Why Is Not Student Loan Forgiveness - 1161 Words

Student loan forgiveness remains such a vital topic to many individuals because the exorbitant costs of post-secondary education require a majority of students to take on debt in order to simply improve themselves and advance intellectually. Thousands of students are graduating college every year, each with several thousands of dollars in debt. This area is important to research because it will provide insight into the futures of all college students immersed in the deep debt that appears to consistently accompany a quality education. Finances are important to many college students, especially when it is hard to receive scholarships to cover schooling expenses. When going through college, students stress about the amount of debt that they acquire throughout their post-secondary schooling and learning about the potential to have these debts forgiven is monumental. In order to be able to afford the future, it is important to understand the amount of loan debt and the possibility for debt forgiveness to be able to proceed through life. This essay seeks to address the question of whether or not student loan forgiveness is currently adequate for assisting graduates in need of financial assistance. The subject of student loan forgiveness tends to warrant strong opinions from many about whether or not they should occur. In many circumstances, student loans should be forgiven, or at least partially forgiven, and the process to do so should be heavily revised in order to make thisShow MoreRelatedStudent Debt Is Tough And Federal Loan865 Words   |  4 PagesThe qualifications for the program are tough and federal loan forgiveness only applies to federal Direct Loans, not private student loans. If the graduate is lucky enough to land a public service job the graduate must realize that there is no guarantee that the employment will still be around in t en years since no one truly knows how the program will work or if it will work at all. Val Meyers, associate director for the Office of Financial Aid at Michigan State University comments are recorded inRead MoreIs Forgiving Student Loan Debt A Good Idea?972 Words   |  4 PagesAnalysis of Is Forgiving Student Loan Debt a Good Idea Many people would love to have their student loans debt forgive but do not believe it will happen. So Kayla Webley decided to write an article about student loan forgiveness, at the time Webley wrote the article she was the education correspondent for Time magazine. Now she is currently a staff writer for the same magazine. In her article, she claims that the student loan dilemma that is facing a lot of Americans is a problem for your countryRead MoreForgiving Student Loan Debt Essay examples822 Words   |  4 Pagesamount of student loan debt have an effect on the economy? If so would forgiving student loan debt help lower the national debt or would it just increase it? According to Mary Claire Fischer, a writer for Kiplinger’s Personal Finance magazine, â€Å"two-thirds of students who receive bachelor’s degrees leave college with debt in tow† (Fischer). Among these students, the average amount owed is twenty-six thousand dollars (Fischer). There is a six month grace period after graduation to allow the student timeRead MoreEssay on Student Loan Debt Should be Forgiven1256 Words   |  6 PagesDoes the amount of student loan debt have an effect on the economy? If so would forgiving student loan debt help lower the national debt or would it just increase it? According to Mary Claire Fischer, a writer for Kiplinger’s Personal Finance magazine, â€Å"two-thirds of students who receive bachelor’s degrees leave college with an average debt of twenty-six thousand dollars† (Fischer). This means that the average student debt has doubled since 2007 (Ross 24). The total student loan debt is $1.2 trillionRead MoreTypes Of Financial Aid : Grants, Loans, And Work Study Jobs Essay986 Words   |  4 PagesThree types of financial aid are grants, loans, and work-study jobs. Grants are often called â€Å"gift aid† because they are free money—financial aid that doesn’t have to be repaid. Grants are often ne ed-based, while scholarships are usually merit-based.Grants and scholarships can come from the federal government, your state government, your college or career school, or a private or nonprofit organization. Do your research, apply for any grants or scholarships you might be eligible for, and be sure toRead MoreEssay On Student Loans768 Words   |  4 PagesEducation in recent times has embraced a new system regarding student loans, bringing on board a customer-friendly policy. According to this new scheme, students will now have access to loans with easier and less complex repayment terms. This development will help them fast-track the repayment of their debts without hassles. The Department of Education also integrated an income-based repayment plan: a flexible approach geared at facilitating student finance in their most dire hour of need. Sadly, despiteRead MoreStudent Loan Loans Should Not Be Forgiven938 Words   |  4 Pages Should student loan borrowers be forgiven for their debt? The cumulative total of student loan borrowing has already reached $1 trillion dollars already make up more than half of what Barack Obama is pushing to cap the amount