When | Why |
---|---|
Jan-14-24 | Wording change |
Jan-14-24 | Wording change |
Dec 21
Endless War in the United States
You can pick almost any point in US history to find the nation engulfed in a war. Backed up with the US after taking various history courses in New Jersey, I know that The powerful nation started off with the American Revolution. Less than 100 years after its birth, the young country fought a huge civil war. Over the next 100 years, the US took part in 2 World Wars. Without a decade of break the country took part in the Vietnam War and Korean War, losing both.
News has taught me that another 30 years hadn’t passed when the US put troops in Afghanistan and Iran, losing against the mountainous terrain. Currently, troops are placed in Taiwan as they prepare to fight their next war against China. Two years ago the US sent aid to the Ukraine war and now a similar situation in Palestine and Israel.
That’s a whole lot of wars and conflict for a relatively new country, especially when the country is isolated between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. The Grand total adds up to 12 wars [study.com]. Sure, at the beginning the US was playing a major role in the wars and winning by a lot, but lately, after World War 2, the US hasn’t had a similar fate. After losing the Korean and Vietnam war, they also lost the conflict in Afghanistan. This was all against the will of the American people. Even now, only 31% of the US supports sending aid for Israel and 43% oppose it [rueters.com]. Why does the US put itself in such a terrible situation and for no benefit? Even if the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam mainland were under totalitarian dictatorships, the countries are smaller than Colorado and have a population owning 2% of the world [Google Population Demographics], dwarfed by India & China’s 40% share.
According to [eisenhowerlibrary.gov] the US joined the Korean War because they were scared it had something to do with Communist China and the Soviet Union. Similar reasons caused the USA’s interference in the Vietnam war, and it caused the US economy to crash [The War’s Consequences]. Putting both together, the US’s main problem is that they join war due to fear which causes their economy to crash back at home. For example, WWI was the initial cause of the Great Depression [The Great Depression and U.S. Foreign Policy].
In summary, the US engulfs itself in way too many wars due to fear of having communism spread to them. These wars cause many crashes in the US economy back at home. In my true opinion, the US shouldn’t be scared of anyone as the richest and most powerful country in the world. The fact that the higher ups get scared just screams out that this country is weakening by the day. We have to defend each other and stand up together.
Dec 21
Rohan A’s Question : Read over my work and tell me what you think.
Text-to-Self Mentor (Add meaningful details about yourself to the Note) with Rohan A’s edits:
Reflecting on your work, it’s clear that you’ve drawn upon a wide array of resources to form a view on the United States’ historical engagement in wars. You mention having taken various history courses in New Jersey as a starting point for your understanding, which already sets a context for the depth of your knowledge on the topic.
Considering your perspective, you seem to feel a sense of frustration, particularly with the United States’ recent military engagements and their outcomes. You mention the wars following World War II where the US has seemingly been on the losing side. You’ve drawn from sources like study.com and Reuters to support your points about the US’s conflict history and current public opinion, respectively.
Your argument pivots on the idea that fear—especially fear of communism spreading—has been the driving force behind many of these conflicts. This fear, as you note, ties back to the US economy and domestic concerns, suggesting a cyclical relationship between external war engagements and internal economic downturns. The connection you make here with the Great Depression and its ties to World War I, as suggested by your reference to US foreign policy, aligns well with this thesis.
You ask, “Why does the US put itself in such a terrible situation and for no benefit?” This question seems to encapsulate your confusion and critique of US foreign policy decisions. It’s a poignant question that could lead you to further scrutinize the motivations behind foreign interventions. Have you considered looking into the military-industrial complex and its potential influence on these decisions? Such an inquiry may provide additional insights into why the ‘higher ups’ opt for military action.
Furthermore, your point about the size and population of the countries the US has engaged with hints at a perceived mismatch between the perceived threat and the actual capacity of these nations. Yet, you may want to think about how geopolitical strategy, not just population size or territorial area, plays a role in these engagements.
In your conclusion, you use strong language to describe the US’s stance as weakening, sensing an incongruity between the nation’s wealth and power and its actions. You end with a call for unity and defense, which suggests you’re looking for a shift in the way the US approaches its role on the world stage.
I encourage you to re-examine these points, perhaps delving into the notion of American exceptionalism and how it has historically influenced US participation in global conflicts. Could there be more undercurrents of this ideology at play in more recent engagements that you’ve not yet explored?
The assertions you make are quite powerful, and as you continue to reflect on this topic, you may find it valuable to ask oneself: Is there a pattern in how the US responds to global crises, and how does this pattern align or conflict with the values you believe the country stands for? Your work opens the door to many nuanced discussions; remember to revisit the question of why these wars keep happening, and how public opinion has fluctuated with each conflict.
Dec 21
Rohan A : Please review my work and tell me what to improve.
A deleted thinking partner with Rohan A’s edits:
Title: Endless War: A Viral Exploration of US Military History
[Scene 1: The Hook]0:00-0:03 – Quick-cut montage of US war footage from the Revolution to modern conflicts, flash images of newspapers with war headlines, sync to a heart-pounding drumbeat. Text overlay: “Ever noticed the U.S. can’t stay out of war?”
[Scene 2: The American Beginning]0:04-0:08 – Re-enactment of Revolutionary War soldiers rushing into battle with “Yankee Doodle” playing in the background. Transition to a creative drawing filter overlaid on the video to give it an old-time parchment look
[Scene 3: Civil and World Wars]0:09-0:15 – Transition to Civil War re-enactment with cannon fire in slow motion, sound dampened under a narrator’s mention of the war’s impact. Leap to World War scenes with soldiers storming a beach, color desaturated for a historic feel.
[Scene 4: Modern Conflicts]0:16-0:24 – Swift jump to Vietnam and Korea, with clips in different styles: grainy ’60s footage, then a sharp cut to digital HD for Afghanistan. Juxtapose the rugged terrain against US troops, with a split-screen effect showing public dissent back home.
[Scene 5: Contemporary Dilemmas]0:25-0:32 – Animated infographic showing US troop placement in Taiwan, a simulation of military planning, intercut with news footage of Ukraine, then a 3D map zooming into Palestine and Israel, all indicating current US involvement.
[Scene 6: Public Opinion]0:33-0:38 – Camera focuses on a protester holding a sign “31% support, 43% oppose”. Filters shift to emulate a live social media feed, with likes and disapproval emojis floating up, simulating real-time reactions to US foreign policy.
[Scene 7: Hard-Hitting Reality]0:39-0:42 – A cracked piggy bank animation spills out coins labeled ‘economy’ that disappear into a hole labeled ‘war’, symbolizing financial drain. Overlay with grim music to underscore the point. Quick flashes of historical economic crashes.
[Scene 8: Conclusion]0:43-0:45 – Ends on a rallying cry, the screen splits into multiple frames showing diverse American faces. Text appears: “Unity is strength”. The sound of a crowd slowly rising in volume. Fade to black with a final message overlaid: “Is fear driving us into an endless cycle of war?”
[Extras: Audience Engagement]– Before the screen goes black, a comment prompt appears: “Drop your thoughts with #HistoryInWars.
Can we break the cycle?”
– Call-to-action sticker encouraging users to “Swipe up & debate”
[Production Values]– Rapid editing and seamless transitions between scenes to maintain high energy.
– Use of different video formats (grainy footage, HD video, creative filters) and styles (dramatic re-enactments, infographics, live feed simulation).
– Sound design includes a mix of iconic music pieces, sound effects and a dramatic, final rising crowd noise.
– Text overlays and comment prompts are crisp, with a military stencil font for effect.
This hypothetical TikTok touches on a serious subject with fast-paced, engaging visuals and thought-provoking content. The mix of historical re-enactments, modern footage, animations, and infographics keeps it dynamic and accessible, while the ending leaves viewers with a challenging question, prompting dialogue and community engagement.
Dec 21
Rohan A : Make a meme out of my work
A deleted thinking partner with Rohan A’s edits:
Scene One (First 3 Seconds – The Hook):
The video opens with an eye-catching kinetic text animation that reads, “Why is the US ALWAYS at war?”
The text quickly zips onto the screen, accompanied by a dramatic sound effect.
The background is a rapid montage of historical war footage and current news headlines, shifting quickly to grab viewers’ attention.
Scene Two (3-10 Seconds – Introduction):
The camera zooms out from the last piece of montage, revealing a user, possibly dressed in a quirky history professor outfit, standing in front of a green screen that now displays a looping GIF of a spinning globe with highlighted areas where the US has been involved in conflicts.
Their tone is satirical and the background music is upbeat yet has an ironic undertone.
Scene Three (10-20 Seconds – Historical Context):
The user starts dancing in an exaggerated manner from one side of the frame to the other, mirroring a ‘timeline dance’.
Each position they hit coincides with a pop-up animation of a different US war (‘Revolutionary’, ‘Civil’, ‘WWI’, ‘WWII’, ‘Vietnam’, ‘Afghanistan’).
Meanwhile, quirky sounds effects, like booms and laser zaps, align with each appearance.
Scene Four (20-30 Seconds – Modern Conflicts):
There’s a cut to a closer shot of the user who now wields props (like toy soldiers or miniature tanks), “placing” them on an overlaid animated map where the US has current military interests.
Quick cuts happen with each new placement, and the user’s expressions shift from comedic to increasingly bewildered.
Scene Five (30-37 Seconds – The Big Question):
Zooming in even closer, with a ‘magnify glass’ filter for effect, the user stops and looks directly into the camera lens with a mock-serious expression.
“But why,” they whisper dramatically, harnessing a tone of mystery, as a dim spotlight shines down on them, “are we so scared?”
The globe GIF shrinks to settle as a “thought bubble” above their head.
Scene Six (37-45 Seconds – The Twist and Comment Prompt):
Abruptly, the user’s demeanor changes to hopeful, and they start a popular TikTok dance, the screen swipes left with every move, showing short skits that represent strength and unity among people (lifting props, linking arms with friends dressed as civilians and soldiers).
As they dance, the user shouts, “Maybe it’s time we write a different story!”
The final frame pauses mid-dance with the text overlay, “Are we fighting the right battles? Sound off below!” with an arrow pointing to the comment section. Emojis of peace signs and earth icons float upwards. The sound fades out with an echo, leaving viewers with a lingering thought and an explicit invitation to engage.
The last moment is a sticker that pops up with the TikTok ‘Share’ animation suggesting viewers to spread the message, aiming to make the thoughtful content go viral.
Dec 21
Rohan A’s Question : Read over my work and give me valuable feedback on it
Say Something Article Thinking Partner (for your text or a peer’s) with Rohan A’s edits:
Your central message is that the United States has been consistently involved in conflicts throughout its history, often influenced by fear, which has led to negative outcomes, particularly economic downturns. You’ve highlighted a pattern of engagement in wars and contrasted the US success in early conflicts with its more recent challenges.
