User Details For: Axis_of_Evil

Essay List
Comments List
  • Battle Flag over Stars and Bars?

    first, by the very topic of this paper, it is obviously an argumentative paper arguing for the right to preserve Southern Heritage via the Confederate "Battle Flag." So, just a few writing pointers--NEVER put info in your paper that will automatically discredit yourself as biased, or provide information that can very easily be grasped as the very reason to disagree with your topic.Exaxmple 1: you mention you are a member of The Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) (where I might add, you forgot to close your "). Most people aren't exactly sure what that society is all about, but those that feel strong enough about NOT wanting to see the Southern Cross already think the SCV is a mini-KKK, and will pick up on your membership as the very reason you are writing this "propaganda garbage."Example 2: You say that the Dec of Independece captured the very essence of the Southern view....then included this:"all men are created with certain inherent rights that a ruler or a government should never violate." This kills your momentum when the reader questions the slavery issue. You could have side-stepped this and pushed the states-rights lines....Oh, and I think the Southern Heritage should be preserved too, but through flying the less traditional Stars and Bars, and not the ultra-controversial Battle Flag (which just before the war ended was voted to be the actual CSA flag.
    • 26/05/2003
    • 07:50:12
    • Score: 1 out of 1 people found this comment useful.
  • Missed the Point-----

    Shakes,America preparing for war is not about world conquest or flexing our sole Superpower status. Saddam MUST be taken out of power, he's a nut case that is bent on controlling the Middle East, with two invasions of his neighbors already under his belt.America would have taken him out in 91, but the agreement with the Coalition forces that helped Kuwait made us agree NOT to replace, 10 years later, he is playing the same games, and we will go in and take him out.No, not everyone will agree with the decision. No, not everyone will understand. But, when we do go, and are targets of Bio/Chem weapons (you know,the ones he "doesn't have") and we find even more than what was claimed, then Germany and France should ensure they don't stick their little hands out to receive the oil they so desperately covet. Russia has already shown its ass--now that their delaying techniques have shown not to affect our war plans, they have sent personnel to finalize oil import deals with Iraq!! C'mon.If you think we are wrong, fine. Just think about this:In 1930s a mad man thought about world domination. By 1939 he was all but unstoppable. He invaded Czech, and France and Britian decided to just hope he would go away. Then he rolled into Poland, and even though Brits and French condemened it, they were unable to reverse it, and allowed the occupation to continue. Then, France realized its own folly when in a mere 3 days, Paris fell. The man was Hitler! How would the world be had a coalition decided to oust him before he was out of control? How would the world be if he were not defeated when he was already devising plans for his own Atom bomb and V12 rockets that could reach all the way to London?What if Hitler was suspected of having WMD, would we still sit around and wait before stopping that mad man? would we try to squeeze in last minute deals for BMWs and Mercedes before finally agreeing to military action? Would we turn our backs on long standing allies? I think not! Yet, its happening even now, that America prepares to go it alone (with a small amount of REAL allies)!Oh, and my University will remain nameless, as I have posted here direct Questions and Answers to professor Exams. :)ANd, Shakes, are you an English as a 2nd Language student? Not trying to be smartass, but with a German wife, I can tell you that your use of words, grammar, sentence structure and the works are very need to really work on that if you are going to write a comment that states no one cares about the draftees of the Iraqi army, and etc.No one hopes for peace more than the soldiers who are standing by to fight it.....
    • 23/02/2003
    • 22:31:27
    • Score: 14 out of 15 people found this comment useful.
  • Ok, Paper. for "13th Grade" 90% maybe too High...

    The content of this paper is pretty decent, and without the background as to why this essay was written (IE closed book Exam, or short Response Paper, etc) I hesitate to spout off a list of NEGs.However, if it was not closed book (and some of the info leads me to believe it was not) then there must be citations to back your views---especially when using the generally taboo "I think" "I feel" intros.The content was very informative and although presented in a bit of a choppy format, was pretty good. The one part that was definately out of place within this essay was the Napoleon bit. After presenting what appears to be a conclusion, the author takes an aside comparing Napoleon to Hitler (without citations) and then goes back to the Germany of 1939 to close out.One more note on the Little Corsican thing: Comparing a rise in power between Hitler and Napoleon is fine....comparing a the Nazi Holocaust and point blank assualt on the civilian population to Napoleons quest for power is going a bit far. The Nazis set out to exterminate the "untermensch" (as Hitler called the unwanted Slavs and Jews), and Napoleon, although possessing a warped view of his role in the world, sought to free "oppressed" peoples of some of the lesser states in Europe. Napoleon was a product born of the Revolution, and was caught up in a whirlwind of violence and change even before he took power.Hitler CAUSED a whirlwind of violence to SEIZE power.--and that's all I got to say 'bout that.AoE
    • 17/01/2003
    • 18:23:59
    • Score: 7 out of 8 people found this comment useful.
  • Damn! this is 10th Grade!