any borrower must pay back and forgive outstanding debt after 20 years, even so calling to forgive some or all of the debt that is escalating. Robert Applebaum, the Author behind the Student Loan Forgiveness Act, believes that student loan should be forgiven to highlight anRead MoreStudent Loan Is The Most Powerful Weapon1302 Words   |  6 Pagespowerful, conventional weapons break down, fail, and can be taken while knowledge cannot be. Sadly student loan debts are increasing at an alarming rate. The days of working all summer or part-time throughout the school year in order to pay tuition are long gone and private student loans are the only viable answer for many students aspiring for a professional career. I believe that student loan forgiveness is an issue of the utmost importance in regards to making education more accessible and affordableRead MoreStudent Loans : The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly899 Words   |  4 Pages Running Head: STUDENT LOANS: THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY. Brown-Gorham 1 Student Loans: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly Da-Mosi Brown-Gorham English 101-23 Western Carolina University Running Head: STUDENT LOANS: THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY. Brown-Gorham 2 Most people are aware that federal student loans are a type of financial aid that must be repaid to the federal government, unlike grants or scholarships. Federal student loans are administered by the United States Government by way ofRead MoreStudent Loan Is A Terrible Idea1308 Words   |  6 PagesStudent loan forgiveness is a terrible idea. Sure, in an idealistic world it would be great if the country could forgive all student loan debt and thus bring relief to all students across the nation. Realistic? Not necessarily! Instead of the fairytale notion of student loan forgiveness being the answer to all the problems, America would fair better in taking the initiative in making reforms to the educational loan system that are a bit more realistic. Student loans are a massive predicament in the

Michelangelo Merisi (Caravaggio) Essay - 1707 Words

There are many Renaissance artists who had a large impact on what was then the future of art. Each of these artists had some-what interesting lives. Although many artists of the Renaissance time had interesting lives, Michelangelo Merisi, who was called Caravaggio, had the most interesting and turbulent life. Caravaggio, was born in Milan in during the late summer or early autumn of 1571. His parents, Fermo Merisi, and Lucia Aratori, had been married on January 14 of that same year. He was the first of their four children. For several generations the Mersi family had lived in the small town of Caravaggio. Caravaggio probably adapted the town name as his own when he left for Rome(Friedlaender 34 – 38).†¦show more content†¦The most reliable of his seventeenth century biographers, Giovanni Petro Bellori, alleges that some criminal difficulty forced him to flee the city, yet nothing is said of that in the Milan police records. When Caravaggio completed his apprenticeship in 1588, he was seventeen years old. Reports say that Caravaggio was seen in the town of Milan multiple times between 1589-1592, but the town was too small to provide a bright young artist any support or much interest. So it is likely that he traveled to places like Lombardy and Veneto, even maybe as far as Venice, picking up whatever jobs and commission he could acquire(Friedlaender 57). When his mother died in 1590 Caravaggio was given a large settlement from his parents estate. He used that money to comfortably support him for a year or two. This money could have lasted him longer but he seemed to squander it somewhat quickly. It has been said that he was already a turbulent extravagant man and that is why he went through his inheritance so rapidly(Langdon 28-29). He probably then set off for Rome. No attempt has ever been made to trace his route. His personal possessions could have fit in a nap sack or wallet, but what he possessed in his mind was endless. As an apprentice in Milan he not only learned the basics but also a skill for portraiture and still life(Friedlander 57-58) Caravaggio probably arrived inShow MoreRelatedCaravaggio And Religion Of Michelangelo Merisi Caravaggio1860 Words   |  8 PagesTrevor Ferguson Semester Paper Art App.1020WI Caravaggio and Religion Michelangelo Merisi Caravaggio was an esteemed Italian baroque artist whom, through his art, established various human connections to religion and his art by humanizing the holy scenes that he would depict. Caravaggio was born in 1571 in Milan where he trained as a painter before relocating to Rome. Over the years, Caravaggio had mastered his skills as an artist, using techniques such as tenebrism and chiaroscuro to become oneRead MoreA Controversial Painter of Post-Renaissance, Michelangelo Merisi de Caravaggio540 Words   |  2 PagesMichelangelo Merisi de Caravaggio (1571-1610) is heralded as the last, and the most controversial painter of the Italian post-Renaissance. In an age when the papacy itself was self-indulgent, corrupt and immoral, Caravaggios sexual ambivalence, his propensity for violence and his scorn for the law made him the enfant terrible of the Italian aristocracy. Qualities that only succeeded in furthering Caravaggio’s notoriety and success. Caravaggios endeavors into art began In 1584 when he was apprenticedRead MoreArt Appreciation Unit 4 Ip Essay1084 Words   |  5 Pagesthrough the postmodern era. 1). Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio; 2) Rembrandt van Rijn; and 3) Peter Paul Rubens, these three artists were known for their religious theme in their art work. The naturalism that was visibly demonstrated in each of the artist work with high contrast of lighting that noticeably appeared in these paintings. Each artist was well known and respected for their work. The three artists Works of Art that I have chosen are: Michelangelo Caravaggio: The Calling of St. MatthewRead MoreComparing Art And The Baroque Eras989 Words   |  4 Pageswill be described by the characteristics, styles and the influences of each; Renaissance and Baroque works of art. Famous artist from the Renaissance era were Leonard da Vinci and Michelangelo Buonarroti. Famous artist from the Baroque era were Rembrandt Harmenszoon van Rijn and Michelangelo Merisi o Amerighi da Caravaggio. The Renaissance History The Renaissance era began in Italy, spread to the rest of Europe and lasted from the 14th to the 17th century. It was defined as a period of cultural historyRead MoreCaravaggio Essay1786 Words   |  8 PagesThe Controversial Caravaggio The Italian Renaissance, which occurred between the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries, was a period of dramatic cultural change where tremendous achievements were made in literature, architecture and art. Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, born in Milan, Italy on September 28, 1571, was a Renaissance artist. He is remembered for his revolutionary yet controversial art which was often deeply rooted in religion. Caravaggio painted during the Counter-Reformation whenRead MoreMartha and Mary Magdalene by Caravaggio884 Words   |  4 Pagesto understanding a work of art then just looking at it. In order to understand a piece, you have to understand the Artist, the time period, and the symbols in that painting that may have very different meaning today. Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio better known as simply Caravaggio was an Italian Baroque master painter born in Italy around 1571. After he apprenticed with a painter in Milan, he moved to Rome, where he lived for most of his life. His work influenced painters around Europe. He’s mostRead MoreAnalysis Of The Denial Of St Peter1134 Words   |  5 Pages The Denial of St. Peter Michelangelo Merisi de Caravaggio’s The Denial of St. Peter depicts the accusal of Peter for being a disciple of Jesus. Painted in 1610 on oil on canvas as was the emerging medium of paintings during the Italian Renaissance. It is on display at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in the Caravaggio and Southern Italy room in the European paintings department. Caravaggio’s piece is relatively medium sized and place directly at eye-level. In this painting, he is being accusedRead MoreThe Era Of The Renaissance1693 Words   |  7 PagesItaly can be looked at as the home of the renaissance and consequently the immergence of great art. Artists such as Michelangelo, Botticelli, Da Vinci, and Raphael are some of the greats and are looked at for standards. But what about the artists whose lives are mysteries, and their works that were influenced by the greats? These artists hold just as much importance in the history of art as do the artist’s whose names can be recalled off the top of an average person’s head. During the sixteenth centuryRead MoreA Personal Statement about the Things I Have Learned in This Course1366 Words   |  6 PagesThe issues, ideas, concepts, and facts I learned in this course have stimulated my imagination and ability to think critically. I have been intrigued most by learning about art through history, from Caravaggio to Munch. The topic that confused and bothered me the most was re lated to the American Civil War, which illuminates the dark side of the countrys history. Because of my future ambitions, I believe that our understanding of why Hollywood became the center of the movie industry over other citiesRead MoreGenre Analysis: The Baroque and Rococo Periods Essay1556 Words   |  7 Pagesworks illustrate the evolvement of a certain genre in Western painting from Renaissance through the modern era. This transformation exemplifies how a similar subject matter can be represented in an entirely new and innovative way. Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio painted the genre scene painting entitled The Musicians during the Italian Baroque period in 1595. The painting depicts four boys in Classical costume. The figures are clearly delineated, and the contours are particularly reminiscent

What made peace hard in the Arab-Israeli conflict Free Essays