In the framework of hope and positivity, your article leans more towards an exposition of historical patterns and critique. It’s not primarily offering hope or presenting solutions; rather, it seems to be a call to reflection and potential reevaluation of the US’s approach to international conflicts.
To introduce solutions, you might consider expanding on what ‘standing up together’ means in practical terms. For example, could it involve more diplomatic avenues, non-interventionist policies, or investment in peacekeeping? Delving into successful historical cases of conflict resolution where the United States played a positive role could provide a more constructive outlook.
The writing could benefit from specificity in several places. Terms like ‘the higher-ups’ are vague. Who exactly are you referring to? Specific government officials, policy makers, or military leaders? Moreover, while references to websites are present, providing exact article titles and authors could strengthen credibility.
In terms of clarity, phrases like ‘losing against the mountainous terrain’ use personification in a way that might confuse the literal understanding of military conflict. Instead, you might want to clarify that it was not merely the terrain but also the strategies and combat tactics of the opposition that contributed to the US’s difficulties.
Finally, I notice that you are passionate and engaged with your topic, which is an admirable quality in any writer. Does this feedback resonate with you, and how can it be woven into your continued exploration of such important historical patterns? Keep using your voice to drive meaningful dialogue.
Dec 22
Rohan A’s Question : Read my writing and give me advice.
Simple Advice with Rohan A’s edits:
Okay! So, you wanna know how to make your story better? Here’s some advice just like my mommy gives me when I draw a picture!
1.
Make sure your story is like a good bedtime story.
It has to be easy for everyone to understand, even kids like me.
2.
When you talk about big things like wars, maybe explain why they matter, kinda like how my teacher talks about why sharing toys is important.
3.
Use words that are simple.
Fancy words can be confusing!
4.
Tell us about why people do things in your story, like why my friends and I choose to play tag.
5.
If there are hard feelings, like being scared, explain how we can be brave instead!
6.
Remember to talk about how to make things better, like how cleaning up toys makes the room nicer.
I hope that helps you! Remember, stories are best when they’re fun and teach us something nice!
Dec 22
Rohan A’s Question : Read over my work and give me advice
Simple Advice with Rohan A’s edits:
Hey there!
So, if you’re looking to make your work even better, here are a few simple tips you might wanna try:
1. Clarify Dates and Events – You’re talking about a ton of different wars and stuff. It might help to include specific years or time periods when those wars happened, so your readers don’t get mixed up.
2. Double-Check Facts – Some of the info might need a second look. Like, saying the US ‘lost’ in Afghanistan and Iran could be explained better because ‘winning’ or ‘losing’ can be complicated, and the US hasn’t fought a war with Iran.
3. Get your Sides Straight – Make sure you’re clear about who’s fighting who. For example, when you mention troops in Taiwan, that’s a pretty sensitive topic, and the US doesn’t have troops fighting there as of the last time I checked.
4. Numbers and Stats – When you throw out percentages, like how many Americans support sending aid, it’s super important to say where you got those numbers. Plus, making sure they’re up to date helps your reader trust you more.
5. Simplify Your Point – You’ve got a strong opinion at the end (which is cool), but make sure all your points lead straight to it. Keeping it super clear helps your reader understand why you think the US should chill out with the wars.
Remember, your work is already pretty awesome, and these are just little things to make it even awesomer. Keep writing and sharing your thoughts!
Dec 23
Rohan A’s Question : Read over my writing and give me advice
Rohan’s Inner Voice with Rohan A’s edits:
It looks like your piece is talking about the history of war involvement by the United States and questioning why the country seems to get involved in so many conflicts. You’re trying to understand the motivations behind these actions and their consequences, especially on the economy and public opinion. Here are three core points to help build your Inner Voice, or motivation, for writing this:
1. Seeking Understanding – Your writing suggests you want to dive deep and understand why the U.S. has participated in numerous wars. By looking at history and connecting wars to current events, you seem to be motivated by a desire to make sense of these patterns. It’s important for you to share this insight because you believe understanding the past can lead to better decisions in the future.
2. Highlighting the Impact on People – You mention how wars go against the will of the American people and discuss the impact on the economy and society. Your Inner Voice might be driven by a sense of empathy for those who are affected by these decisions, both in the U.S. and abroad. Your writing could be a call for people to think about how war decisions made by the few can have huge effects on the many.
3. Promoting Change – By expressing your opinion that the U.S. shouldn’t be scared and should not engage in so many wars, it seems like you’re striving for a change in U.S. foreign policy. You appear to believe that as citizens, people have the power to influence these decisions and should stand up together for what they believe in. Your Inner Voice is motivated by a quest for more peaceful and sensible approaches to international conflicts.
These three motivators can help you strengthen the message in your writing and connect more deeply with your readers by giving them a clear understanding of why this topic is significant and worthy of their attention.
Jan 1
Paul A’s Question : What is Rohan getting right? What is not accurate? What else might he consider?
Congressional Research Service Fact Checker on U.S. Wars (any text) with Paul A’s edits:
The information I’m using to check the facts comes from a Congressional Research Service Report, “U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts”. You can see this report here: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RS/RS21405
What is accurate:
1.
The United States engaged in World War I and World War II.
The dates provided in the CRS report align with the common historical understanding of these conflicts.
2.
The U.S. was involved in the Korean War and the Vietnam War, which are mentioned in the CRS report as the Korean Conflict and Vietnam Era respectively.
3.
The United States did engage in conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq in recent history, known as Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom respectively, transitioning to Operation Freedom’s Sentinel in Afghanistan and Operation New Dawn in Iraq.
What is not accurate:
1.
The text says the United States “lost” the Vietnam War and Korean War.
While these conflicts did not result in clear-cut victories, the outcomes are more complex than simply being categorized as losses.
2.
The mention that troops are placed in Taiwan preparing “to fight their next war against China” is not substantiated by the CRS report and needs clarification.
3.
The assertion that the United States placed troops in Iran is inaccurate; while the U.S. has been involved in the region, notably in Iraq and Afghanistan, there has not been a war with the U.S. deploying troops to Iran.
4.
The statement “WWI was the initial cause of the Great Depression” is not supported by mainstream historical analysis.
The primary factors for the Great Depression are linked to the economic practices of the late 1920s, not WWI.
5.
The idea that the U.S. joins wars due to fear causing their economy to crash is an oversimplification of complex geopolitical situations and economic results.
What other, related facts from the article might be added:
1.
The CRS report notes the importance of designating “periods of war” for determining veterans’ benefits, suggesting that Rohan’s discussion might not consider the multifaceted reasons for conflict involvement beyond fear and economic consequences.
2.
“The President, or executive branch officials responsible to him, through proclamation, or Congress, through legislation, has been responsible for designating the war’s termination date.”
This clarification is important to understand the official process for ending a war, which isn’t solely about winning or losing.
3.
“For some entries, this initial summary is followed by an explanatory note or declaration, armistice, cease-fire, or termination dates cited by other official sources.”
It’s crucial to differentiate between the official dates and the historical narratives surrounding these conflicts.
The CRS report provides a nuanced and complex view of U.S. military conflicts that contrasts with the generalizations found in the text Rohan is using. His analysis might benefit from a deeper consideration of the multifaceted reasons behind U.S. involvement in global conflicts and the varied consequences of such involvement.
Jan 3
Rohan A’s Question : Read over my writing and give me some sources to help expand my writing.
Rohan’s Evidence with Rohan A’s edits:
Here are the three core points of your writing, along with recommendations for sources to expand each point:
1. Historical involvement of the United States in wars: Your writing asserts that the U.S. has been involved in numerous conflicts throughout its history.To strengthen this point, you may consider these sources: – A People’s History of the United States by Howard Zinn, which provides an alternative perspective on U.S. history and its military engagements. – The U.S. Department of State’s Office of the Historian website, which offers detailed historical accounts of the country’s foreign relations and military actions (history.state.gov).
2. Public opinion on U.S. involvement in conflicts: You mention that recent U.S. military actions, like aid to Israel, have not had strong public support.To offer more evidence on public opinion: – Pew Research Center (pewresearch.org) regularly conducts surveys and reports on U.S. public opinion regarding foreign policy and military interventions. – Gallup (gallup.com) also provides historical and recent poll data on Americans’ views on national decisions to engage in various conflicts.
3. Economic consequences of war for the United States: You suggest that the U.S.’s involvement in international conflicts harms its domestic economy.For more information on economic impacts: – The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison edited by Mark Harrison, for a scholarly analysis of the economic impact of war. – The National Bureau of Economic Research (nber.org) can provide papers and reports examining the relationship between military engagement and economic performance.
Keep in mind that when writing about such topics, especially wars and conflicts, it is essential to verify facts and use credible sources. For example, saying the U.S. lost the war in Vietnam is widely accepted, but claiming the U.S. lost the Korean War might need clarification since the result of that conflict is often considered a stalemate rather than a clear loss for the United States. Moreover, the statement that troops are in Taiwan preparing for a war against China is a sensitive and complex international relations issue that requires current, credible sources to fact-check for accuracy. News websites with high editorial standards and governmental releases can be valuable for the most recent developments.
Jan 3
Rohan A’s Question : Read over this and fact check my work.
Fact Checker with Rohan A’s edits:
Points where the writing is accurate:
1.
The United States did indeed start with the American Revolution and later fought a Civil War.
2.
The US took part in two World Wars in the 20th century.
3.
There have been subsequent conflicts involving the United States, such as the Korean and Vietnam wars, and later, Afghanistan.
Points where the facts are a bit off and suggestions for corrections:
1.
Claim: “After losing the Korean and Vietnam war…”
Correction: The Korean War ended in an armistice, and the territories were essentially left divided much as they were before the war, so it’s not accurate to say the US “lost” the war.
It was more of a stalemate.
The Vietnam War is often seen as a failure for the US because it didn’t prevent the fall of South Vietnam to communism, but using the word “lose” simplifies a complex outcome.
2.
Claim: “the US put troops in Afghanistan and Iran…”
Correction: The United States has had military involvement in Afghanistan, but not Iran—this might be a confusion with Iraq.
The US-led invasion of Iraq began in 2003, which is likely what was meant here.
3.
Claim: “Currently, troops are placed in Taiwan…”
Correction: As of my knowledge cutoff in 2023, there is no large-scale deployment of U.S. troops stationed in Taiwan.
The U.S. does sell defensive military equipment to Taiwan and has made commitments to help Taiwan defend itself, but this statement isn’t accurate.
4.
Reference to “rueters.com” for statistics on US support for sending aid to Israel.
Correction: Ensure that the source is spelled correctly; it should likely be “reuters.com.”
Also, verify the statistics from a recent and reliable data set.
5.
Claim: “WWI was the initial cause of the Great Depression.”
Correction: The Great Depression started in 1929, a decade after the end of World War I, and its causes are numerous and complex, including but not limited to the stock market crash of 1929, bank failures, reduction in purchasing across the board, and more.
