Think Before You Do

I recently watched a movie called, “Lords of Nature: Life in a Land of Great Predators,” and was surprised by the effects of man’s decision to extract predators from an environment. The movie’s main claim is that predation is the dominating factor that structures ecosystems.  Moreover, that a lack of predators threatens the life of the entire ecosystem. It then proceeded to explain the situation that was facing Yellowstone in the late 1920s. The general consensus at the time was that “the only good predator is a dead predator.” This perspective is shown by the fact that wolves were extracted out of Yellowstone. Just at the same time that the wolves were extracted however, experts began to realize that the Aspen Trees had stopped reproducing. Not only this, but all the forestation was experiencing a difficulty in growing. The only thing that experts could point to was the fact that this issue began at the same time that the wolves were taken away. Through this discovery came a montage of other supporting evidences. First, that because the wolves were taken away, the elk population had thrived to a level at which the forestation was literally being destroyed by the elk’s eating habits. Second, that because of the elk’s overpopulation, drinking habits resulted in weak to nonexistent streams, thereby negatively affecting the organisms that lived in or benefitted from the streams. I had never really considered the impact that such a seemingly harmless and beneficial decision (i.e. protecting tourists) could have. Why does this matter? Well, with the every growing destruction of animals and habitats (which follows globalization) for purposes such as constructing cities or extracting nature-made products for man’s use (such as trees), it becomes ever more important that we consider the effects which these choices will have on these habitats lest we destroy them in a way that is irreversible, and which proves detrimental to both nature’s organisms and humans as a whole.      

Global Warming: Here a Little and There a Little

Disregard for mounting facts associated with global warming and its effects have soared over the decades as a major and controversial issue of our day. Increased technology and machinery that emits carbon dioxide such as cars, airplanes, and farming equipment greatly contribute to the growing damage. This carbon dioxide more specifically has increased by about 6 billion metric tons worldwide since 1990; this is a major problem as it is recognized as the gas primarily responsible for global warming. Growing concerns about the affects of global warming hold a great amount of validity. These may include the transmission of diseases (as disease-carrying insects migrate to warming Northern countries), destructive storms and the economic impact thereof, health concerns due to smog, animal extinction resulting from habitat destruction, droughts, and wildfires to name a few. Even so, many disregard global warming as an issue in our day. They argue that although the world has certainly contributed to the warming, that the earth experiences a natural and inevitable heating curve and because of this, there is no reason to worry. There is also significant evidence to support this point of view. With the two polar opposities presenting themselves, how can the gap be bridged between the two in order to come to an aggreement on the matter? Perhaps the answer is not to strive to acquire an aggrement about the claims but rather about the common sense improvements that can be made in order to increase the safety of people everywhere. One example of this is pollution. Though many have their varying opinions about pollution in relation to global warming, we can all agree to strive to make decisions that will improve pollution for the health safety of people, if anything else. By dodging the core claims and implications, and instead focusing on aggreeable improvements that can be made for obvious reasons, we are able to actually take action, rather than reaching a stalemate of progress because aggrement cannot be made.

US: Great World Dominance or Isolationist?

When it comes to the realtionship between the US and other countries I see myself as neither conservative nor radical. I do believe in the duty for America to serve as a nation that other countries can mimick in order to experience the great success that we have. Sometimes this may include becoming involved in what some people may think of as none of our business in order to spead the mission of freedom and equality to all. However, we musn't go through with this if it results in the detriment of our country. The troops in Iraq provide a good example of this sort of circumstance. Initially I believe that the decision to invade Iraq was a good one. For one, America could not look weak by not responding to the 9/11 terrorist attack as it would result in further and more malicious terrorist attacks. Secondly, I think that we needed to give the Iraqi people a chance to experience a stable government and the freedom that comes along with it. Through the years that we have continued to stay in Iraq this attempt has proven to be somewhat of a failure. Afterall, there is only so much an outside force can do to help if the general population do not commit and consent to the new form of government. Ultimately, factions will take control. At this point, while I do support our troops that are still in Iraq, I think that moving the troops out would prove a good decision because of the mounting debt and inablility to create a stable governmnet for the Iraqi people. Certainly this initial and continued decision to stay in Iraq has had a huge effect on the American people's ideals as well as America's growing debt situation. Understanding the huge impact that these decisions about foreign policy has on the American people makes me realize the importance or need to consider each separate circumstance so that all pros and cons may be weighed before a decision is made. For this upcoming election I want the president to support a foreign policy in which America is able to spread its example of freedom and equality while still maintain stablility and efficiency at home.