string(70) " the prospect of peace after nearly 40 years of constant negotiating\." The peace treaty between Israel and Palestine was signed by the two presidents, Yitzhak Rabin (Israeli president) and Yasser Arafat (Palestinian president) in 1993. The peace treaty didn’t last for very long because the two countries as a whole didn’t like the peace treaty because lots of different groups didn’t agree with it. When the Israelis were given land in Palestine by the US, They were outraged. We will write a custom essay sample on What made peace hard in the Arab-Israeli conflict or any similar topic only for you Order Now They had owned it for almost the last 2000 years. The Palestinians didn’t see why they had to give up their land to the Israelis. What made it worse was the fact that the Israelis took over Jerusalem (sacred place to both Israelis and Palestinians) during the war in 1967. The Israeli Jews wanted Jerusalem because that is where the Wailing Wall is (the last standing wall of their ancient mosque). The Palestinian Muslims wanted Jerusalem because they believe that their prophet Mohammed descended to heaven there. The fact that both sides wanted Jerusalem made peace difficult because they wanted a place that is holy to both of them, and were willing to fight for it. During the wars, seven hundred thousand Palestinians were forced out of the country by the Israelis. They had to become refugees and they had really poor living conditions because most of them lived in makeshift huts and tents. Also, they had poor water supply and a lack of food. They were living in poverty, and this made the situation even worse because they all hated the Israelis even more because they had driven them out and made them live like this. This made peace more difficult because the Palestinians have no quality of life and they hate the Israelis even more. When reporters from Britain and America went to the refugees over there to get some news, they found out that their life was awful for them and then Britain and America started feeling sorry for them. The PLO thought because the fact Britain and America were feeling sorry for them, that they should stop using terrorism. The HAMAS however, didn’t stop using terrorism. This made peace more difficult because there was still terrorism and people dying from this. HAMAS are a Palestinian group who do not accept the state of Israel. They are terrorist organisations who use suicide bombings to try to get what they want, which is to destroy Israel and establish an Islamic state of Palestine. They are worse than the PLO ever were. They think terrorism is the answer because if they use terrorism they will be able to scare the Israelis so much they will eventually surrender. HAMAS challenged the PLO and Arafat for support so they would be able to get bombs and weapons. The Israelis didn’t like HAMAS because they were terrorizing their citizens and they were killing lots of people. This made peace more likely because if the Israelis didn’t like what HAMAS were doing, they would try to make peace to make HAMAS stop. Israel is a small country of less than 5 million people but there are still many different views on how the country should be run. The Labour party is one of the two most powerful parties in Israeli politics. They believe that peace is an important for the wellbeing of their country. The other one is the Likud party. The Likud believe that there should be no Palestinian state and if the Palestinians do something to them they will hit back even harder. Likud won every election in Israel since 1977 up to 1992 which is when the Labour party won. This helped make peace possible because the politicians in the labour party were willing to sign a peace treaty with Yasser Arafat of the PLO. Israel however still had their super power, the USA. When USA heard that Russia had collapsed at the end of the cold war, they didn’t support Israel so strongly because there was no Russia to compete with because they were not helping Palestine anymore. When Russia collapsed, the Arab countries had no support. This was because Russia (USSR) and they had no money from them or weapons. Because of this, other countries felt more sympathetic towards them. Because lots of the Arab countries were looking to the US for money and weapons now, the US had more influence over them. This made peace easier because if the US had more influence over them then they could make them make peace. The gulf war was the war between Iraq and the UN when Saddam Hussein tried to take over Kuwait. The USA went over to Kuwait and stopped him from invading. Lots of Arab countries supported the USA when they were trying to stop Saddam Hussein. Then the Arab countries asked USA why they were on Israel’s side because they did the same as Saddam Hussein in taking over land that was not theirs. The Arabs thought this was very hypocritical of them because they weren’t stopping the Israelis from something that Saddam Hussein had done. Bush (USA president) wanted to keep the Saudi Arabia and Egypt on his side so the other countries would be more sympathetic towards the Palestinians. This made the peace treaty more likely because then the Palestinians would be more willing to make peace because this put pressure on the Israelis to make peace. The members of Likud believe that the entire country of Israel should be theirs, and there should be no form of division of it for the Palestinians. They are not willing to make peace and share their land with the Palestinians at all. The Labour party thought that Jerusalem should still belong to the Jews, but they still thought they should give some land back to the Palestinians in return for peace. When Arafat and the