World War I’s economic impact did create conditions that contributed to economic instability in the 1920s, but it wasn’t the initial cause of the Great Depression.
6.
Claim: “The US engulfs itself in way too many wars due to fear of having communism spread to them.”
Correction: While anti-communism was a significant motivator for some US actions during the Cold War, framing every conflict as being solely due to fear of communism spread is reductive.
Each conflict had a unique set of circumstances.
Please consider checking primary sources or consulting educational material for the most precise information when discussing historical events and their motivations.
Jan 9
Rohan A’s Question : Read my writing and grade it.
Grader with Rohan A’s edits:
Hey there!
1) Your idea and point for writing – 4/5
Your main idea is clear; you’re discussing the frequent involvement of the United States in wars and its effects, particularly on the economy.
The point could be more impactful with a stronger thesis statement.
2) Your grammar and mechanics – 3/5
While the essay is mostly understandable, there are several punctuation and capitalization errors.
It reads more like a collection of thoughts than a polished essay.
3) Author’s word choice/vocabulary so it suits the target audience – 4/5
The vocabulary is appropriate for the intended audience, with a mix of informal language and specific historical references, though more sophisticated language could enhance the argument.
4) Organization – 3/5
The flow of your essay is logical, but transitions between points can be smoother.
The organization would benefit from more systematic reasoning and clearer connection between thoughts.
Overall, you have a clear idea with vocabulary that’s appropriate for the audience, but the grammar and organization could use some work. Keep it up!
Jan 4
You can pick almost any point in US history to find the nation engulfed in a war. Backed up with the US after taking various history courses in New Jersey, I know that The powerful nation started off with the American Revolution. Less than 100 years after its birth, the young country fought a huge civil war. Over the next 100 years, the US took part in 2 World Wars. Without a decade of break the country took part in the Vietnam War and Korean War, losing both.
News has taught me that another 30 years hadn’t passed when the US put troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, losing against the mountainous terrain. Currently, China is becoming a potential enemy for the US as 83% of US adults see China as an enemy (More Than a Third of Americans View China as an ‘Enemy’, 2023). Two years ago the US sent aid to the Ukraine war and now a similar situation in Palestine and Israel.
That’s a whole lot of wars and conflict for a relatively new country, especially when the country is isolated between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. The Grand total adds up to 12 wars (Sullivan, n.d.) . Sure, at the beginning the US was playing a major role in the wars and winning by a lot, but lately, after World War 2, the US hasn’t had a similar fate. After withdrawing from the Korean and Vietnam war, they lost the conflict in Afghanistan. This was all against the will of the American people. Even now, only 31% of the US supports sending aid for Israel and 43% oppose it (Lange & Spetalnick, 2023). Why does the US put itself in such a terrible situation and for no benefit? Even if the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam mainland were under totalitarian dictatorships, the countries are smaller than Colorado and have a population owning 2% of the world [Google Population Demographics], dwarfed by India & China’s 40% share.
According to (Online Documents – Korean War, n.d.) the US joined the Korean War because they were scared it had something to do with Communist China and the Soviet Union. Similar reasons caused the USA’s interference in the Vietnam war, and it caused the US economy to crash (Digital History, n.d.) . Putting both together, the US’s main problem is that they join war due to fear which causes their economy to crash back at home. For example, WWI was the initial cause of the Great Depression (Milestones: 1921–1936 – Office of the Historian, n.d.) .
In summary, the US engulfs itself in way too many wars due to fear of having communism spread to them. These wars cause many crashes in the US economy back at home.
We can continue fighting Endless wars, but we aren’t getting anywhere. As we move on, the US government should be more mindful of the wars they take place in.
Jan 4
Rohan A’s Question : Read over my writing and fact check the writing.
Congressional Research Service Fact Checker on U.S. Wars (any text) with Rohan A’s edits:
The information I’m using to check the facts comes from a Congressional Research Service Report, ‘U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts’. You can see this report here: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RS/RS21405
Accuracy check:
1) Accurate:
– The United States began with the American Revolution.
– The U.S. participated in two World Wars.
– The U.S. was involved in the Korean War and the Vietnam War.
– The U.S. engaged in military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.
2) Not accurate:
– The statement about the U.S. “losing both” the Korean War and the Vietnam War is subjective and simplifies complex outcomes.
– The assertion that “the US hasn’t had a similar fate” as it did in World War II since that war can be disputed, as subsequent conflicts have varied outcomes and contexts.
– The claim that WWI was the initial cause of the Great Depression is not accurate.
Although the war may have created conditions that contributed to the economic downturn, the stock market crash of 1929 and a series of banking panics are more directly linked to the onset of the Great Depression.
– The assertion of a “grand total” of 12 wars is vague; a more specific context or definition of “wars” is necessary for accuracy.
– The U.S.’s reasons for participating in the Korean War are oversimplified; the conflict was part of a larger context of Cold War tensions, not solely based on fear of communism spread.
3) Related facts or context to provide more understanding:
– “For additional information, see the following CRS Products: … CRS Report RL31133, Declarations of War and Authorizations for the Use of Military Force: Historical Background and Legal Implications, by Jennifer K. Elsea and Matthew C. Weed.”
This provides context for understanding the legal basis for U.S. involvement in conflicts.
– “See CRS Report R41989, Congressional Authority to Limit Military Operations, by Jennifer K. Elsea, Michael John Garcia, and Thomas J. Nicola.”
This relates to the question of why the U.S. government chooses to engage in certain conflicts.
– The quote “On June 22, 2011, President Obama again addressed the American people about the way forward in Afghanistan: ‘We will begin the drawdown of U.S. troops from a position of strength.
We have exceeded our expectations on our core goal of defeating al-Qaeda…’” provides context for the objectives of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan.
– “In the first quarter of FY2022, CJTF-OIR provided approximately $219 million in assistance to Iraq partner forces and vetted Syrian partner forces through the Counter-ISIS Train and Equip Fund (CTEF) in ‘continued efforts to maintain the enduring defeat of Daesh.’”
This relates to recent U.S. military expenditures in the context of counterterrorism efforts.
Jan 4
You can pick almost any point in US history to find the nation engulfed in a war. Backed up with the US after taking various history courses in New Jersey, I know that The powerful nation started off with the American Revolution. Less than 100 years after its birth, the young country fought a huge civil war. Over the next 100 years, the US took part in 2 World Wars. Without a decade of break the country took part in the Vietnam War and Korean War, both without a clear-cut victory.
News has taught me that another 30 years hadn’t passed when the US put troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, losing against the mountainous terrain. Currently, China is becoming a potential enemy for the US as 83% of US adults see China as an enemy (More Than a Third of Americans View China as an ‘Enemy’, 2023). Two years ago the US sent aid to the Ukraine war and now a similar situation in Palestine and Israel.
That’s a whole lot of wars and conflict for a relatively new country, especially when the country is isolated between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. The Grand total adds up to 12 wars (Sullivan, n.d.) . Sure, at the beginning the US was playing a major role in the wars and winning by a lot, but lately, after World War 2, the US hasn’t had a similar fate. After withdrawing from the Korean and Vietnam war, they lost the conflict in Afghanistan. This was all against the will of the American people. Even now, only 31% of the US supports sending aid for Israel and 43% oppose it (Lange & Spetalnick, 2023). Why does the US put itself in such a terrible situation and for no benefit? Even if the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam mainland were under totalitarian dictatorships, the countries are smaller than Colorado and have a population owning 2% of the world [Google Population Demographics], dwarfed by India & China’s 40% share.
According to (Online Documents – Korean War, n.d.) the US joined the Korean War because they were scared it had something to do with Communist China and the Soviet Union. Similar reasons caused the USA’s interference in the Vietnam war, and it caused the US economy to crash (Digital History, n.d.) . Putting both together, the US’s main problem is that they join war due to fear which causes their economy to crash back at home. For example, WWI was the initial cause of the Great Depression (Milestones: 1921–1936 – Office of the Historian, n.d.) .
In summary, the US engulfs itself in way too many wars due to fear of having communism spread to them. These wars cause many crashes in the US economy back at home.
We can continue fighting Endless wars, but we aren’t getting anywhere. As we move on, the US government should be more mindful of the wars they take place in.
Jan 4
Rohan A’s Question : Read over my work and give me advice.
Rohan’s Inner Voice with Rohan A’s edits:
After going through your article, it seems clear that your Inner Voice has a strong sense of questioning and seeks to raise awareness about the reasons behind the United States’ military actions throughout history. To further build on this Inner Voice and enhance your motivation for writing, consider these three core points:
1. Educational Perspective: You are writing this because you want to share what you’ve learned from history classes and news reports. By discussing the numerous conflicts the U.S. has been involved in, you are aiming to educate readers on a pattern you’ve noticed. Your motivation is to make others think more deeply about the historical steps that have led the country to where it is today.
2. Critical Analysis: Your Inner Voice is pushing for a deeper understanding of the consequences of war. You’re not just listing historical events; you’re exploring the outcomes, such as economic downturns and loss of support among the American people. You are seeking to analyze these patterns critically to help readers understand the long-term impact these decisions have had on the country.
3. Advocacy for Change: You are motivated by a desire to advocate for a change in how the U.S. approaches conflict. By highlighting the pattern of engaging in wars due to fear, and questioning their usefulness, you’re suggesting that it’s time for a new approach. Your Inner Voice calls for a deliberate, more mindful government that evaluates the potential outcomes of foreign interventions more critically.
To align your writing more closely with these points, continue to provide evidence to support your arguments, raise questions that provoke critical thinking, and suggest alternative actions that could lead to better outcomes for the United States.
Jan 4
Rohan A’s Question : Read over my writing and give me Simple Advice.
Simple Advice with Rohan A’s edits:
Hey, so here are a couple of tips on how to make your writing even better!
1. Back up your statements – When you make claims, like “after World War 2, the US hasn’t had a similar fate,” it’d be cool if you could tell us more about why you think that. Adding more proof or examples can make your point stronger.
2. Clarify complex ideas – You talk about the economy crashing and wars causing problems. Explaining more about how they’re connected could help someone understand this better. Like, how did the wars actually cause the economy to crash?
3. Keep it focused – You jump from a bunch of different wars to the economy to people’s opinions on current conflicts. It might help to stick to one idea at a time, so it’s easier to follow what you’re saying.
4. Keep an eye on facts – Make sure the facts and numbers you use are right on point. For example, when you say countries like Vietnam are smaller than Colorado but then compare populations, the info could get a bit confusing.
5. Tone down generalizations – You said “the US puts itself in such a terrible situation and for no benefit,” but that can upset people who think differently. Maybe you can explain that some people believe there are benefits and some don’t, and then say what you think.
