馃敟 Popular | Latest

Surely there's no way: NORTHWESTERN EUROPE, 1940 CAMPAIGN IN THE WEST, 1940 Situation 16 May and Operations Since 10 May Dutch surrendered 14 May Dardrecht w 10 May Moerdijk a-- (11 Gennep Goch Maas River Units of Seventh Army surrendered 17 May Wesel DGHTEENTH KUECHLER Breda. H O A N D 50 SCALE OF MILES WALCHEREN PEEL Esseno s ISLAND XXXX MARSUES XXXXX In the interests of clarity, fortifications other than the Maginot Line, have been omitted from this and succeeding maps. ZEELAND Terneuzen Ma Roermong BOCK XXXX SEVENTH GIRAUD Ostendo Dusseldorf Aptyjerp o ALIRT d14 May Nieuport XXXx -XXXX Ghent Dunkirk of Eftet Gravelines shide R BELG. Beregues Calais, XXXX SIXTH REICHENAU -褏写褏褏褏 Cologneo XXXXBrussels Lauyaino BEF Courtra Audenardeo Menin 10 May Yr Ruer Ypreso t Maastricht Watten 6 Boulogne o Aachen xXXX Wavre 13 May PEBENA EMAGL Rier Bonno Escut Rier XXXXX A RUNDSTADT XXXX Hannut Li茅ge Lille eof honschayxx NINTH BLASKOWITZ FIRST Carvin BLANCHARDMaulde XXXX FIRST Gemblouke Bethune Huy Maubeugeo Mamu Charlerol er Reve Douai o 14 May XXXX HOTA FRENCH FOURTH CAVALRY KLUGE Rer Arras 袧芯s芯 Dinante 袗谐谐as xxxx Beaumpn Elarenges o Samb ver - St. Vith Prum THEC SCREEN Marche o Lesse ve Cambraid Philippevilleo Abbeville Doulleng, XXXX EIFEL LaRoche XXXXX O Bapaume XXXX NINTH CORAP Giyeto Rocheforto Sone River XXXX Houffalize I XXXX TWELVE LIST BILLOTTE SECOND Ag脫ENRNHARDT St. Hubert Bastogneo, 褏褏 gLipramont WEICHS Bitburge 袪械谐one Revin Montheune Amiens Vianden XXXX Diekirch Echternach Oise River O Hirson 11 May FOREST St. Quentino -KLEJST KONeufchatea Belgian Group Marle o Mosele Ham Trieg Mezigres Boullage dan3 May Bazeille Caribnan XXXX GUDERIAN Signy L 'Abbayebonebersta XXXX SIXTEENTH 13 Mayl La Fere Arlon HIRD BUSCH CONDE Montcorne FIr Noyon o Saa褎urg o Oise River / Luxembourg LUX, Laon Virtono Longwyo XXXX Stonn茅 Retheles XXXX Montmed SECOND XXXXX Clermonto Bourg OMerzig 16 May Longuyory x2pong" Soissons HUNTZIGER XXXX LEEB XXXXX Vele ver THIRD Saarlautern SIXTH TOUCHON Quren ver Reims Senliso Saarbrucken SUBSCRIBE 3 divisions to Billotte 15 May Dentelce Go Wd Geese Verdun Mef 屑 Chateau Thierry Dormans and I division from Eighth Army en route to Billotte. Epernayb PRETELAT 褏褏 HD JRTH Chalons 9 times Germany surprised us 79,279 views 鈥 Nov 11, 2019 gI 67 1.4K SHARE E+ SAVE Go Wild Geese 1.06K subscribers SUBSCRIBE Rhine Rver Roer Mage her Sint Surely there's no way