PLO heard of this proposition, they accepted this resolution, and they had high hopes at the prospect of peace after nearly 40 years of constant negotiating. You read "What made peace hard in the Arab-Israeli conflict" in category "Papers" The PLO gave up using terrorism and their plan of trying to drive the Israelis into the sea because they now knew it wouldn’t work. This made peace more possible because they were no longer killing people unnecessarily. Another reason why this made peace more possible was because no one would have sat down at a table if Yasser Arafat was there, because he was the leader of the PLO, which was the terrorist group. Another reason why peace was more possible was because reporters went over to where the refugees lived and found out how they had to live. They found they lived in horrible makeshift tents and they had little food and little water. They realised that people had been born and had died as refugees and had no quality of life. The PLO realised that using terrorism wasn’t getting them anywhere and they needed to stop to be able to get peace. Palestinian civilians aged around fourteen in the Israeli streets started to rebel against the Israeli soldiers by throwing stones at the tanks. The soldiers became irritated and started to shoot them. People were outraged on both the Palestinian and the Israeli sides. These were just kids they were shooting and they weren’t doing any harm by throwing stones at the tanks. This made peace more likely because the people on the Palestinian side were angry that the Israeli soldiers were just shooting their children dead, and they wanted it to stop. This would have made them want to sign the peace treaty. People started to feel sorry for the Palestinians and not blame them for the fact that peace was not possible. When the PLO stopped using terrorism, peace was more possible because they were not trying to kill people to try and get what they wanted. However, HAMAS had not stopped using terrorism and were using suicide bombers and promising people would go to paradise if they died for their country and their religion. Arafat (leader of the PLO) was losing popularity to them and people started listening to HAMAS instead of Yasser Arafat. This made peace more likely because Yasser Arafat needed some sort of victory against HAMAS, so he signed the peace treaty. In 1993, when the two countries of Israel and Palestine signed a peace treaty, Clinton was there as the peacemaker. He wanted to be seen like this because it made him look good to everyone else and also may have helped him win a next election because he has done something really good. One of the reasons Yasser Arafat agreed to the peace treaty was because he needed some sort of success against HAMAS. He wanted to have some more popularity again amongst his people so they would listen to him and not HAMAS. Yitzhak Rabin wanted to make peace because his country was facing economic problems and the government was spending far too much on the army and weapons. Also Yitzhak Rabin wanted peace because the Intifada was making Israel look bad because of their occupation and control of Palestinian territories. The first Intifada ended when Israel granted limited autonomy to the Palestine national authority in the 1993 peace agreement. Lots of things were really necessary to change on both sides for peace between Israel and Palestine. There were lots of things each side did that the other hated. Lots of things did change and made peace possible. First of all, one thing that changed was the new winner of the general Israeli elections in 1992. The Labour party won the next election which made Yitzhak Rabin the president. The labour party were in favour of making peace with Palestine, unlike the Likud who had been in power since 1977. The Likud who were against making peace in Israel were not in power any more so they could not stop the peace treaty. Because the labour party was in control, lots of other people in Israel thought that the peace treaty was a good idea. This was a really important thing to happen because if the Labour party had not been elected there was not going to be any chance of Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat signing a peace treaty. Also in Palestine lots of things changed. The PLO stopped terrorism because people found out how the refugees were living, which made peace possible because they weren’t killing loads of the opposite side. This was quite an important reason because if the PLO hadn’t given up terrorism, no one would have sat down at a table with Yasser Arafat and tried to make peace if he was the leader of a terrorist group. Also the fact that HAMAS were becoming more popular in Palestine made Yasser Arafat want to do something good so he would be more popular again, and people would listen to him and not to HAMAS. This was not as much an important reason as the other reasons because Yasser Arafat would have wanted peace anyway, no matter whether HAMAS was going to carry on with terrorism. Also this was not as important because HAMAS didn’t originally sign the peace treaty, so they were not really part of the agreement. They only made peace more difficult after the treaty had been signed. Overall both the Israelis and the Palestinians had something in their society that changed to make the peace treaty work. Some things still didn’t work out though because although the PLO stopped terrorism, HAMAS still used it. Also, even though the labour party won in 1992, the Likud party won the next election. The Likud were not in favour of peace so this did not work out because the Likud spent vast amounts money on the army again. How to cite What made peace hard in the Arab-Israeli conflict, Papers

