as
religious right of passage when it simple can be viewed as standing up
for what we as a country believe to be right and wrong. As a people
it maybe in our nature to be violent but not to kill fellow man.
Nothing has haunted man more then the memory of murder. It would then
make senses the need to reprogram the thinking of our youth to make
taking a life acceptable for the sake of a greater cause.

The Golden Rule of do onto others like you’d have them do onto you is
most represented with the act of killing. No one wants to die and to
take a life is to rob someone of, to the best of our knowledge, the
only existence they will know. We are trained from birth not to hurt
others and to kill is the ultimate hurt. Anybody who can willing kill
carelessly more than likely has a skewed perception on life. But for
us normal people why wouldn’t it make sense to make someone
comfortable with the idea of taking a life you’d have to completely
reconfigure their thinking. The ritualistic practices of face painting
drugs and alcohol all to mentally prepare someone to take a life at
will may have been the best primative way to change a persons
thinking, especially in the sword wielding barbaric past where killing
was a little more personal.

[FASantamaria]

Felipe Albert Santa Maria
Eng 101 – O’ Connell
E.1.1 2/28/09
Blood Rites and War

With a sad attempt to motivate warfare on a Christmas day, President
Bush tries to enlighten the nation with his unconvincing concern and
pseudo religious ideology; this radio address shows examples of what
Barbara Ehrenreich’s analysis is on warfare. For eight years, the
nation has been under Bush’s reign. Families have been divided
because of his wars which were driven by suspicion. War is not an
instinct, as Ehrenreich would soon state, or is decided on by the
individuals; a leader, who claims to be in their right mind, has the
one way ticket to create a war.
The nation is in a jumble. An epidemic has happened. Friends and
families on every corner are being departed overseas for months at a
time to fight “enemies that do not take holidays” (Bush Address 2008)
President Bush thanks our friends and families with regards and
constant “shout-outs, but why are they there in the first place? Our
enemies do not take holidays as he claims, but who exactly are our
enemies? Our friends and family have departed based on suspicion and
greed. They do not sleep because the other “team” does not sleep.
This just all seems wrong to me because the reason for fighting is not
clear and obviously unclear to the mass. The situation isn’t black or
white or this and that, but instead blurry reasons are being said. “I
hope you'll also take time to remember the men and women of our armed
forces,” Bush understates in his Christmas address. The men and woman
that Bush hopes we do not forget about the on Christmas Day are our
family and friends that we truly miss. We understand that we should
“remember” the heroes, our very own family, of our nation, but we do
not understand the reason for this war. Not only does Bush want us to
remember our very own family across seas, but he wants us to remember
the miracle that happened on Christmas day. George Washington was a
leader that led his soldiers to victory chanting “victory or
death” (Bush Address 2008) in the dark night which then led to “morale
immediately improving” (Bush Address 2008) In our time, it seems the
deaths have outweighed the victories. He tells us to remember that
day, the day of a miracle, without missing a beat, Bush also mentions
the miracle of the “humble” birth of Jesus. It is miracles that save
our nation apparently. Is Bush trying to compare our situation to
Washington’s night in 1776? Our morale has not improved with the help
of his example in his radio address regardless of what tradition he
speaks of. Our families, young and old, are fighting his battle.
We do not send our families to fight wars because we want to, but we
send them because they are forced in a way to fight a battle that was
not started by the individual. “There is no plausible instinct, for
example, that impels a man to leave his home, cut his hair short, and
drill for hours in tight formation.”( Barbara Ehrenreich, Blood Rites,
1997) Granted, our enemies do not take holidays, but how did we come
about on having enemies in the first place? Did we invade? Spread
democracy? Or have suspicion and greed? As Ehrenreich would say, “it
isn’t an instinct…the sacralization of war is not the project of a
self-confident predator.” (Ehrenreich, Blood Rites, 1997) We will
not forget those who have fought for the good of the nation for they
are family. The stress of repeating the word family is used because
it is truly our families that are suffering and we are fighting right
beside them. If they are fighting we are fighting as well. We have
seen in the families in the past suffer from those that have been
drafted and departed; All because of war. There no miracles, but only
great leaders in the subject of war. It wasn’t a miracle that saved
the civil war, but a good leader, Lincoln, did. Even using an example
of the opposing side of that situation would be Robert E. Lee,
commander of the South against the Union army. It wasn’t a miracle
that his men did not all die, but he, as a leader, surrendered to the
North to stop so many of his soldiers getting killed. The men and
women are the only people we should believe in, not our tradition of
celebrating miracles. Again, no we will not forget those and “hope”
to remember our soldiers that are fighting for us overseas on
Christmas day, we already know by the empty seat across the dinner
table.
The people of our Nation aren’t naïve to know that we are losing
friends and family to this war, but from President Bush radio address,
he convinced that we are. We as a country did not choose this war.
War is not an instinct or is decided on by the individuals; a leader,
who claims to be in their right mind, has our one way ticket to create
a war.