Surely there's no way

Save
My terrible school newspaper. It's entirely opinionated and there are no factual articles. They print like 200 of these a month and no one reads them. Most of them just go in the recycling bin.: Vat 2.3 NAMF 307 4 Opinion Opinion November 26, 2019 College Board is November 26, 2019 creativity scam kills School you decide to back out, you can cancel the registration but also for a late fee, which causes you to lose $40. This is highly inconvenient, as many canalready see. Many students are skeptical about AP exams, and understandably want to take exams that they feel confident in scoring a 4 or a 5 on. This is a large sum of "THIS OPENION IS becomes very difficult to bring your grade up. Additionally, if you fail a test or do very poorly, you never re- ally go back and fix those mistakes, you just move on to the next chapter and hope to do better on that one. If you get lucky and do test correc- tions, you may understand how to do the questions on that test, but no one really cares if you have truly understood theconcepts behind them or if you will ever remember how to solve those types of questions later on. The most unfortunate part of this is that we still use grades to measure A LARGE SUM OF MONEY TO BE We all know about College Board, the company overseeing all of our AP exams, SAT Subject Tests, and SAT exams. If you were to search "College Board" on Google, the first thing that would come up is that it is a "non-profit organization", despite the millions of dollars it racks up from test registration fees. This year, College Board also worth, not waste possibly hundreds changed its AP exam registration of dollars on something that would process. In the past, students enrolled in AP courses could pay and register for the May AP exams in the March lege Board is trying profit as much before This would givestudents time to know how they are performing in edgeof deciding whether or not they thosedasses todecidewhetherornot OPINION "UNTIL LEARN- As young children, everyone is born with an innate sense of curiosity and excitement. When I was a little girl, I used to love learning, and I would say truthfully that I loved going to school, because Igot to learn new things every day. Over time, however, I have noticed that slowly, that love and enthusiasm that I had ING BECOMES THE PAYING FOR A SINGLE money to be paying for a single test, so most would wish to get their money's PRIORITY OVER TEST" for learning has faded into monotony, and I have seen the same sort of lead to no positive outcomes. This new policy makes it seem like Col- GRADES, SCHOOL decline in my peers as well. I do not think that the reason for this is merely that we have grown up; I think that it is the school system and the larger educational system that we are in. In school, we are not allowed to take risks or be creative. Every single thing that we do is graded and as- sessed. Especially in English and oc- casionally history classes, where the material is more subjective, the objec- tive of the student is not to think out of the box about different interpreta- tions and perspectives, but instead to somehow predict what their teacher wants to hear. If a student attempts to do anything differently, they are punished with a bad grade which will inevitably affect their average in the class, as well as their overall GPA. Instead ofexploring their more creative sides, students are forced rescored. This gives no insight into how the students performed, or any indication of how they could improve for future examinations. Even with this large fee, students aren't able to see exactly how well they did, only a single number from one to five. It's justonenumber, noteven where com- pared to the four range, for example, their score fell. Given the money that families spend on these exams, more student score analysis should be given. One may also argue that these someone's intelligence. Being smart does not mean that you get good grades, and getting good grades does not mean that you are smart. What does "smart" even mean? as possible, to make students on the make you stupid. The SAT is an exam many students take multiple times in WILL NEVER BE want to take the test to pay earlier. Even when the students get their hopes of getting a satisfactory score they are happy with. This also results in more money being poured into the College Board, still a non-profit organization. SAT registration also has late registration, meaning that you can opt to take the test after the deadline, but for a late registration fee. The regular deadlines are quite early. For the December 14 test date, registrations were due by November 8. However, late registrations span until late November. During this time, students must pay an extra $30 late fee for the test. A $50 test can rise they want to take the exam for college THE MENTALLY credit. From now on, students have AP soores back, there is basically to register in October, months before no extra information on their per- the original registration dates. This formances on the website. Students means that if you have any thoughts and their families would have to pay of taking an exam, you would have extra fees to get their short answer response booklets back, or to get their multiple choice sections simply It just means that one has a talent for completing schoolwork and for answering test