6. Watch your bias – You have opinions in your writing, which is totally cool, but try to show both sides. Like, if you talk about people not liking the US being in wars, also mention why some people think it might be necessary.
I hope my advice helps you out with your writing! Keep going, you’re doing great!
Jan 5
You can pick almost any point in US history to find the nation fighting a horrid war. Backed up with the US after taking various history courses in New Jersey, I know that the powerful nation started off with the American Revolution. Less than 100 years after its birth, the young country fought a huge civil war. Over the next 100 years, the US took part in 2 World Wars. Without a decade of break the country took part in the Vietnam War and Korean War, both without a clear-cut victory. Soon, the US took in part with regional conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, losing against the mountainous terrain.
Currently, China is on the path to becoming a potential enemy for the US as 83% of US adults see China as an enemy (More Than a Third of Americans View China as an ‘Enemy’, 2023). Two years ago the US sent aid to the Ukraine war and now a similar situation in Palestine and Israel.
That’s a whole lot of wars and conflict for a relatively new country, 12 to be exact (Sullivan, n.d.)
.
Maybe the US has a huge impact on regional and worldwide conflicts, but they haven’t got anywhere.
After withdrawing from the Korean and Vietnam war, the US withdrew from the conflict in Afghanistan.
This was all against the will of the American people.
Even now, only 31% of the US supports sending aid for Israel and 43% oppose it (Lange & Spetalnick, 2023).
Why does the US put itself in such a terrible situation and for no benefit?
According to (Online Documents – Korean War, n.d.) the US joined the Korean War because they were concerned that it had something to do with Communist China and the Soviet Union. Similar reasons caused the USA’s interference in the Vietnam war, and it caused the US economy to crash (Digital History, n.d.) . Putting both together, the US’s main problem is that they join war due to fear which causes their economy to crash back at home. For example, WWI was the initial cause of the Great Depression (Milestones: 1921–1936 – Office of the Historian, n.d.) .
In conclusion, the US has pulled itself in too many wars. Looking back since the American Revolution and to date, the outcomes of the war have started to fall away from the US’s favor. WWI and WWII were huge victories for the US, but after that the US started losing its grip in the Korean War and Afghanistan.
Since War outcomes have been getting worse over time, it is apparent that if the US ever has a WWIII, the outcomes might be frightening, even devastating, for the United States of America.
Jan 5
Rohan A’s Question : Read over my writing and fact check it.
Fact Checker with Rohan A’s edits:
Your writing covers some broad aspects of US military history and presents various interpretations of the causes and consequences of wars involving the United States. Here’s a fact-check with layers of accuracy and corrections:
Accurate Points:
1.
The United States indeed began with the American Revolution and later fought in a Civil War less than 100 years after its founding.
2.
The United States did participate in two world wars in the 20th century.
3.
The Korean and Vietnam War did not result in clear-cut military victories for the United States.
4.
The US has been involved in conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq in recent history.
5.
There is indeed contemporary debate and concern over the relationship between the US and China.
Points that need correction or clarification:
1.
The phrase “losing against the mountainous terrain” in reference to Afghanistan is metaphorical and could suggest that the terrain alone was the reason for the US not achieving its objectives, which simplifies a complex conflict.
The difficulties faced by the US in Afghanistan were also due to factors such as insurgency tactics, and the complexities of nation-building, among others.
2.
The claim that the American Civil War happened “less than 100 years after its birth” is a bit misleading—it began in 1861, approximately 85 years after the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776.
3.
The assertion that “83% of US adults see China as an enemy” is an oversimplification.
According to the source you cited (More Than a Third of Americans View China as an ‘Enemy’, 2023), it’s important to differentiate between those who view China as unfriendly or an enemy, and those who simply view China as a competitor or a serious problem.
4.
The assertion that involvement in wars caused the US economy to “crash” is overly broad and not entirely accurate—economic consequences of wars are complex and varied, with some conflicts contributing to economic booms (e.g., WWII) and others having negative economic impacts.
5.
It’s incorrect to state that “WWI was the initial cause of the Great Depression.”
The Great Depression began in 1929, over a decade after the end of World War I; its causes were numerous, including the stock market crash of 1929, bank failures, and reduced purchasing across the board.
World War I did lead to economic problems in the 1920s, but it’s not accurate to pinpoint it as the cause of the Great Depression.
6.
The “Digital History” citation would need more specific information to check accuracy.
Similarly, if “Online Documents – Korean War” is a source, a reader needs specifics to verify claims.
7.
The claim about US public opinion on sending aid to Israel needs context; public opinion fluctuates over time and is influenced by current events.
The numbers provided (31% support, 43% oppose) should be attributed to a specific poll by a reputable source to be verifiable.
8.
The concluding thoughts on the US potentially losing a WWIII are speculative and not factual content.
To correct these points:
– Offer nuanced and fact-based explanations for the outcomes of conflicts, taking into account multiple factors.
– When using statistics or making claims about public opinion, provide the specific sources and understand that public opinion can be complex and varied.
– Be more precise in linking historical events with their economic effects, ensuring that the relationships you draw are supported by historical evidence.
Avoid making simplified causal connections.
– Avoid speculative predictions about future conflicts like “WWIII” and focus on providing a clear analysis of past and present situations based on factual history.
Jan 5
You can pick almost any point in US history to find the nation fighting a horrid war. Backed up with the US after taking various history courses in New Jersey, I know that the powerful nation started off with the American Revolution. Less than 100 years after its birth, the young country fought a huge civil war. Over the next 100 years, the US took part in 2 World Wars. Without a decade of break the country took part in the Vietnam War and Korean War, both without a clear-cut victory. Soon, the US took in part with regional conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, losing against the mountainous terrain.
Currently, China is on the path to becoming a potential enemy for the US as 83% of US adults see China as a potential threat for the US (More Than a Third of Americans View China as an ‘Enemy’, 2023). Two years ago the US sent aid to the Ukraine war and now a similar situation in Palestine and Israel.
That’s a whole lot of wars and conflict for a relatively new country, 12 to be exact (Sullivan, n.d.)
.
Maybe the US has a huge impact on regional and worldwide conflicts, but they haven’t got anywhere.
After withdrawing from the Korean and Vietnam war, the US withdrew from the conflict in Afghanistan.
This was all against the will of the American people.
During the Vietnam War, some protests gathered up bodies of 15,000 – 25,000 people in the US Capitol (The March on Washington · Exhibit · Resistance and Revolution: The Anti-Vietnam War Movement at the University of Michigan, 1965-1972, n.d.)
.
Why does the US put itself in this situation against the will of the American people?
According to (Online Documents – Korean War, n.d.) the US joined the Korean War because they were concerned that it had something to do with Communist China and the Soviet Union. Similar reasons caused the USA’s interference in the Vietnam war, and it caused the US economy to crash (Digital History, n.d.) . Putting both together, the US’s main problem is that they join war due to fear which causes their economy to crash back at home. For example, WWI was the initial cause of the Great Depression (Milestones: 1921–1936 – Office of the Historian, n.d.) .
In conclusion, the US has pulled itself in too many wars. Looking back since the American Revolution and to date, the outcomes of the war have started to fall away from the US’s favor. WWI and WWII were huge victories for the US, but after that the US started losing its grip in the Korean War and Afghanistan.
Since War outcomes have been getting worse over time, it is apparent that if the US ever has a WWIII, the outcomes might be frightening, even devastating, for the United States of America.
Jan 5
Rohan A’s Question : Read my writing and fact check it
Fact Checker with Rohan A’s edits:
Your writing covers a broad spectrum of U.S. military history and attempts to draw some conclusions about the nation’s war engagements and their impacts. Here are some points where your writing is accurate, and some points where the facts could be fine-tuned or clarified.
Accurate Points:
1.
The United States indeed started with the American Revolution.
2.
The Civil War occurred less than a century after the founding of the country.
3.
The U.S. participated in both World War I and World War II.
4.
There was American involvement in the Korean War and the Vietnam War.
5.
The U.S. has been involved in conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq in the recent past.
6.
A significant portion of U.S. adults views China as a potential threat.
Points for Clarification and Correction:
1.
Generalization of War Participation: Not every point in U.S. history involves the nation fighting a “horrid” war.
While there have been many conflicts, there have also been periods of peace.
2. Description of War Outcomes: The characterization of the Korean and Vietnam Wars lacking a “clear-cut victory” is accurate, but the phrase “losing against the mountainous terrain” in Afghanistan simplifies a complex array of factors that led to the challenging circumstances of the war in Afghanistan.
3. Public Opinion on Wars: It is incorrect to state that all U.S. military actions were against the will of the American people. Public opinion has varied greatly among different conflicts. For example, the initial invasion of Afghanistan had widespread public support in response to the attacks of September 11, 2001.
4. Economic Impact of Wars: The Great Depression was not caused by World War I; it was a result of a variety of factors, including stock market crashes, banking panics, and economic policy decisions. World War I concluded in 1918, and the stock market crash that initiated the Great Depression occurred in 1929, over a decade later.
5. War Outcomes Over Time: The claim that the outcomes of wars have been getting progressively worse for the United States is subjective and may not capture the complexity of each conflict’s consequences.
6. U.S. Military Aid: Two years ago, the U.S. sent aid to Ukraine, but equating this to being directly involved in a war like past conflicts may not be accurate. Additionally, the situation in Palestine and Israel is an ongoing conflict that the U.S. has been involved in through diplomacy and aid, rather than direct military engagement.
To fix the writing, you should accurately represent the complexity of the causes of the Great Depression and be cautious not to oversimplify the factors that led to the outcomes of the wars in Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan. Also, refine the claims about public opinion towards wars and the narrative that all wars have had worse outcomes for the U.S. over time. In history, each conflict has its unique context and consequences that may not follow a linear trajectory of success or failure.
Jan 5
It is a common occurrence of the United States to find itself in a brutal war. After taking various history courses in New Jersey, I know that the powerful nation started off with the American Revolution. Less than 100 years after its birth, the young country fought a huge civil war. Over the next 100 years, the US took part in 2 World Wars. Without a decade of break the country took part in the Vietnam War and Korean War, both without a clear-cut victory. Soon, the US took in part with regional conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, losing against the mountainous terrain.
Currently, China is on the path to becoming a potential enemy for the US as 83% of US adults see China as a potential threat for the US (More Than a Third of Americans View China as an ‘Enemy’, 2023). Two years ago the US sent aid to the Ukraine war and now a similar situation in Palestine and Israel. That’s a whole lot of wars and conflict for a relatively new country, 12 to be exact (Sullivan, n.d.) . Maybe the US has a huge impact on regional and worldwide conflicts, but they haven’t got anywhere. After withdrawing from the Korean and Vietnam war, the US withdrew from the conflict in Afghanistan.
Currently, China is on the path to becoming a potential enemy for the US as 83% of US adults see China as a potential threat for the US (More Than a Third of Americans View China as an ‘Enemy’, 2023). Two years ago the US sent aid to the Ukraine war and now a similar situation in Palestine and Israel.
