Euthanasia3 essays

Euthanasia3 essays Euthanasia continues to be an extremely controversial issue in society, and there are many opposing viewpoints concerning this specific subject. The case of Sue Rodriguez versus the province of British Columbia, is one that demonstrates the high degree of debate over such a sensitive topic, as euthanasia. The following is an analytical examination of the case at hand, and a critical comparison of it, to the theories of Patrick Nowell-Smith. When relating the theories of Patrick Nowell -Smith to the case of Sue Rodriguez, it is evident that he would not agree with the judges final decision. Firstly, it is necessary to discuss some of the relevant and significant points of the case. Sue Rodriguez is a mother in her forties, suffering from Lou Gehrigs disease. Her life expectancy is several months, however her condition is deteriorating quickly. Soon, she will no longer be able to swallow, speak, walk or move, and she will require a respirator in order to breath. She will be bedridden. Sue Rodriguez is aware of her situation and knows that death is inevitable, however, she wishes to control her circumstances, and her time and manner of death. By the time Sue is no longer able to enjoy life, she will be physically unable to terminate her life with out assistance. Sue is not requesting that her death be caused by active euthanasia, which would be by means of a doctor physically ending her life with some form of injection. She is asking that a qualified medical physician set up a certain technological system that would allow her, if she chose to, end her life with he r own hand. This is passive euthanasia, as it allows the victim herself to control the time and manner of her own death. The Criminal Code includes a section regarding the idea of suicide that the judge lays before her in an attempt to defy her wishes. Section 241 states that Every one who counsels a person to commit suicide or aids or abets someo...

The Events of Septrmber 11, 2001

The Events of Septrmber 11, 2001 On the morning of September 11, 2001, Islamic extremists organized and trained by the Saudi-based jihadist group al-Qaeda hijacked four American commercial jet airliners and used them as flying bombs to carry out suicide terrorist attacks against the United States. American Airlines Flight 11 crashed into Tower One of the World Trade Center at 8:50 AM. United Airlines Flight 175 crashed into Tower Two of the World Trade Center at 9:04 AM. As the world watched, Tower Two collapsed to the ground at about 10:00 AM. This unimaginable scene was duplicated at 10:30 AM when Tower One fell.   At 9:37 AM, a third plane, American Airlines Flight 77, was flown into the west side of the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia. The fourth plane, United Airlines Flight 93, initially being flown toward an unknown target in Washington, D.C., crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania at 10:03 AM, as passengers fought with the hijackers. Later confirmed as acting under the leadership of Saudi fugitive Osama bin Laden, the terrorists were believed to be attempting to retaliate for America’s defense of Israel and continued military operations in the Middle East since the 1990 Persian Gulf War.   The 9/11 terrorist attacks resulted in the deaths of nearly 3,000 men, women, and children and the injuries of more than 6,000 others. The attacks triggered major ongoing U.S. combat initiatives against terrorist groups in Iraq and Afghanistan and largely defined the presidency of George W. Bush. America’s Military Response to the 9/11 Terror Attacks No event since the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor propelled the nation into World War II had the American people been brought together by a shared resolved to defeat a common enemy. At 9 PM on the evening of the attacks, President George W. Bush spoke to the American people from the Oval Office of the White House, declaring, â€Å"Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve.† Foreshadowing America’s impending military response, he declared, â€Å"We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.† On October 7, 2001, less than a month after the 9/11 attacks, the United States, supported by a multinational coalition, launched Operation Enduring Freedom in an effort to overthrow the oppressive Taliban regime in Afghanistan and destroy Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda terrorist network. By the end of December 2001, U.S and coalition forces had virtually eradicated the Taliban in Afghanistan. However, a new Taliban insurgency in neighboring Pakistan resulted in the continuation of the war. On March 19, 2003, President Bush ordered U.S. troops into Iraq on a mission to overthrow Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, believed by the White House to be developing and stockpiling weapons of mass destruction while harboring Al Qaeda terrorists in his county. Following the overthrow and imprisonment of Hussein, President Bush would face criticism after a search by United Nations inspectors found no evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Some argued that the Iraq War had unnecessarily diverted resources from the war in Afghanistan. Though Osama bin Laden remained at large for over a decade, the mastermind of the 9/11 terror attack was finally killed while hiding out in an Abbottabad, Pakistan building by an elite team of U.S. Navy Seals on May 2, 2011. With the demise of bin Laden, President Barack Obama announced the beginning of large-scale troop withdrawals from Afghanistan in June 2011. As Trump Takes Over, War Goes On Today, 16 years and three presidential administrations after the 9/11 terror attacks, the war continues. While its official combat role in Afghanistan ended in December 2014, the United States still had nearly 8,500 troops stationed there when President Donald Trump took over as Commander in Chief in January 2017. In August 2017, President Trump authorized the Pentagon to increase the troop levels in Afghanistan by several thousand and announced a change in policy regarding the release of future troop level numbers in the region. â€Å"We will not talk about numbers of troops or our plans for further military activities, Trump said. Conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables, will guide our strategy from now on,† he said. â€Å"Americas enemies must never know our plans or believe they can wait us out.† Reports at the time indicated that top US military generals had advised Trump that a â€Å"few thousand† additional troops would help the U.S. make progress in eliminating the insurgent Taliban and other ISIS fighters in Afghanistan. The Pentagon stated at the time that the additional troops would be conducting counterterrorism missions and training Afghanistan’s own military forces.   Updated by Robert Longley