questions. What it does not mean that someone with ENRICHING AND that talent is somehow more valuable thansomeone with a talent forsports to pay the $94 fee for every exam you plan to take. If for some reason 66 or music or art or for communicat- ing with others. Having bad grades does not make you a failure, but it LIFE-GIVING INSTI- "COLLEGE BOARD, tests can be used for college credit, 6. so the price is not too bad. However, is the mentality of our education system that makes it seem that way. Leaming is something that should be fun, but school makes it a chore. TUTION THAT IT most colleges are not very accept- ing of AP credits, resulting in many of them being somewhat useless. The SAT's are also a big deal for EVEN WHILE CLAIMING OUGHT TO BE." Firstly, there are so many classes that everyone is forced to take in order to graduate. After slogging through the work in all of your classes, you to an $80 one quite quickly. These fees are negatively impactful on families, who may not have the luxury to pay for these exams so often. Fee waiver TO BE 'NON-PROFIT鈥 highschool students, since the major- ity of students, if not almost all, take the SAT exam at least once for their to simply memorize the way things should be done in accordance to that teacher's preferences in order to get good grades. Even supposedly "open-ended" assignments are never really so; there is still a "right" and "wrong" way to do them, and if you donot fit the unwritten requirements, you will not do well, and of course there is an increasing pressure to do well as time goes on to get into are available, but many families aren't eligible, but also can't be too comfortable paying for these exams. College Board, even while claim- ing to be "non-profit", receives millions of dollars each year in have a tiny window of time to focus am doing all of these things because someone told me thatit would be im- portant for my future and useful for college and my career. I don't know if that is true, but I do know that it is making me miserable now. How often do high school students look at an assignmentand feel excited about learning whatever it has to offer? I cannot recall the last time I have felt that way in the last five or so years. Until learning becomes the priority over grades, school will never be the mentally enriching and life- giving institution that it ought to be. for the workings of life in APbiology, we look for a 5 on the AP exam and better grades than the people sitting around us. We do not seek to better on one or two subjects that you are actually passionate about. By the time you get to them, you have neither the motivation nor the energy to dedicate yourself to actually learning about them, and you have to waste an exor- bitant amount of time on something that you have no interest in and that will never helpyou later in life. Ontop of that, there are unrealistic expecta- college applications. The SAT is also administered by the College Board, and costs about $50 with no essay, RECEIVES MILLIONS OF which costs anadditional $15. It is not ourselves as human beings through volunteering, welook for a mumber of hours to send to colleges to somehow validate ourselves as having good character to people who have never met us before. Very rarely is this the fault of teachers or of their students; DOLLARS EACH YEAR' a measure of intelligence in any way, getting a high sat score doesn't make you smart nor does getting a bad one overpriced test prices and does not provide maximum service. a prestigious university or to get scholarships, among other things. We are often told that we learn EDITORIAL POLICIES tions of a "well-rounded student" for college resumes. To look good for itis merely the result of a system that colleges, you have to take rigorous values competition over education. courses, play a sport, have hundreds of volunteer hours, high SAT scores, and participate in extracurricular activities. Among all of these crazy keep swimming even schedules and the intense competi- though every day the tion that comes with it, students forget to value the actual lessons higher and higher. It behind these activities. We do not doesn't feel like there is il for onthusiasm and excitement apoint, itjust feels likeI Letters to the editor are welcome from all members of the school community, and can be delivered to Warrior staff or sent via email to: thewarrioropinion@gmail.com. The War- rior reserves the right to edit letters for grammar, length, by failing and trying again until we eventually succeed. We hear stories of people like Thomas Edison, who failed 1,000 times attempting to cre- ate the lightbulb, and we glorify the idea of succeeding after failure, as we should, since failure is an excel- lent learning opportunity. However, students in our school system are not niuon the chance to fail. If you start off School no longer feels like an ad- venture; it feels like a losing battle, where you have to and content. Signed opinion articles express the opinions of their cre- ators. Unsigned editorials represent the consensus of the paper's editorial board, consisting of the Opinion section and the Editor-in-Chief. AL Da water keeps getting WILLI SC the My terrible school newspaper. It's entirely opinionated and there are no factual articles. They print like 200 of these a month and no one reads them. Most of them just go in the recycling bin.