That’s a whole lot of wars and conflict for a relatively new country, 12 to be exact (Sullivan, n.d.) . Maybe the US has a huge impact on regional and worldwide conflicts, but they haven’t got anywhere. After withdrawing from the Korean and Vietnam war, the US withdrew from the conflict in Afghanistan. Many of the regional conflicts were against the will of the American people. During the Vietnam War, some protests gathered up bodies of 15,000 – 25,000 people in the US Capitol (The March on Washington · Exhibit · Resistance and Revolution: The Anti-Vietnam War Movement at the University of Michigan, 1965-1972, n.d.) . Why does the US put itself in this situation against the will of the American people?
That’s a whole lot of wars and conflict for a relatively new country, 12 to be exact (Sullivan, n.d.) . Maybe the US has a huge impact on regional and worldwide conflicts, but they haven’t got anywhere. After withdrawing from the Korean and Vietnam war, the US withdrew from the conflict in Afghanistan. Many of the regional conflicts were against the will of the American people. During the Vietnam War, some protests gathered up bodies of 15,000 – 25,000 people in the US Capitol (The March on Washington · Exhibit · Resistance and Revolution: The Anti-Vietnam War Movement at the University of Michigan, 1965-1972, n.d.) . Why does the US put itself in this situation against the will of the American people?
According to (Online Documents – Korean War, n.d.) the US joined the Korean War because they were concerned that it had something to do with Communist China and the Soviet Union. Similar reasons caused the USA’s interference in the Vietnam war, and it caused the US economy to crash (Digital History, n.d.) . Putting both together, the US’s main problem is that they join war due to fear which causes their economy to crash back at home. For example, WWI was the initial cause of the Great Depression (Milestones: 1921–1936 – Office of the Historian, n.d.) .
In conclusion, the US has pulled itself in too many wars. Looking back since the American Revolution and to date, the outcomes of the war have started to fall away from the US’s favor. WWI and WWII were huge victories for the US, but after that the US started losing its grip in the Korean War and Afghanistan.
Since War outcomes have been getting worse over time, it is apparent that if the US ever has a WWIII, the outcomes might be frightening, even devastating, for the United States of America.
Jan 9
Rohan A’s Question : Read over my writing and grade it
Grader with Rohan A’s edits:
Yo, what’s up? Ready for some grade action on this essay? Let’s jump into it!
1) Your idea and point for writing
Score: 4
Reason: You present a clear argument about the US’s involvement in wars, and how it negatively impacts the country, but some points could be more thoroughly explained.
2) Your grammar and mechanics
Score: 3
Reason: You’ve got some grammar and mechanics issues.
Watch for run-on sentences, punctuation, and overall sentence structure needs a bit of cleanup.
3) Author’s word choice/vocabulary so it suits the target audience
Score: 4
Reason: Your vocabulary is generally appropriate for an informative essay, though sometimes the word choice could be more precise for stronger impact.
4) Organization
Score: 4
Reason: The essay’s organization is logical, with a clear introduction, body, and conclusion, but transitions between some ideas could be smoother.
Overall, rockin’ job but with a little bit of fine-tuning, this essay could totally be top-tier! Keep at it!
Jan 9
Rohan A’s Question : Read and grade my work.
Grader with Rohan A’s edits:
Hey there! Just got your essay to check out. Here’s how I think you did:
1) Your idea and point for writing: 75/100
You’re writing to show the pattern of the U.S. involvement in wars and the outcomes, which is clear, but you could better explain how each war relates to your main point.
2) Your grammar and mechanics: 65/100
You’ve got a few grammar issues and sentences that might need a bit of polishing, which could confuse readers.
3) Author’s word choice/vocabulary so it suits the target audience: 80/100
Your vocab is pretty on point for what looks like a high school essay!
It’s informative without being too complicated.
4) Organization: 70/100
The essay has a logical flow, but some points jump around, and it could be more clearly structured with better transitions between points.
Total score: 290/400
Overall, it seems like you’ve grasped the main concept, but there’s definitely room to improve consistency, clarity, and flow.
To get an overall score out of 100, I’d add up all the points (290) and then divide by the number of categories (4). So, your overall score would be about 72.5/100. Keep it up, and you could get that score even higher!
Jan 9
Rohan A’s Question : Read my writing and grade it
Grader with Rohan A’s edits:
Hey there!
Let’s get to grading your essay:
1) Your idea and point for writing – 80/100
The essay clearly aims to discuss the United States’ history with war and its impact.
The point you’re making comes through, but the argument could be crafted with more depth.
2) Your grammar and mechanics – 75/100
While the essay is mostly understandable, there are some grammatical issues and awkward phrasings that disrupt the flow of reading.
3) Author’s word choice/ vocabulary so it suits the target audience – 70/100
The vocabulary is appropriate for a general audience, but some sentences could be clearer, and using varied sentence structures could enhance reader engagement.
4) Organization – 80/100
The essay’s organization is decent, with a clear introduction, body, and conclusion.
However, smoother transitions between points would improve the overall structure.
Adding up the scores, we get a total of (80+75+70+80) / 4 = 76.25, which rounds to 76/100 for your overall score.
Remember that 80/100 would be passable, so don’t get discouraged. Keep working on your writing, and you’ll keep improving!
Logging in, please wait...
0 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
As we create this first article we are calling: Say Something Meaningful, the kids are creating their own partners to get the feedback they want. I love seeing them coming to me in the morning and showing because I don’t give homework, but they are so interested in it, they do it beyond the classroom!
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
As students work towards bigger end of year projects like a TED talk, we stop and say something to gather our ideas and force ourselves to say something about what we are reading.
We initially used AI’s thinking partner that Paul created to help us review our Book Thought Journals to analyze what topics it thought we might be interested in based on the thoughts we had about the books we were reading (students all choose to read what they want).
Here are the basic criteria I posted for this article:
At different periods of our inquiry and reading, we need to stop and say something about the knowledge we are gaining and the observations we are making.
Basic Requirements:
1. You must stay in this range: 425-500 words.
2. Try to limit your use of “I think” or “I” or “we”.
3. Make sure you refer to two sources of knowledge and correctly cite them (italics for books, capitals, authors). You may use your experience as a source, but you must be specific in the details and you will want additional knowledge to support it. Use the “words to introduce evidence” to weave in experts and statistics. You build credibility when you show people where your knowledge came from.
4. Organize your article so that it makes sense for our audience (your peers, parents and Youth Voices). Maybe your article has topics and subtopics, maybe it’s a letter, maybe it’s a traditional article—but all options have a structure and organization to help the reader understand your message.
5. Your thoughts should be yours, not AI’s; although you can acknowledge AI came up with a root, branch or question for you. Voice comes from your passion for the topic. AI has no heart.
6. Have AI read your article to check for areas where you have been vague or repetitive.
7. Your article must be read aloud and clearly show the revisions and edits of being read aloud to a friend.
8. Under your article, include three sections: AI prompt, AI feedback, AI reaction to feedback. Make sure to bold these and space them, so the reader can easily see them.
9. YOU MUST INCLUDE A PARAGRAPH ABOUT THE PROCESS OF WRITING THIS on 1/3’s week Growth/Reflection Journal. For example, comment on how you came up with the idea from the mapping/drawing day. Explain how your idea/writing changed as you drafted. Often, as we write, we discover or uncover a new idea or more clarity in what we are trying to say. Comment if this happened to you. Describe any craft choices you made. For example, did you use any analogies or metaphors to help your reader? Did you separate a line and give it its own paragraph? Why? What parts of the article did you struggle with? What do you understand about credibility? What do you understand about the writing process? What do you understand about you as a writer?
10. Title your piece!!
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
One of the greatest take-aways I have seen with using the writing thining partners and allowing and forcing students to create their own partner is that it makes them think about what type of feedback they want. When they don’t get “good” feedback, they often realize they did not prompt the AI well. I modeled with my piece and we brainstormed all the things it could help us with like:
(1) it could look for repetitive ideas
(2) it could help us organize our ideas by outlining them which also showed us undeveloped ideas/thoughts
(3) it could show us where an audience might challenge my ideas
Just these few helped them think more deeply about their writing and realize their power. I was thrilled because as a NWP teacher, I have always tried to get my students to write a memo to their writing group to ask for the type of feedback they want – what areas they were concerned with. It was always super difficult and hard for them to do this—maybe because they couldn’t think about their writing like this. AI partners and creating prompts REALLY helped this!
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
Because we can not spend endless time with one piece and need to publish these articles to our class magazine to send home to our parents for thoughts and possible resources as we continue in our inquiries, most students only created one thinking partner.
There was at least 20% of my students who used the initial feedback and prompt and realized the wealth of feedback potential. Attached to their draft articles in Google, I can see who did that. Also, students wrote a very detailed reflection in Growth/Reflection Journals about this process.
As we move on to our next writing piece which will be a conversation with a person in our lives where students will write an essay about their conversations and the observations they made about life, we will look to use the AI thinking partners again. It should be interesting to see what prompts they come up with for this piece because it will be all personal.
My overall excitement still seems to be that thinking what to prompt the AI thinking partner with makes students think much more deeply about their writing and how to improve it.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Turn this text into a description of a 45-second, viral-worthy TikTok video.
Expand on a detailed, moment-by-moment, scene-by-scene description of a TikTok video
Describe the hook. Say what happens in the first three seconds
Describe anything and everybody we would be seeing and hearing.
Describe the camera angles, filters, stickers, different video formats and styles and the edits.
Give it creative, cool, but authentic production values.
Amaze us with this TikTok.
Leave us with a question at the end, and find creative ways to ask us to comment.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Act like the skilled, attentive writing instructor dedicated to writing as process, not product.
Provide me with your expanded thoughts about my writing.
Use the second person point-of-view. Use second-person pronouns: you, your, yours, yourself, yourselves.
Each comment should be up to and no longer than 150 words.
Tell me the main idea of this article
Evaluate whether this article offers hope, solutions, or positivity.
Offer possible solutions about the topic in the paper
Review the piece, and only respond with feedback about how/where the writing is vague, general, or generic
Include some ideas about how to improve my writing
End by finding a creative way to ask me if this is helpful and a compliment about my writing.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Act as if you are a kid, perhaps about 13 years old. Make your feedback easy to comprehend, and make it simple advice.