What made peace hard in the Arab-Israeli conflict Free Essays

string(70) " the prospect of peace after nearly 40 years of constant negotiating\." The peace treaty between Israel and Palestine was signed by the two presidents, Yitzhak Rabin (Israeli president) and Yasser Arafat (Palestinian president) in 1993. The peace treaty didn’t last for very long because the two countries as a whole didn’t like the peace treaty because lots of different groups didn’t agree with it. When the Israelis were given land in Palestine by the US, They were outraged. We will write a custom essay sample on What made peace hard in the Arab-Israeli conflict or any similar topic only for you Order Now They had owned it for almost the last 2000 years. The Palestinians didn’t see why they had to give up their land to the Israelis. What made it worse was the fact that the Israelis took over Jerusalem (sacred place to both Israelis and Palestinians) during the war in 1967. The Israeli Jews wanted Jerusalem because that is where the Wailing Wall is (the last standing wall of their ancient mosque). The Palestinian Muslims wanted Jerusalem because they believe that their prophet Mohammed descended to heaven there. The fact that both sides wanted Jerusalem made peace difficult because they wanted a place that is holy to both of them, and were willing to fight for it. During the wars, seven hundred thousand Palestinians were forced out of the country by the Israelis. They had to become refugees and they had really poor living conditions because most of them lived in makeshift huts and tents. Also, they had poor water supply and a lack of food. They were living in poverty, and this made the situation even worse because they all hated the Israelis even more because they had driven them out and made them live like this. This made peace more difficult because the Palestinians have no quality of life and they hate the Israelis even more. When reporters from Britain and America went to the refugees over there to get some news, they found out that their life was awful for them and then Britain and America started feeling sorry for them. The PLO thought because the fact Britain and America were feeling sorry for them, that they should stop using terrorism. The HAMAS however, didn’t stop using terrorism. This made peace more difficult because there was still terrorism and people dying from this. HAMAS are a Palestinian group who do not accept the state of Israel. They are terrorist organisations who use suicide bombings to try to get what they want, which is to destroy Israel and establish an Islamic state of Palestine. They are worse than the PLO ever were. They think terrorism is the answer because if they use terrorism they will be able to scare the Israelis so much they will eventually surrender. HAMAS challenged the PLO and Arafat for support so they would be able to get bombs and weapons. The Israelis didn’t like HAMAS because they were terrorizing their citizens and they were killing lots of people. This made peace more likely because if the Israelis didn’t like what HAMAS were doing, they would try to make peace to make HAMAS stop. Israel is a small country of less than 5 million people but there are still many different views on how the country should be run. The Labour party is one of the two most powerful parties in Israeli politics. They believe that peace is an important for the wellbeing of their country. The other one is the Likud party. The Likud believe that there should be no Palestinian state and if the Palestinians do something to them they will hit back even harder. Likud won every election in Israel since 1977 up to 1992 which is when the Labour party won. This helped make peace possible because the politicians in the labour party were willing to sign a peace treaty with Yasser Arafat of the PLO. Israel however still had their super power, the USA. When USA heard that Russia had collapsed at the end of the cold war, they didn’t support Israel so strongly because there was no Russia to compete with because they were not helping Palestine anymore. When Russia collapsed, the Arab countries had no support. This was because Russia (USSR) and they had no money from them or weapons. Because of this, other countries felt more sympathetic towards them. Because lots of the Arab countries were looking to the US for money and weapons now, the US had more influence over them. This made peace easier because if the US had more influence over them then they could make them make peace. The gulf war was the war between Iraq and the UN when Saddam Hussein tried to take over Kuwait. The USA went over to Kuwait and stopped him from invading. Lots of Arab countries supported the USA when they were trying to stop Saddam Hussein. Then the Arab countries asked USA why they were on Israel’s side because they did the same as Saddam Hussein in