My terrible school newspaper. It's entirely opinionated and there are no factual articles. They print like 200 of these a month and no on...

Save
Let me drop a truth sandwich: 23 mins 路 People say MLMS don't work. They say they don't like them. They say they don't want any part of them, because they aren't for them. They blame the lack of growth on other people. I, too, felt this way. Let me drop a truth sandwich... These people aren't working so hard, or doing the things they should be in order to become successful. That aren't attempting to learn what would help them to grow their business to fit the size of their dreams. Would you go every day to your current job without learning current techniques and continuing your education? If you're a stay-at-home-mom, would you constantly try and just "figure it out" without asking the advice of seasoned mothers or experts who have the experience and tools that it takes to help you better yourself?? When you join an MLM, you have to allow yourself to be afraid of failure. Not succeeding. Challenging yourself. #failforward I decided recently to give MLM a shot, and to get involved with the most experienced team of go-getters in the business. These women know what it takes to elevate their careers financially and personally. If you have a vision, THEY can help you achieve it. TRUST ME... I have never been more confident in myself that I, too, can be a Boss Babe. If there is one thing that I have learned in the past 6 weeks, it's that having the power of knowledge and skill is almost as powerful as better health itself. Tonight one of the fastest growing leaders on my team will be sharing how she earned a car and $12k in 33 days. Not because of beginner's luck, but because she led with her heart and followed our simple system. If you want to hear from the link. As always our trainings are open to anyone. rreach out and I'll send you Boss up, ladies. I'm pulling for you is making waves and sometimes that's hard to imma give you a . Keep it up girl. They are taking notes on you love. handle. Let me drop a truth sandwich

Let me drop a truth sandwich

Save
I revised this using the feedback I got. Is there anything else I should work on?: JFK uses examples of different groups in America giving sacrifices for the good of the country to persuade his audience to lower steel prices. JFK speaks about union members holding wage requests and servicemen dying in Vietnam during a time when "restraint and sacrifice are being asked of every citizen." Hearing this would make the steel owners feel guilt. Union members who should be demanding higher wages don't because they realize the harsh situation the U.S. is going through. Servicemen who are risking their lives for America are aware that losing may mean that the difficult time the U.S. is going through could worsen, so they are giving it their all in order to achieve victory. These groups know that their patience will benefit not only the country, but themselves as well. When the U.S. returns to being a safe and prosperous country, the Union members will be able to join in that prosperity since their wages would go up because the economy would be secure again. The service men would be able to return home and would be financially supported by the government as they transition from life on the battlefield. The steel owners, however, would now believe that they aren't fulfilling the request to sacrifice Kennedy made since instead of sacrificing and potential profit they are instead aiming to raise prices while also negatively impacting the economy and, thus, preventing America from succeeding. Knowing this would motivate them to decrease their prices to help the country return to prosperity. Nobody wants to be the one that holds back the team They want to contribute to the success of the whole because that means that they would be praised as the ones who are responsible for victory. The government would look at them as an honorable company that deserves funding in return for their sacrifices for the countries cause I revised this using the feedback I got. Is there anything else I should work on?

I revised this using the feedback I got. Is there anything else I should work on?

Save
Could someone read over this rhetorical analysis body paragraph and grade it 1-4 and what say what I should improve on?: JFK uses examples of different groups in America giving sacrifices for the good of the country to persuade his audience to lower steel prices. JFK speaks about union members holding wage requests during a time when restraint and sacrifice are being asked of every citizen." Hearing this would make the steel owners feel guilt. Union members who should be demanding higher wages don't because they realize the harsh situation the U.Ss is going through, and that their patience will benefit not only the country but themselves as well since when the U.S. returns to being a safe and prosperous country, the Union members will be able to join in that prosperity since their wages would go up because the economy would be secure again. The steel owners, however, would now believe that they aren't fulfilling the request to sacrifice Kennedy made since instead of sacrificing and potential profit they are instead aiming to raise prices while also negatively impacting the economy and, thus, preventing America from succeeding. Knowing this would motivate them to decrease their prices to help the country return to prosperity. Therefore, JFK would achieve his purpose in convincing his audience to decrease prices Could someone read over this rhetorical analysis body paragraph and grade it 1-4 and what say what I should improve on?

Could someone read over this rhetorical analysis body paragraph and grade it 1-4 and what say what I should improve on?