    Admittedly, I did not read this whole thing--first, I didn't have the time, and second, its a topic I have little interest in....BUT, what ind of class does a 10th grader take that requires a 13,000 word paper! and what kind of student writes one! ...a good one, I would imagine.Compare this to the 10th Grader who I commented on via the Alexander the Great paper. Must be the differing school districts.... hehehe.--AoE
    • 05/01/2003
    • 16:55:18
    • Score: 20 out of 23 people found this comment useful.
  • Title Should Say it All...... ,)

    Luca, you spelled Territorial and Philippines wrong in the title, which tempted me to read more.Well, you did spell them write in the paper, but your research seems a bit lacking, and you present no qoutes or citations to show where your info was gained from. The US hold on the Philippines wasn't just a "noble intention."Further, there are more spelling/typos in the paper. Need to do a little more work.Good Luck on future endeavors....-AoE
    • 05/01/2003
    • 16:42:13
    • Score: 10 out of 10 people found this comment useful.
  • A note about Citations

    Mr. Kestenbaum,just a quick note: I have submitted papers here WITH citations correctly emplaced only to have all the reference numbers disappear both IN the paper and IN FRONT of the citation below. At least he included his Bib, which is amazing here. :)Hokki,good work. nice to see that somewhere, someone is receiving an education and able to still write!! Refreshing to see this was written by someone who still has some time left in grade school!-AoE your friend in the Rogue Regime
    • 05/01/2003
    • 15:13:12
    • Score: 16 out of 16 people found this comment useful.
  • Not a bad summary....

    Considering the Crazy Nadsat language and the MAJOR differences between movie and novel endings, tattva has done a pretty good job of overviewing the entire novel, even including the much debated film/novel difference. Impressive considering this was done in 387 pages. One day when I find it and retype it to post here, I'll submit my 10+ page term paper on the importance of that "missing" chapter from the film.--AoE
    • 05/01/2003
    • 11:22:35
    • Score: 8 out of 9 people found this comment useful.
  • Prof Comments on Essay

    I was given a 24 of 25 pts on this Essay from my professor. (So much for the CLOWN who rated it with a SAD face!).Typo below is from Prof, this quote is cut and pasted right from my online grade sheet:"ESSAY FEEDBACK: Good interpretation of the text. Sun Tzu was the creator of teh military timetable-Logistics tied to a sound strategy were the keys to victory "
    • 04/01/2003
    • 10:46:44
    • Score: 11 out of 14 people found this comment useful.
  • Prof Notes on above Essay

    Cut and Pasted here. I was awarded 25 of 25 points on a Mid-Term Esssay Question."Excellent comparative analysis--The spirit of the Offensive can be seen in both these commanders. This permeates military institutions until 1914! "
    • 04/01/2003
    • 10:44:17
    • Score: 11 out of 14 people found this comment useful.
  • Proof? Only if you already believe.....

    Not to begin a huge unstoppable religious debate, but the essay does not present any evidence of the Bible's "fact or fiction" status. You used your strong conviction to present quotes (scriptures) from the Bible to support your ideas, but if you are trying to validate the Bible, you must use hard eveidence from OUTSIDE the Bible.The word of Jesus, as presented in the Bible does nothing more than if I write on cheathouse that Jesus says this site rocks. Its still word of mouth...and through the years, even if true, it could eventually be mis-translated as Jesus eats rocks, or Jesus rocks this site. Get the point?The Ark, from Noah's Ark found in a mountain range (landlocked at that) is more what I'm talking about.Good to have faith.....but in an argumentative paper, it's not enough. :)the Cheathouse favorite Atheist,--AoE
    • 15/11/2002
    • 11:18:06
    • Score: 14 out of 17 people found this comment useful.
  • Negative.....why are we all so Negative?

    Ok, here we go again:If you are going to take the easy route of "Sad Face / Happy Face" click, then please leave some kind of comment for either me (to work on possible problems in style or content) or to the masses (as to why you did not like the paper.Note to Kraft: When will this be MANDATORY?! :)
    • 15/11/2002
    • 10:47:55
    • Score: 12 out of 16 people found this comment useful.
  • Negative...........