taking over land that was not theirs. The Arabs thought this was very hypocritical of them because they weren’t stopping the Israelis from something that Saddam Hussein had done. Bush (USA president) wanted to keep the Saudi Arabia and Egypt on his side so the other countries would be more sympathetic towards the Palestinians. This made the peace treaty more likely because then the Palestinians would be more willing to make peace because this put pressure on the Israelis to make peace. The members of Likud believe that the entire country of Israel should be theirs, and there should be no form of division of it for the Palestinians. They are not willing to make peace and share their land with the Palestinians at all. The Labour party thought that Jerusalem should still belong to the Jews, but they still thought they should give some land back to the Palestinians in return for peace. When Arafat and the PLO heard of this proposition, they accepted this resolution, and they had high hopes at the prospect of peace after nearly 40 years of constant negotiating. You read "What made peace hard in the Arab-Israeli conflict" in category "Papers" The PLO gave up using terrorism and their plan of trying to drive the Israelis into the sea because they now knew it wouldn’t work. This made peace more possible because they were no longer killing people unnecessarily. Another reason why this made peace more possible was because no one would have sat down at a table if Yasser Arafat was there, because he was the leader of the PLO, which was the terrorist group. Another reason why peace was more possible was because reporters went over to where the refugees lived and found out how they had to live. They found they lived in horrible makeshift tents and they had little food and little water. They realised that people had been born and had died as refugees and had no quality of life. The PLO realised that using terrorism wasn’t getting them anywhere and they needed to stop to be able to get peace. Palestinian civilians aged around fourteen in the Israeli streets started to rebel against the Israeli soldiers by throwing stones at the tanks. The soldiers became irritated and started to shoot them. People were outraged on both the Palestinian and the Israeli sides. These were just kids they were shooting and they weren’t doing any harm by throwing stones at the tanks. This made peace more likely because the people on the Palestinian side were angry that the Israeli soldiers were just shooting their children dead, and they wanted it to stop. This would have made them want to sign the peace treaty. People started to feel sorry for the Palestinians and not blame them for the fact that peace was not possible. When the PLO stopped using terrorism, peace was more possible because they were not trying to kill people to try and get what they wanted. However, HAMAS had not stopped using terrorism and were using suicide bombers and promising people would go to paradise if they died for their country and their religion. Arafat (leader of the PLO) was losing popularity to them and people started listening to HAMAS instead of Yasser Arafat. This made peace more likely because Yasser Arafat needed some sort of victory against HAMAS, so he signed the peace treaty. In 1993, when the two countries of Israel and Palestine signed a peace treaty, Clinton was there as the peacemaker. He wanted to be seen like this because it made him look good to everyone else and also may have helped him win a next election because he has done something really good. One of the reasons Yasser Arafat agreed to the peace treaty was because he needed some sort of success against HAMAS. He wanted to have some more popularity again amongst his people so they would listen to him and not HAMAS. Yitzhak Rabin wanted to make peace because his country was facing economic problems and the government was spending far too much on the army and weapons. Also Yitzhak Rabin wanted peace because the Intifada was making Israel look bad because of their occupation and control of Palestinian territories. The first Intifada ended when Israel granted limited autonomy to the Palestine national authority in the 1993 peace agreement. Lots of things were really necessary to change on both sides for peace between Israel and Palestine. There were lots of things each side did that the other hated. Lots of things did change and made peace possible. First of all, one thing that changed was the new winner of the general Israeli elections in 1992. The Labour party won the next election which made Yitzhak Rabin the president. The labour party were in favour of making peace with Palestine, unlike the Likud who had been in power since 1977. The Likud who were against making peace in Israel were not in power any more so they could not stop the peace treaty. Because the labour party was in control, lots of other people in Israel thought that the peace treaty was a good idea. This was a really important thing to happen because if the Labour party had not been elected there was not going to be any chance of Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat signing a peace treaty. Also in Palestine lots of things changed. The PLO stopped terrorism because people found out how the refugees were living, which made peace possible