Save
Troubled redditor pens a long essay on whether the "Western nations" have the "moral obligation" of invading China in order to "stop genocide": 74 points 13 hours ago Edit see my self reply below for explanation of why this comment examines what it does while ignoring other important areas of this broad and complex problem. I think this should also make us more sympathetic to the enormity of the choices we casually foisted on our ancestors, and made them responsible for. (And I am not here diminishing the magnitude of past genocides; on the contrary, I mean to emphasize them.) With this data, the only moral choice directly available to stop this is war: invasion of China by other powers, and imposition of martial law to the extent that victims of these policies are freed and their unjust suffering given reparation (insofar as this sort of thing is even possible much about suffering cannot be undone, and certainly you cannot pay for the dead in a way that makes up for their loss to the living) Because that is what we mean by "responsible", right? That our ancestors stood by as the Holocaust or some other genocide unfolded, and allowed it to continue. Certainly there are other ways of bringing pressure against nation- states, but there is little hope of gaining the sort of international unity that could make this effective against a state with an economy as diversified as China's. Only war is credible here, because other countries would suffer incredible deprivation by opposing China, and worry about the unequal competition with other nations that choose to continue reading with China. (Sanctions work to a degree against Russia, but people should understand that this is because of its much less diversified economy hitting on just one or two coordinated fronts is very effective, and Russia does not have reliable capital (money/asset) protection, making asset seizing/freezing in finance hubs like London and the U.S. effective. Additionally, their "best" goods, such as natural gas, can be gotten from elsewhere, albeit not as cheaply, giving huge importers of those resources like Germany enormous leverage not buying starts a price spiral that hurts Russia far more than Germany China, on the other hand, is a linchpin of the global economy, and in many areas is essentially the sole provider of many rare raw materials, like rare earth magnets used in electronics, as well as many manifactured goods. Its economy is also roughly self-sufficient it can technically feed itself and outfit armies start to finish in a pinch, even if that's far from ideal economically. As a result, and in addition to its unique and historically unprecedented role in the global economy (no nation has ever worn this many hats in this particular way) most economic options for political pressure actually hurt everyone else much more than China, which completely changes the calculus. That in turn makes those economic options for diplomacy largely ineffective even if you can get countries on-board, which you basically can't. Ever wonder why we hear about strict sanctions on small or isolated countries like Cuba/North Korea, or global powers like Russia, but not really China? That's why. Not very effective, hurts everyone else more, and too many countries fear not having access to the Chinese economy/competing against other countries that are happy to continue importing inexpensive Chinese goods. This is one reason why China insists on domestic companies only at the helm of its economy, and/or forces technology transfers and domestic partnerships on any Western company entering its market, and probably the most important one. Many centuries of subjugation by Western powers through economic warfare has hardened its resolve to not be vulnerable to this problem ever again. So this circumstance is not coincidental in the least, and it limits what political levers other nations can apply to China without war. Paradoxically, this increases instability in a way, from a global perspective because it means conflict resolution short of war is very difficult to force China to the table on, as we have frequently seen when China ignores international treaties with impunity.) But an actual war, a real war, a war that would not stop until these oppressed peoples were free would lead to unimaginable suffering on a global scale. The refugees alone would overwhelm the stability of East Asia/Central Europe Millions at least would die directly in war, even if China did not ultimately result to nuclear weapons, or other weapons of mass destruction. They are a great power on the way to becoming a global superpower the world has not seen a conflict like that since WW2, even if only the U.S. and China fought (and certainly other nations would be drawn in, including at minimum former superpower Russia, and North Korea, where Chinese divisions decimated American forces during the Korean War at troop strength rations of 12 divisions or more to each American division) The world has never seen the central nations of a globally interconnected world economy at war. The amount of knock on suffering caused by that economic turmoil is probably incalculable. The Great Recession in 2012 would look tiny in comparison. (The limited trade war initiated by President Trump is already having global impacts on the economy, and that is simply tariff trading, not complete disconnection and war.) And if I focus on the U.S. here, it's primarily for two reasons: One, because it is the superpower that made human rights a matter of politics, after the Holocaust. Before its global hegemony, and the catastrophe that brought it to the head of that hegemony, what a nation did to its people was considered its own business. This is to both its glory and its shame: a rare international and historical triumph of morality to be responsible for, and a magnification of the shame of its own human rights abuses, and its intermittent strategic befriending of those who have committed them already. (For example, how many people know that it is the U.S. that forced Britain to divest its empire, and allow the independent self-determination of its subjugated peoples? This was a direct requirement imposed by the United States if Britain wanted to be included at the treaty