    Ok, here we go again:If you are going to take the easy route of "Sad Face / Happy Face" click, then please leave some kind of comment for either me (to work on possible problems in style or content) or to the masses (as to why you did not like the paper.Note to Kraft: When will this be MANDATORY?! :)
    • 15/11/2002
    • 10:43:57
    • Score: 11 out of 14 people found this comment useful.
  • Pearl Harbor 25 Years Later......

    Ok, the author made a mistake and wrote WWII, but the essay is clearly about WWI, which I already addressed. Hence, Pearl Harbor, happening some 25 years AFTER WWI would have little impact on the WHYs of the U.S. involvement. The essay covered the WHYs of WWI---NOT WWII. Welcome to the top 10 Jedi. :)
    • 07/10/2002
    • 17:14:49
    • Score: 10 out of 11 people found this comment useful.
  • "decent paper thorough paper"

    Well, think your Prof got it right. And it also looks like part of your paper was cut off--it ends abruptly.As I took Human Genetics years ago, this paper could serve as a generalized guideline to how evolution continues, especially as presented in your 'seperate societies' example where exact gene pools in differing environments will result in different evolutions of certain genes.However, the paper came across as more regurgitation than an in-depth research. I'd agree with your prof's grade as well.BTW...are you related to Jimmy the Greek? That closing comment (although part of the paper is missing) is the exact thing he got canned for back in the 80s!! :)--AoE
    • 19/09/2002
    • 18:33:54
    • Score: 9 out of 9 people found this comment useful.
  • Great Opening.....

    FoF: The opening was great, immediately drew me into the story even though a quic glance of D&D started to discourage me. Your comment: "In the eyes of observers, it seemed to be the disenfranchised intellectual who was drawn to the game. Geeks, weirdoes, thinkers, dreamers, were stereotyped and set apart for their love of fantasy," was right on the money. :) when asked if I played D&D when I was younger I normally reply, "No, I had friends in High School!" heheAnyway, the style is very "weekly-columnist" and I think you need to pursue this style and approach more, as it definately fits to your style and enthusiasm for writing.--AoE
    • 19/09/2002
    • 16:31:04
    • Score: 8 out of 9 people found this comment useful.
  • Pretty decent coverage of the German policy.....

    However, this is World War I, not II as the title states. Anyone not familiar with the World Wars, be sure to distnguish between WWI--German subs sinking American merchant ships, and WWII--Japan sneak-attacking Pearl Harbor.Otherwise, from an 11th grader, this is pretty good paper.--AoE
    • 19/09/2002
    • 16:03:40
    • Score: 12 out of 13 people found this comment useful.
  • Another encyclopedia summarized.....

    Ok, same comments as the SNAKE deal. It appears that an encyclopedia was opened and the some interesting facts pulled at random and then typed up in some kind of order.And guys got to know each you jumped in immediately to rate this author again. And with such sophisticated babble in an attempt to glorify substandard work! cmon...real comments or none at all!
    • 05/09/2002
    • 15:13:50
    • Score: 13 out of 15 people found this comment useful.
  • I am THAT narrow minded American! :)

    I don't necessarily agree that the paper is all that well written--it is missing that 'flow' that usually (don't take it personally if its not the case) means the passages presented are 'summarized' comments (borderline plagarism if not cited) and then the connecting sentences between these summarized thoughts are missing. This is especially alarming when a Bibliography is so long but the actual paper contains so few citings.As far as cenzo's comment: it is not that Islam is a heathen religion that causes anti-globalization, but unfortunately too many Middle East countries hide their true intentins and hatred for the "blue-eyed devils" of the West behind the religion of Islam--obviously warping the Western views of that religion. But who's to blame for that? It is human nature to fear the unknown--and Islam is a very big unknown to the western world. Then to have it presented as the religion that the fanatical terrorists claim? They bring the heat upon themselves!As far as Palestinians---hit the books. first, it has been over 20 years since that region has been fighting---try since the Philistines (the forefathers of Palestine) encroached and then dominated the Israelites (who just escaped Egyptian slavery) for over 50 years starting with their victory over King Saul in 1050 BC.Of course, the fighting hasn't been constant since then, but it is the foundation of a hatred that has existed. Further, the establishment of a Jewish state after WWII can not be blamed either--as Israel threw off the chains of the colonizing power (Britain) to finally acheive full recognition. Arafat brought his fanaticsm to the Palestinian people and has actually been the greater cause of 'his' people's suffering. For more history and my narrow-mindedness :) read the Beyond the Storm essay posted on this site!
    • 03/09/2002
    • 18:37:25
    • Score: 9 out of 13 people found this comment useful.
  • Well rounded paper.