because they weren’t killing loads of the opposite side. This was quite an important reason because if the PLO hadn’t given up terrorism, no one would have sat down at a table with Yasser Arafat and tried to make peace if he was the leader of a terrorist group. Also the fact that HAMAS were becoming more popular in Palestine made Yasser Arafat want to do something good so he would be more popular again, and people would listen to him and not to HAMAS. This was not as much an important reason as the other reasons because Yasser Arafat would have wanted peace anyway, no matter whether HAMAS was going to carry on with terrorism. Also this was not as important because HAMAS didn’t originally sign the peace treaty, so they were not really part of the agreement. They only made peace more difficult after the treaty had been signed. Overall both the Israelis and the Palestinians had something in their society that changed to make the peace treaty work. Some things still didn’t work out though because although the PLO stopped terrorism, HAMAS still used it. Also, even though the labour party won in 1992, the Likud party won the next election. The Likud were not in favour of peace so this did not work out because the Likud spent vast amounts money on the army again. How to cite What made peace hard in the Arab-Israeli conflict, Papers

Musculoskeletal disorders free essay sample

1. An x-ray examination of the thoracic spine reveals osteopenic changes at T7. What does this mean? Osteopenia means that the bone is thinning which could lead to fractures. Bone thinning leads to osteoporosis. Decreased bone density occurs as people age. BMD determines bone strength and it peaks around 25-30 years of age. After these peak years, bone breabsorption exceeds bone building which causes a decrease in bone density. Ignatavicius, D., D. Workman, M., L. (2013). 2. The physician suspects osteoporosis. List seven risk factors associated with osteoporosis. Cigarette smoking Obesity Lack of exercise Postmentopausal Low calcium intake Low weight and BMI Alcohol and caffeine consumption Ignatavicius, D., D. Workman, M., L. (2013). 3. Place a star next to those risk factors specific to M.S. 4. What tests could be done to determine whether M.S. has osteoporosis? Which tests is recommended and why? N-teleopeptide (NTX) and C-teleopeptide (CTX) are proteins released when bone is broken down. We will write a custom essay sample on Musculoskeletal disorders or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Increases levels of these markers indicate a risk for osteoporosis. A peripheral DXA scan assesses BMD of the heel, forearm, or finger. The Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) can also mearsue bone density and the peripheral quantitative ultrasound (pQUS) detects osteoporosis and it can predict risk for hip fracture. The most commonly used screening for measuring BMD is the dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). This tool is the best one for a definite diagnosis of osteoporosis. With this test the patient can stay dressed, which would be more comforting for the patient since she has not been to the doctor is eleven years. The patient will have to remove any metallic objects  such as belt buckles, coins, keys, or jewelry because these objects may interfere with the test. Ignatavicius, D., D. Workman, M., L. (2013). 5. M.S’s DEXA scan revealed a bone density of -2.6 SD. What does this mean? Osteopenia is present when the T score is at -1 and above -2.5. Since M.S’s DEXA scan showed a bone density of -2.6, she would be diagnosed with osteoporosis. Any score lower than -2.5 indicate osteoporosis. Ignatavicius, D., D. Workman, M., L. (2013). 6. The physician orders alendronate (Fosamax) 70mg/wk. what instructions should you give M.S. regarding alendronate? Fosamax is a biphosphonate that is commonly used for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. It would be best to take Fosamax on an empty stomach with plenty of water. Do not lie down or eat for at least 30 minutes after taking the pill. The side effects for Fosamax are abdominal pain, bone/skeletal pain, constipation, diarrhea, dyspepsia, and nausea. I would also tell M.S that osteonecrosis of the jaw may occur after dental extraction, root canal, dental implant or other oral surgeries. Lastly I would tell M.S. that oral biphosphonates are commonly associated with a serious problem called esophagitis which is inflammation of the esophagus. If chest discomfort occurs which is a symptom of esophageal irritation, she should discontinue the drug and contact her health care provider. I would assess her for poor renal function, hypocalcemia, and GERD because if she ha s any of these, she would not be able to take Fosamax. Ignatavicius, D., D. Workman, M., L. (2013). 7. What nonpharmacolocic interventions should you teach M.S. to prevent further bone loss? I would recommend decreasing caffeine intake, stop smoking, strength training exercises, walking, eat dark green leafy vegetables for calcium, avoid jarring activities such as horseback riding, get at least 5 minutes of sun exposure per day to activate the vitamin D to help absorb the calcium, and to read the food labels to make sure she increases the calcium intake. Ignatavicius, D., D. Workman, M., L. (2013).