after the end of WW2. The U.S. also directly and successfully opposed Anglo-Soviet plans for carving up other countries as spoils of war, notwithstanding the annexations the Soviet Union began before the treaty was even concluded and continued in the immediate aftermath. Consider also things like the Alien Torts act, a statute that underwent a legal revival in the modern era, in which U.S. courts allowed foreigners to bring suits against other foreigners for crimes against humanity committed in foreign countries a more substantial threat to dictators than it might seem, due to the U.S.'s role as a global finance and capital hub, which meant assets of dictators or other person's could be frozen or seized by court order, and travel to the U.S. impossible in practice.) People focus on the hypocrisy of the U.S. here, but honestly, it is not the hypocrisy that is remarkable at all. We would expect nations to do nasty things in their own interest, and they usually do. It is a little remarked on miracle that the U.S. is directly responsible for human rights being seen as legitimate political objective at all; it was and is a completely unprecedented occurrence in human history. The second reason is that it is only the U.S. that would have a credible chance of invading China and succeeding and odds are quite good that even this "credible chance" would end in failure, as force projection for a smalll amount of time anywhere in the world (the specialty of the U.S., and its expertise by far) is much different than total war predicated on supply chains thousands of miles long. (Where this is occurring in China is possibly one of the the worst places for it to occur, too, in terms of this military difficulty.) Even a multinational force of smaller nations with modern militaries would pose no credible threat of total war on China; such is the state of her military power already at this early date in her rise. Even a truly global coalition (i.e. not a nominally global but practically unilateral coalition like the one that invaded Iraq in 2003), has a moderate chance of failure- China's geography in particular disfavors any inland invasion coming from the sea. Without the U.S., any such effort is likely doomed to failure. So the problem is especially acute: the sole actor that can add the value needed to make the conflict worthwhile has a lonely spotlight to sit under. Only it can credibly act, and hence it alone must also carry the shame of inaction, if chosen. With great power comes great responsibility, as Uncle Ben noted.. How terrible are the options we are left with. To let the innocent suffer and be effectively silent (what good does awareness without change do?), or to wage war and cause equal or worse suffering, but arguably as moral victors. As someone who fought in a war much more limited and low intensity than this, I cannot express just how much misery war results in. It is never an option to be chosen lightly. There are literally no winners in war other than armament industries and nation-statess moneyed interests and abstractions, and maybe in very rare cases, future generations. Every actual person involved loses, even as the victors. I don't even know whether to be disappointed in us all. I am sure no war will come, but is this a good thing or a bad thing? Are we too standing by during the Holocaust? Such an ugly and dispiriting circumstance. I feel like it gives me more sympathy for the onlookers who, still scarred by wW1, and even threatened themselves, were still too skittish for war. And of course even more sympathy for the victims of that genocide, and that war, and their modern day counterparts. My heart cries out for these people. They live between what is, for other nations, the frying pan and the fire. permalink embed unsave parent report give award reply - 23 points 12 hours ago Minor note as reply to myself (other comment already at character limit): I am not ignoring the evidence of China's internal struggle over this, a struggle that may (we can only hope) eventually result in the freedom of these people being persecuted for practicing their religion peacefully. Rather, I am focusing on one aspect of the issue: the position of Western, non-China nations in this equation, as well as their available options for resolution This is certainly a much broader issue than that, and China's internal politics, as well as the victims themselves, are more important and central than what I chose to examine here. The reason for my narrow focus was simply this: thinking about what we, as people of Western nations, can actually and directly do (as opposed to any options that rely on China deciding on her own agency to stop), if we agree that responsibility falls on our shoulders when known genocide is met with inaction, as is mentioned in the submission statement For a number of reasons, some of which I gave here, I am fairly sure that war is the only directly efficacious means of ensuring that aim China may or may not change her internal policy, but if she does, it won't be because of Western economic or political pressure. Hence, if it is true we are morally responsible for inaction during genocide, it seems that in this case it would mean a moral obligation to go to war: an option with its own extremes of suffering, and nearly guaranteed to be a calamity of global scope. Which is not very different at all from WW2, as it was then: the war that eventually did occur was in fact a global calamity, and hence the choice that we fault our ancestors for not going to war over human rights is very similar to what we exp to see the war that would have resulted, for other reasons. And hence the now, except we opportunity to see just how much suffering a choice to make war over genocide would have created, if our ancestors had actually acted. This extremely unappetizing choice, between "moral" war and immoral inaction, is what prompted my comment permalink embed save parent report give award reply Troubled redditor pens a long essay on whether the "Western nations" have the "moral obligation" of invading China in order to "stop genocide"

Troubled redditor pens a long essay on whether the "Western nations" have the "moral obligation" of invading China in order to "stop geno...

Save