Give them valuable advice on the main points. DO NOT give a summery of what you like about the story, just go straight to the simple Advice.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Hi,
I created a new thinking partner on NowComment this morning. It is named “Rohan’s Inner Voice”. I prompted it to give three core points on how to express your motivation/inner voice of the passage. I really liked the feedback it gave me. This is the advice it gave me:
Rohan Arya’s Question : Read over my writing and give me advice
Rohan’s Inner Voice with Rohan Arya’s edits:
It looks like your piece is talking about the history of war involvement by the United States and questioning why the country seems to get involved in so many conflicts. You’re trying to understand the motivations behind these actions and their consequences, especially on the economy and public opinion. Here are three core points to help build your Inner Voice, or motivation, for writing this:
1. Seeking Understanding – Your writing suggests you want to dive deep and understand why the U.S. has participated in numerous wars. By looking at history and connecting wars to current events, you seem to be motivated by a desire to make sense of these patterns. It’s important for you to share this insight because you believe understanding the past can lead to better decisions in the future.
2. Highlighting the Impact on People – You mention how wars go against the will of the American people and discuss the impact on the economy and society. Your Inner Voice might be driven by a sense of empathy for those who are affected by these decisions, both in the U.S. and abroad. Your writing could be a call for people to think about how war decisions made by the few can have huge effects on the many.
3. Promoting Change – By expressing your opinion that the U.S. shouldn’t be scared and should not engage in so many wars, it seems like you’re striving for a change in U.S. foreign policy. You appear to believe that as citizens, people have the power to influence these decisions and should stand up together for what they believe in. Your Inner Voice is motivated by a quest for more peaceful and sensible approaches to international conflicts.
These three motivators can help you strengthen the message in your writing and connect more deeply with your readers by giving them a clear understanding of why this topic is significant and worthy of their attention.
The prompt I gave was the following:
“You should speak with an 8th grade reading/vocabulary level, so it isn’t too hard for the reader to understand what you are saying.
After reading through the article, I want you to identify the Inner Voice of the reader, and find out their strive for writing this. You need to give 3 core points to help build their Inner Voice/ motivation."
The main reason I created this Thinking Partner is that in our Say Something Articles, I think that it’s really easy to throw facts on a page, and many 8th graders have trouble building their motivation/ foundation of their writing.
I hope you like this New Thinking Partner!
Have a wonderful rest of your winter vacation!
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Be a historian who is an expert on on U.S. Wars.
Compare the selected text to the to “U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts” by the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
Make three lists:
1) What is accurate
2) What is not accurate.
3) What other, related facts from the article might be added to provide more understanding and context. Quote from the article.
Uae the following article to compare the facts in the text and in this CRS Report.
Start by finding a creative way of saying: "The information I’m using to check the facts comes from a Congressional Research Service Report “U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts”
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of
Recent Conflicts
Updated November 29, 2022
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
RS21405
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service
Summary
Many wars or conflicts in U.S. history have federally designated “periods of war,” dates marking
their beginning and ending. These dates are important for qualification for certain veterans’
pension or disability benefits. Confusion can occur because beginning and ending dates for
“periods of war” in many nonofficial sources are often different from those given in treaties and
other official sources of information, and armistice dates can be confused with termination dates.
This report lists the beginning and ending dates for “periods of war” found in Title 38 of the Code
of Federal Regulations, dealing with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). It also lists and
differentiates other beginning dates given in declarations of war, as well as termination of
hostilities dates and armistice and ending dates given in proclamations, laws, or treaties. The
dates for the recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq are included along with the official end date
for Operation New Dawn in Iraq on December 15, 2011, and Operation Enduring Freedom in
Afghanistan on December 28, 2014. Operation Inherent Resolve continues along the Syrian-Iraqi
border effective October 15, 2014.
For additional information, see the following CRS Products: CRS In Focus IF10539, Defense
Primer: Legal Authorities for the Use of Military Forces, by Jennifer K. Elsea; CRS Report
R42699, The War Powers Resolution: Concepts and Practice, by Matthew C. Weed; CRS Report
RL31133, Declarations of War and Authorizations for the Use of Military Force: Historical
Background and Legal Implications, by Jennifer K. Elsea and Matthew C. Weed.
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service
Contents
War Dates………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1
Indian Wars…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1
Spanish-American War…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1
Mexican Border Period…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2
World War I ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 2
World War I against Germany……………………………………………………………………………………… 2
World War I against Austria-Hungary…………………………………………………………………………… 2
World War II…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2
World War II with Germany………………………………………………………………………………………… 3
World War II with Japan……………………………………………………………………………………………… 3
World War II with Italy ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3
World War II with Bulgaria…………………………………………………………………………………………. 3
World War II with Hungary…………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
World War II with Romania ………………………………………………………………………………………… 4
Korean Conflict ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
Vietnam Era……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
Tonkin Gulf Resolution………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
Selected Military Operations (1980-1996) in Lebanon 1982-1983, Grenada 1983, and
Panama 1989-1990……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
Persian Gulf War …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
Recent Conflicts: Afghanistan and Iraq………………………………………………………………………………. 6
Afghanistan—Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF)……………………………………………………….. 6
Afghanistan—Operation Freedom’s Sentinel (OFS)………………………………………………………. 7
Iraq—Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)…………………………………………………………………………… 9
Iraq—Operation New Dawn (OND)…………………………………………………………………………… 10
Islamic State-Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR)……………………………………………………………11
Contacts
Author Information………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 12
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service 1
War Dates
Congress, usually through a declaration of war, has often been the first governmental authority to
designate the beginning date of a war or armed conflict. The President, or executive branch
officials responsible to him, through proclamation, or Congress, through legislation, has been
responsible for designating the war’s termination date.1
In some cases, later legislation is enacted
to extend these beginning and ending dates for the purpose of broadening eligibility for veterans’
benefits.2 This report notes the variations in the dates cited in the Code of Federal Regulations
(C.F.R.) “periods of war” and those dates given in the declarations of war beginning and the
proclamations, laws, or treaties terminating such conflicts.3 Adding to the confusion, during
World War II, wars were declared and terminated with six individual combatant countries.
Moreover, armistice dates are also often confused with termination dates.4
Title 38, Part 3, Section 3.2 of the Code of Federal Regulations, dealing with the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA), lists official beginning and termination dates for most war periods from the
Indian Wars to the present to be used in determining the availability of veterans’ benefits.5 The
material below summarizes these dates. Where applicable, a summary of the Department of
Veterans Affairs official beginning and termination dates is provided followed by a citation to the
lettered C.F.R. section. For some entries, this initial summary is followed by an explanatory note
or declaration, armistice, cease-fire, or termination dates cited by other official sources. Also
included are dates for the recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Indian Wars
January 1, 1817, through December 31, 1898, inclusive. Service must have been rendered with
U.S. military forces against Indian tribes or nations. Code of Federal Regulations, 3.2 (a).
Spanish-American War
April 21, 1898, through July 4, 1902, inclusive. If the veteran served with the U.S. military forces
engaged in hostilities in the Moro Province, the ending date is July 15, 1903. The Philippine
1 For background on the War Powers Act and use of military force abroad, see the following: CRS Report RL31133,
Declarations of War and Authorizations for the Use of Military Force: Historical Background and Legal Implications,
by Jennifer K. Elsea and Matthew C. Weed; CRS In Focus IF10539, Defense Primer: Legal Authorities for the Use of
Military Forces, by Jennifer K. Elsea; and CRS Report R42699, The War Powers Resolution: Concepts and Practice,
by Matthew C. Weed.
2 The American Legion also follows these dates closely in determining who is eligible for membership; the Veterans of
Foreign Wars has its own much more elaborate list of dates.
3 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) Title 38, Part 3, §3.2 Periods of war, at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title38/chapter-I/part-3/subpart-A/subject-group-ECFRf5fe31f49d4f511/section-3.2..
4 Armistice—“In International law, a suspension or temporary cessation of hostilities by agreement between belligerent
powers.” Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, Joint Publication 1-02, Department of
Defense, 12 April 2010, on p. 36 at https://fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp1_02-april2010.pdf..
5 Title 38 of the C.F.R., titled “Pensions, Bonuses and Veterans’ Relief,” is not to be confused with Title 38 of the
United States Code, titled “Veterans Benefits.” Laws enacted in each Congress are first collected as session laws,
published in the Statutes at Large for each session. These laws are then codified by subject and published in the United
States Code. The general guidance given by these laws results in the issuance of more detailed regulations to
implement these laws. Such regulations are first published in the Federal Register and are then codified by subject in
the C.F.R.
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service 2
Insurrection and the Boxer Rebellion are included for the purposes of benefit determination under
this C.F.R. section. Code of Federal Regulations, 3.2 (b).
Declared by an act of Congress April 25, 1898 (30 Stat. 364, Ch. 189). An armistice signed
August 12, 1898. Terminated by Treaty signed at Paris, December 10, 1898 (30 Stat. 1754),
ratified and proclaimed April 11, 1899.
Mexican Border Period
May 9, 1916, through April 5, 1917. In the case of a veteran who during such period served in
Mexico, on the borders thereof, or in the adjacent waters thereto. Code of Federal Regulations,
3.2 (h).
World War I
April 6, 1917, through November 11, 1918, inclusive. If the veteran served with the U.S. military
forces in Russia, the ending date is April 1, 1920. Service after November 11, 1918, and before
July 2, 1921, is considered World War I service if the veteran served in the active military, naval,
or air service after April 5, 1917, and before November 12, 1918. Code of Federal Regulations,
3.2 ©.
World War I against Germany
Declared by Joint Resolution of Congress of April 6, 1917 (40 Stat. 429, Ch. 1). Armistice signed
near Compiègne, France, November 11, 1918. Terminated July 2, 1921, by Joint Resolution of
Congress (42 Stat. 105, Ch. 40, 1).
World War I against Austria-Hungary
Declared by Joint Resolution of Congress, December 7, 1917 (40 Stat. 429, Ch. 1). An armistice
signed near Compiègne, France, November 11, 1918. Terminated July 2, 1921, by Joint
Resolution of Congress (42 Stat. 106, Ch. 40, 3).
World War II
December 7, 1941, through December 31, 1946, inclusive. If the veteran was in service on
December 31, 1946, continuous service before July 26, 1947, is considered World War II service.
Code of Federal Regulations, 3.2 (d).
During World War II, war was officially declared against six separate countries. The war with
each was not over until the effective date of the Treaty of Peace. Note also the confusion cited
below over which day is the official Victory in Europe Day (V-E Day)6
and Victory over Japan
6 May 7, 1945, is listed as V-E Day in commentary about signing the first German surrender document in Historic
Documents of World War II by Walter Consuelo Langsam (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1958), p. 144. However,
May 8, 1945, is cited as V-E day in The Encyclopedia of American Facts and Dates, p. 528; as the “Official V-E Day”
in Louis L. Snyder, Louis L. Snyder’s Historical Guide to World War Two (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1982), p. 736;
and the World Almanac of World War II, ed. Brigadier Peter Young (New York: Pharos Books, 1981), p. 347, states in
its chronology for May 8, “The British and Americans celebrate VE Day (Victory in Europe Day). Truman, Churchill
and King George VI all make special broadcasts.” Although President Truman did not officially proclaim May 7 as V-
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service 3
Day (V-J Day).7
World War II with Germany
Declared by Joint Resolution of Congress, December 11, 1941 (55 Stat. 796, Ch. 564). German
representative Colonel General Alfred Jodl signed the unconditional act of surrender to Allied
representatives in a schoolhouse in Reims, France, on May 7, 1945. A second German surrender
ceremony was held on May 8 in Berlin at the insistence of the U.S.S.R. Cessation of hostilities
declared as of noon, December 31, 1946, by presidential proclamation of December 31, 1946
(Proc. no. 2714, 61 Stat. 1048). State of war with the “government of Germany” terminated
October 19, 1951, by Joint Resolution of Congress of that date (65 Stat. 451, Ch. 519), by
Presidential Proclamation 2950, October 24, 1951. No peace treaty with Germany was signed.