[meetka...@gmail.com]

first try

[meetka...@gmail.com]

Stryzhak, Olesya
English 101
Section 3226
Essay 1.1
Professor O'Connell, Ed


In Barbara Ehrenreich's Blood Rites (1997), she tries to
get to the point that war attempts to create predators from young men,
especially if it's 'undertaken for the stated purpose' (Ehrenreich,
97'). While she claims war in making wild animal hunters from young
people, I'd say the same people, not that young though, made from
flash and blood, start that war, trying to get more land, money, prove
something to somebody, or just stay their rights sometimes. I hate to
say, but war is in us. It's not always come with guns and tanks, but
we sacrifice as same as soldiers do.
In 2008 Christmas radio address (Dec. 23, 2008), President Bush said
that defending freedom is a full time job, I'd just add that first of
all defending your family is a full time job, but Barbara Ehrenreich
gone too far with ideas that sending people to war is a lives
sacrifice for nothing. Yes, when people die - it's a tragedy, when
young man dies it's even more tragedy, but they went to the
battlefield for a reason, and most of the times it worth it. I don't
support war in any cases, but why contaminate such things like
protecting loved ones with transition to 'warrior-predator'? All
people are different, somebody will end up in mad house after hitting
squirrel by car, or seeing intestine of a cow, but for someone it's an
every day life.
Getting to the point, World Peace is a never happened dream.
Historically people up to go and fight. For someone it's a transition
from daddy son to grown up, for someone it's an opportunity to prove
that he or she can make it, there will be someone who become a hero,
and of course someone who will hate everything and everyone after what
he or she saw... It's a 21st century and unfortunately people are
still not educated enough to solve such problems by a conversation.
May be it's too simple argue and agree while you're here, on a land,
where you can fearless go walk your dog and go out at night, but we
have to support and respect those who went out to protect that, what
we have today, believe in better, and may be not think about war as a
sacrifice, but as duty. I think about those soldiers as serious
people, who know what they're doing, but not as prey, neither as
predator.

[o'c]

saydie p
View profile
More options Mar 1, 12:03 am
sul a (saydie) park
The author, Barbara Ehrenreich, of Blood Rites claims that there are
two main reasons for wars, conflicts and psychology desire. She
explains that the nations, states and tribes do not fight for their
advancements only but desire to fulfill aggressive instinct.
However,
her point is limited to wars in different errors and situations. In
middle age, people used to weapons, such as sword, that have to be
aggressive and even needed murderous rage in battle. However, as the
author claimed, there were some people who tried to avoid the killing
and ran from the scene. They even faced jail time or death by
avoiding the war or killing enemies for their leaders. I wonder how
many people want to join the battle. I am certain that it is very
few
if any. I am certain that most do not want to risk their lives as
much as they do not want to kill anyone in any manners. The leaders
might have aggressive instinct to cause wars to fulfill their
psychological desire, however, I am certain that they, individually,
do not have murderous rage to a person.

[o'c]

Ferdinand Urbano
View profile
More options Feb 28, 3:18 pm
Ferdinand Urbano

Eng 101 – O’ Connell
E.1.1 2/28/09
Blood Rites and War

Section:3226
In (Bush address 2008), he defines what Barbara
Ehrenrich’s “The male warrior-predatory role”. The nation has been in
war for years now losing men and women each day, but for what? Power?
Many citizens do not know the reason for this war and why we are
still
fighting, bush insisted on staying in Iraq for freedom. Why do we
need
to fight for freedom, which is something we have had since George
Washington and the battle in the Delaware River. Ehrenrich implies
about male dominance showing others of their power and destruction, I
believe Former President Bush falls into all her categories.
If you ask the whole country it would seem as if the majority
does
not know why we are fighting and why we still are there. Bush tried
convincing his nation at the time that there are people outside of us
who have power of mass destruction. He put the fears into all our
minds making us believe that war was the only option. We have lost
thousands of men and women fighting for Bush’s power and control over
the globe. This war has done nothing for others and us; the Former
President has captured whom he believed had the “Weapons of mass
destruction” but found no evidence of such threat. Why do we fight?
He
told us to give freedom to another country Iraq. Nothing has come out
good since this war, now the present our economy has gone down almost
leading to a depression and for what to show off his power and to
give
freedom to another country in which they can figure out themselves.
Bush tries to relax us with the speech he had on Christmas
day. He
talks about our first President George Washington who gave this
nation
its freedom. Bush said in his speech “George Washington was a leader

that led his soldiers to victory chanting “victory or death” (Bush

Address 2008). It seems like Bush is comparing us to George
Washington. What is there to compare? Washington was trying to save
our freedom from the British who were trying to invade us. How is
that
related to Bush going across the seas to give freedom to Iraq? If you
think about it, imagine the British trying to give us their freedom
and Washington is trying to defend ours, and put that with bush
trying
to give our freedom to Iraq. He can’t compare us when it seems like
his is doing the exact opposite of Washington. Nothing good has come
out of the war I believe that Iraq should come with a new government
especially after we have caught sad dam Hussein. We don’t need to
change anything and to just let people fix what they have broken.
President Bush takes aggressive action in forming the war that
we are
in. He shows Barbara Ehrenrich’s definition of “the male warrior-
predatory role.” (Ehrenreich, Blood Rites, 1997) When Bush was
elected it seemed as if he already knew what he was going to do right
away, and the attack on 9/11 made him pull the trigger faster. With
the war he shows the power he has with this country and planned to
keep fighting. With his greed of power our family, friends, and loved
ones served their life to show others that we are not weak. President
Bush seems like he would never back down sending more and more troops
to their deaths. Everything has turned out for the worst ever since
he
was elected president and now we the people the nation are paying for
it.
We the nation know what we are losing with this war, but it
seems
like President Bush uses us like we are recycled cans. We all have
loved one out there fighting for nothing and we hope they all will
come back safely. It is always power and greed, that leads one into
destruction. It’s the pass that leads a leader into war and it has
led
us all into the depths also.