    The facts are there, though the paper opens with thumping on Charlemgne and then ends with justifying his "the Great" title.The facts in between the intro and conclusion are, for the most part, right on the money, but could have expanded on either the economic downfall or on the military genius of Charles the Great. He revolutionized warfare in the early Medieval world--he introduced heavy cavalry, later equipped with stirrups, that outright punished foot soldiers. They became so feared, that coupled with the size of his armies (he also introduced fuedalism) there were many 'battles' that he never even had to fight from intimidation alone.Good research, sentence structure throws me off for a "13th grader" though, and I'm alawys a bit skeptical about no works cited.
    • 02/09/2002
    • 05:25:58
    • Score: 10 out of 12 people found this comment useful.
  • I Can't Believe This is 10th Grade!

    No kidding. The sentence structure and paragraph flow is horrendous, and the works cited, if noticed, came from basically 6 pages of material. You CAN NOT write a paper on Alexander the Great with 6 pages of reference!Historians do not "think otherwise" about Alexander's possible link to Philip's death either. They are split on the subject, and the underlining theme of events are very suspicious. Additionally, although homosexuality was common with Greeks/Macedonians of that time, there has been no evidence to suggest Alexander was in fact gay--and historians are just as split on this issue.The fact that Alexander's empire consumed the largest land area ever conquered by a single individual (save Genghis Khan-though a large portion of his empire contained lesser civilizations or none at all) was poorly summed up in one paragraph. Alexander defeated the greatest army/empire of his time (and their king Darius III right along with it) and did so within the ranks of his men---fighting at the head of his troops in almost every single battle!One more note, Philip did NOT invent the phalanx--it was first depicted in a stone carving from the Sumerians---(within present day Iraq) and this was only say, about 2500 years before Philip's reign. He did modify the phalanx to contain 5 ranks as opposed to the standard 3, and incorporated the 'sarissa'--a pike of 13 feet, but he did not invent it.With the backbone formed, Alexander continued to imporve both the phalanx (heavy infantry) and his Companions (cavalry) before testing the Persians.**a bit about me---I'm a college junior studying to obtain a major in military history--and have served in the US Army for going on 10 years now.
    • 02/09/2002
    • 05:15:05
    • Score: 16 out of 17 people found this comment useful.
  • He was called "the GREAT" for a reason!

    Saminsf:I think you missed the overall "Greatness" of Charlemagne.First, as Rome began its downward spiral, the barbarian tribes of the Franks immediately began to break off and form their own Merovignian dynasty and by the 5th Cenutry, they had occupied and united parts of (present day) France and portions of northern Italy, western Germany, and the southern portion of the Low Countries.Of course, this dynasty came under immediate attack from its neighbors and had been all but crushed by the 6th Century. And by the 7th, the leader of the Franks set out to reestablish (reunite) the original territory of the dynasty (now Carolingian).Thus, Charles Martel began campaigning in northern Gaul and Burgundy, and repelled Arab attacks at Poitiers. He was followed by his son Peppin III who campaigned in southern Gaul. So, as you see, Charlemagne inherited a third generation quest to reunite the old empire--and although some of his methods may seem barbaric, he was no mere warmonger.At the height of his empire it stretched as far as Hungary to the East, the Saxons finally fell in the North, northern Rome was his, and he had subjugated the north of Spain. However, he also began strengthening the religious education of the Franks and the conquered subjects within his empire through established 'schools' system, and was so heavily involved in education becoming a founding pillar of civilization, even attended classes himself!Back to the war side of his greatness, the Franks introduced the Heavy Cavalry to Western Europe (especially once the stirrup found its way from China) and this revolutionized warfare throughout the rest of the Medieval periods. Charlemagne was also instrumental in the establishment of the 'defensive-offense' wherein territory was taken and held by an ongoing system of fortification construction to insure the security of newly acquired land. This eventually led to the Motte and Bailey castles--the groundwork for all castles that followed in Western Europe.I'm not picking at your paper, just shedding some light on the other side of Charlemagne. Of course the source of your paper was from Einhard--but you must be aware that Einhard was Charlemagne's personal biographer--and therefore his work will surely be both biased and influenced by his subject.**Just a note about me, I am a 3rd year Military History Major with an additional 10 year military career to add to my love for the field I study.
    • 31/08/2002
    • 20:24:47
    • Score: 12 out of 12 people found this comment useful.