World War II with Japan
Declared by Joint Resolution of Congress, December 8, 1941 (55 Stat. 795, Ch. 561). Japanese
representatives publicly signed unconditional surrender document on the deck of the USS
Missouri anchored in Tokyo Bay on September 2, 1945. President Truman proclaimed this date
Victory over Japan Day or V-J Day. Cessation of hostilities declared as of 12 noon, December 31,
1946, by presidential proclamation of December 31, 1946 (Proc. no. 2714, 61 Stat. 1048).
Terminated by Multilateral Treaty of Peace with Japan, signed at San Francisco, September 8,
1951 (3 UST 3329), and ratified March 20, 1952, effective April 28, 1952.
World War II with Italy
Declared by Joint Resolution of Congress, December 11, 1941 (55 Stat. 797, Ch. 565). Cessation
of hostilities declared as of noon December 31, 1946, by presidential proclamation of December
31, 1946 (Proc. no. 2714, 61 Stat. 1048). Terminated by Treaty of Peace dated at Paris, February
10, 1947 (61 Stat. 1247), effective September 15, 1947.
World War II with Bulgaria
Declared by Joint Resolution of Congress, June 5, 1942 (56 Stat. 307, Ch. 323). Cessation of
hostilities declared as of noon December 31, 1946, by presidential proclamation of December 31,
E (Victory in Europe) Day, he did proclaim Sunday, May 13, 1945, a day of prayer. To make for more confusion, his
May 8, 1945, Proclamation 2651, proclaiming May 13 as a day of prayer, is titled, “Victory in Europe; Day of Prayer”
(3 C.F.R., 1943-1948 Comp.), p. 55. In addition, his May 8 news conference in which he proclaims May 13 a day of
prayer is titled, “The President’s News Conference on V-E Day”—Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States.
Harry S. Truman, 1945 (Washington: GPO, 1961), p. 43.
7
In his news conference of August 14, 1945, announcing news of the Japanese government’s complete acceptance of
terms of surrender, President Truman states, “Proclamation of V-J Day must wait upon the formal signing of the
surrender terms by Japan.”—Public Papers, p. 216. The proclamation of September 2 as V-J Day was given in his
September 1, 1945, “Speech to the American People after the Signing of the Terms of Unconditional Surrender by
Japan.”—Public Papers, p. 254. However, no formal, numbered proclamation was apparently issued. Both August 14,
the day of President Truman’s announcement of the Japanese surrender, and September 2, the official day proclaimed
by President Truman in his speech, are cited as V-J Day in Chase’s Calendar of Events 2002 (New York: McGrawHill, 2002), pp. 421 and 555. August 15 is cited as V-J Day by The Encyclopedia of American Facts and Dates, 9th ed.,
by Gordon Carruth (New York: Harper Collins, 1993), p. 530. August 15, on which the Japanese Emperor made his
historic broadcast to the Japanese people telling of Japan’s surrender, is cited as V-J Day in The World Almanac of
World War II, p. 353.
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service 4
1946 (Proc. no. 2714, 61 Stat. 1048). Terminated by Treaty of Peace dated at Paris, February 10,
1947 (61 Stat. 1915), effective September 15, 1947.
World War II with Hungary
Declared by Joint Resolution of Congress, June 5, 1942 (56 Stat. 307, Ch. 324). Cessation of
hostilities declared as of noon December 31, 1946, by presidential proclamation (Proc. no. 2714,
61 Stat. 1048). Terminated by Treaty of Peace dated at Paris, February 10, 1947 (61 Stat. 1757),
effective September 15, 1947.
World War II with Romania
Declared by Joint Resolution of Congress, June 5, 1942 (56 Stat. 307, Ch. 325). Cessation of
hostilities declared as of noon December 31, 1946, by presidential proclamation of December 31,
1946 (Proc. no. 2714, 61 Stat. 1048). Terminated by Treaty of Peace dated at Paris, February 10,
1947 (61 Stat. 1757), effective September 15, 1947.
Korean Conflict
June 27, 1950, through January 31, 1955, inclusive. Code of Federal Regulations, 3.2 (e).
On June 25, 1950, North Korean Communist forces attacked South Korean positions south of the
38th parallel, leading to an immediate United Nations (U.N.) Security Council resolution calling
for a cease-fire and withdrawal of the North Korean forces. On June 26, President Truman
ordered U.S. air and sea forces in the Far East to aid South Korea. On June 27, the U.N. Security
Council adopted a resolution asking U.N. members for assistance in repelling the North Korean
armed attack and in restoring peace and security in the area. On June 30, the President stated that
he had authorized the use of certain U.S. air and ground units wherever necessary. No declaration
of war was requested of Congress and no authorization for use of force, by statute, was requested
or enacted. An armistice signed at Panmunjom, Korea, on July 27, 1953, between U.N. and
Communist representatives (4 UST 234; TIAS 2782). No peace treaty was ever signed.
Vietnam Era
The period beginning on February 28, 1961, and ending on May 7, 1975, inclusive, in the case of
a veteran who served in the Republic of Vietnam during that period. The period beginning on
August 5, 1964, and ending on May 7, 1975, inclusive, in all other cases. Code of Federal
Regulations, 3.2 (f).
Tonkin Gulf Resolution
No declaration of war was requested of Congress. Instead, there was a Joint Resolution of
Congress to promote the maintenance of international peace and security in Southeast Asia, which
stated in part that Congress “approves and supports the determination of the President, as
Commander in Chief, to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces
of the United States and to prevent any further aggression.” H.J. Res. 1145, P.L. 88-408, August
10, 1964 (78 Stat. 384). The Tonkin Gulf Resolution was formally repealed on January 12, 1971,
by P.L. 91-672, (84 Stat. 2055). The Agreement Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Vietnam
signed in Paris, January 27, 1973 (TIAS 7674). Joint communiqué implementing the agreement
and protocols of January 27, 1973, signed at Paris and entered into force, June 13, 1973.
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service 5
Selected Military Operations (1980-1996) in Lebanon
1982-1983, Grenada 1983, and Panama 1989-1990
Lebanon. U.S. Marines deployed on August 21, 1982 and September 29, 1982, were part of a
temporary multinational force in Lebanon. See S. 639, P.L. 98-43 (Lebanon Emergency
Assistance Act of 1983).
8
Grenada. On October 25, 1983, U.S. troops were deployed to Grenada “to restore law and order”
and to protect American lives at the request of the members of the Organization of Eastern
Caribbean States. Known as Operation Urgent Fury,9 by December 15, 1983, all forces were
withdrawn.
Panama. On December 21, 1989, President George H.W. Bush reported that he had ordered U.S.
military forces to Panama to protect the lives of American citizens and bring General Noriega to
justice. Known as Operation Just Cause,10 by February 13, 1990, all U.S. forces were withdrawn.
Participation in these conflicts alone does not confer automatic veterans’ status for
servicemembers. For more information, see CRS Report R47299, U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs: Who Is a Veteran?, by Scott D. Szymendera, and CRS Report RL31133, Declarations of
War and Authorizations for the Use of Military Force: Historical Background and Legal
Implications, by Jennifer K. Elsea and Matthew C. Weed.
Persian Gulf War
August 2, 1990, through April 6, 1991, when Iraq officially accepted cease-fire terms. Congress
passed H.J.Res. 77, Authorizing the Use of Military Force against Iraq, the same day it was
introduced (January 12, 1991), and it was signed by President George H.W. Bush on January 14,
1991 (P.L. 102-1). Operation Desert Storm11 and the air war phase began at 3 a.m. January 17,
1991 (January 16, 7 p.m. Eastern Standard Time). Allied ground assault began at 4 a.m. February
24 (February 23, 8 p.m. EST). Cease-fire declared at 8:01 a.m. February 28, 1991 (12:01 a.m.
EST).12 Cease-fire terms negotiated at Safwan, Iraq, March 1, 1991.13 Iraq officially accepted
8 See also S.J.Res. 159 (P.L. 98-119) authorizing the President to keep U.S. forces in Lebanon for as long as 18 months,
or until April 1985; and “A Reluctant Congress Adopts Lebanon Policy,” CQ Almanac 1983 at
https://library.cqpress.com/cqalmanac/document.php?id=cqal83-1198422..
9 Ronald H. Cole, Operation Urgent Fury The Planning and Execution of Joint Operations in Grenada 12 October – 2
November 1983, Joint History Office, Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Washington, DC 1997, at
https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/History/Monographs/Urgent_Fury.pdf..
10 Cole, Operation Just Cause The Planning and Execution of Joint Operations in Panama February 1988 – January
1990, Joint History Office, Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Washington, DC 1995, at
https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/History/Monographs/Just_Cause.pdf..
11 Shannon Collins, “Desert Storm: A Look Back,” DOD News Feature, January 11 2019, at
https://www.defense.gov/Explore/Features/story/Article/1728715/desert-storm-a-look-back/..
12 Cease fire—“A command given to any unit or individual firing any weapon to stop engaging the target.” Department
of Defense Dictionary, p. 67.
13 This agreement is actually a transcript of the discussion held at Safwan Airfield, Iraq, between Coalition participants,
U.S. Gen. M. Norman Schwarzkopf and Lt. Gen. Khalid of the Joint Arab Forces, and Iraqi participants, Lt. Gen.
Sultan Kasim Ahmad, Chief of Staff of the Ministry of Defense, and Lt. Gen. Sala Abud Mahmud, III Corps
Commander.
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service 6
cease-fire terms, April 6, 1991.14 Cease-fire took effect April 11, 1991. Currently, the Code of
Federal Regulations, 3.2 (i) does not list an official end date.15
Recent Conflicts: Afghanistan and Iraq
Shortly after the terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001, President George W.
Bush called on Afghanistan’s leaders to hand over Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda leaders
and close their terrorist training camps. He also demanded the return of all detained foreign
nationals and the opening of terrorist training sites to inspection.16 These demands were rejected.
The Administration sought international support from the United Nations for military action
against Afghanistan. U.N. Security Council Resolution 1368 of September 12, 2001, stated that
the Council “Expresses its readiness to take all necessary steps to respond to the terrorist attacks
of September 11, 2001 … ”
17 This resolution was interpreted by many as U.N. authorization for
military action in response to the 9/11 attacks. As a result, Congress passed S.J.Res. 23,
“Authorization for Use of Military Force,” on September 14, 2001. This bill was signed by
President George W. Bush on September 18, 2001, as P.L. 107-40, and it authorized the President
to use “all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he
determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on
September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons…. ”
18 Operations in the region
began with U.S. military forces deployed to the region on October 7, 2001.
See CRS Report R41989, Congressional Authority to Limit Military Operations, by Jennifer K.
Elsea, Michael John Garcia, and Thomas J. Nicola.
Afghanistan—Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF)
Operations began with U.S. military forces deployed to Afghanistan to combat terrorism on
October 7, 2001, and designated Operation Enduring Freedom.
On March 27, 2009, President Barack Obama announced a new strategy in Afghanistan and
Pakistan and ordered the deployment of 17,000 troops that had been previously requested by
General David McKiernan.19 In President Obama’s “Address to the Nation on the Way Forward
in Afghanistan and Pakistan” at West Point on December 1, 2009, he stated that “it is in our vital
national interest to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan. After 18 months, our
troops will begin to come home. These are the resources that we need to seize the initiative, while
14 Acceptance is in the form of a letter to the U.N. Security Council accepting the terms of U.N. Resolution 687 (U.N.
document S22485, April 11, 1991).
15 38 C.F.R. Part 3, §3.2 Periods of war, at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-38/chapter-I/part-3/subpart-A/subjectgroup-ECFRf5fe31f49d4f511/section-3.2.. Note: Section (i) for the Persian Gulf War lists “August 2, 1990, through
date to be prescribed by Presidential proclamation or law.” No specific end date is listed as of the date of this report.
16 President George W. Bush, “Address Before A Joint Session of Congress on the United States Response to the
Terrorist Attacks of September 11,” September 20, 2001, p. 57/PDF p. 65, at https://georgewbushwhitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/bushrecord/documents/Selected_Speeches_George_W_Bush.pdf..
17 United Nations, Security Council Resolution 1368 (2001), adopted by the Security Council at its 4370th meeting, on
September 12, 2001, at https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/126/1368.pdf..
18 P.L. 107-40, “To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks
launched against the United States,” at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ40/pdf/PLAW-107publ40.pdf..
19 The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, “Remarks by the President on a New Strategy for Afghanistan and
Pakistan,” press release, March 27, 2009, at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/remarks-presidenta-new-strategy-afghanistan-and-pakistan..
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service 7
building the Afghan capacity that can allow for a responsible transition of our forces out of
Afghanistan.”
20
On June 22, 2011, President Obama again addressed the American people about the way forward
in Afghanistan: “We will begin the drawdown of U.S. troops from a position of strength. We have
exceeded our expectations on our core goal of defeating al-Qaeda killing 20 of its top 30 leaders,
including Osama bin Laden. We have broken the Taliban’s momentum, and trained over 100,000
Afghan National Security Forces.”21 As a result, U.S. forces began the withdrawal of 10,000
troops from Afghanistan.
On December 28, 2014, after 13 years of combat operations, President Obama and Secretary of
Defense Hagel announced the end of OEF and the beginning of a follow-on mission on January 1,
2015.22 A transition ceremony was held at the International Security and Assistance Force
headquarters in Kabul, Afghanistan, attended by U.S. commanders and allied troops from the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). For more information, see CRS Report RL30588,
Afghanistan: Post-Taliban Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy, by Kenneth Katzman and
Clayton Thomas.
Afghanistan—Operation Freedom’s Sentinel (OFS)
Effective January 1, 2015, Secretary of Defense Hagel announced that the U.S. mission in
Afghanistan would focus on training, advising, and assisting Afghan security forces and
designated it as Operation Freedom’s Sentinel.
23 During 2015, approximately 13,000 troops, with
nearly 10,000 from the United States, were deployed alongside NATO’s 28 member nations and
13 partner nations for its Resolute Support Mission (RSM).
24 RSM focused on training, advising,
and assisting (TAA) the Afghan Security Institutions (ASI) and the Afghan National Defense &
Security Forces (ANDSF) in order to build their capabilities and long-term sustainability.25 On
20 The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, “Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation on the Way
Forward in Afghanistan and Pakistan,” press release, December 1, 2009, at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/thepress-office/remarks-president-address-nation-way-forward-afghanistan-and-pakistan..
21 The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, “Remarks by the President on the Way Forward in Afghanistan,”
press release, June 22, 2011, at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/06/22/remarks-presidentway-forward-afghanistan..
22 U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), “Obama, Hagel Mark End of Operation Enduring Freedom,” news release,
December 28, 2014, at https://dod.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/603860/obama-hagel-mark-end-of-operationenduring-freedom/..
23 DOD, “Statement by Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel on Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Freedom’s
Sentinel,” news release, NR-631-14, December 28, 2014, at https://dod.defense.gov/News/News-Releases/NewsRelease-View/Article/605332/statement-by-secretary-of-defense-chuck-hagel-on-operation-enduring-freedom-and/..
24 NATO Resolute Support Mission (RSM) “placemat”: Key Facts and Figures, at
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2021/2/pdf/2021-02-RSM-Placemat.pdf.. As of February 2021, there
were 9,592 troops from 36 nations including the United States. Note on numbers: The number of troops above reflects
the overall contribution of individual contributing nations. They should be taken as indicative as they change daily, in
accordance with the deployment procedures of the individual troop-contributing nations.
25 NATO, Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan, August 19, 2021, at
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_113694.htm.. At the 2016 NATO Summit in Warsaw, Allied leaders decided
to extend the presence of RSM beyond 2016. Two years later, at the Brussels Summit in July 2018, they committed to
sustaining the mission until conditions indicate a change is appropriate. On February 29, 2020, NATO welcomed the
announcement that “significant first steps in pursuit of a peaceful settlement, paving the way for intra-Afghan
negotiations between a fully inclusive Afghan national team and the Taliban to reach a comprehensive peace
agreement.” See also CRS Report R45122, Afghanistan: Background and U.S. Policy: In Brief, by Clayton Thomas in
the section “U.S.-Taliban Agreement.”
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service 8
October 1, 2015, General John F. Campbell, commander, RSM, U.S. Forces-Afghanistan/ISAF,
defined the U.S. military’s objectives: “U.S. forces are now carrying out two well-defined
missions: a Counter-Terrorism (CT) mission against the remnants of Al-Qaeda and the Resolute
Support TAA mission in support of Afghan security forces. Our CT and TAA efforts are
concurrent and complementary. While we continue to attack the remnants of Al-Qaeda, we are
also building the ANDSF so that they can secure the Afghan people, win the peace, and contribute
to stability throughout the region.”
26 On October 15, 2015, President Obama announced that the
posture of 9,800 U.S. troops in Afghanistan would remain through 2016. By the end of 2016,
5,500 troops were expected to remain in Afghanistan to support the U.S. embassy in Kabul and at
bases in Bagram, Jalalabad, and Kandahar to train Afghans and focus on counterterrorism
operations in the region.
27
On August 21, 2017, President Donald Trump announced his strategy in Afghanistan and South
Asia in a speech at Fort Myer, VA. He stated, “In Afghanistan and Pakistan, America’s interests
are clear: We must stop the resurgence of safe havens that enable terrorists to threaten America,
and we must prevent nuclear weapons and materials from coming into the hands of terrorists and
being used against us, or anywhere in the world for that matter.”
28
On September 2, 2018, Army General John M. Nicholson passed command of NATO’s Resolute
Support Mission and U.S. Forces Afghanistan to Army General Austin S. Miller during a
ceremony in Kabul, Afghanistan.29 General Miller emphasized to coalition troops that what they
are doing in Afghanistan makes their own countries and citizens safer. The “train, advise, assist”
mission allows Afghan security forces to take the fight to the enemy, and to give the Afghan
government the security needed to provide stability and no longer a safe haven for terrorists.30 In
February 2020, the Trump Administration announced that the United States had entered into an
agreement with the Taliban “that secures important commitments that are necessary to finally end
the conflict in Afghanistan.”
31 Per the agreement, which was signed on February 29, 2020, the
United States committed to the withdrawal of “all military forces of the United States, its allies,
and Coalition partners, including all non-diplomatic civilian personnel, private security
contractors, trainers, advisors, and supporting services personnel” from Afghanistan by the end of
April 2021.32
26 Gen. John F. Campbell, commander, Resolute Support Mission, U.S. Forces-Afghanistan/ISAF, “Operation
Freedom’s Sentinel and our continued security investment in Afghanistan,” Army.mil, October 1, 2015, at
https://www.army.mil/article/156517/operation_freedoms_sentinel_and_our_continued_security_investment_in_afgha
nistan.
27 The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, “Statement by the President on Afghanistan,” October 15, 2015, at
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/10/15/statement-president-afghanistan..
28 The White House, Briefings and Statements, “Remarks by President Trump on the Strategy in Afghanistan and South
Asia,” August 21, 2017, at https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trumpstrategy-afghanistan-south-asia/..
29 Jim Garamone, “Miller Takes over NATO, U.S. Commands in Afghanistan,” DOD News, September 2, 2018, at
https://dod.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/1618550/miller-takes-over-nato-us-commands-in-afghanistan/..
30 Jim Garamone, “Commander Wants Coalition Forces in Afghanistan to Know Why They Fight,” DOD News,
September 29, 2018, at https://dod.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/1649125/commander-wants-coalition-forces-inafghanistan-to-know-why-they-fight/..
31 The White House, Briefings and Statements, “President Donald J. Trump is Taking a Historic Step to Achieve Peace
in Afghanistan and Bring Our Troops Home,” February 29, 2020, at https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefingsstatements/president-donald-j-trump-taking-historic-step-achieve-peace-afghanistan-bring-troops-home/..
32 State Department, Agreement for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan between the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which
is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban and the United States of America,
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service 9
On April 14, 2021, President Biden announced his intent to uphold the agreement signed under
the Trump Administration. He stated that the final withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan
would begin on May 1, 2021 and end by September 11, 2021.33
On August 30, 2021, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin announced that the evacuation of
civilians and the removal of all U.S. forces from Afghanistan was complete, marking the end of
OFS and the war in Afghanistan.34 Marine Corps General Frank McKenzie, the head of U.S.
Central Command (CENTCOM), confirmed the end of the evacuation and the war with the
departure of the last military planes. The final C-17 left Kabul on August 30, 2021, at 3:29 p.m.
Eastern Daylight Time.35
The war in Afghanistan spanned nearly two decades and DOD reports that it claimed the lives of
2,462 U.S. servicemembers and civilians.
36 For more information, see CRS Report R46879, U.S.
Military Withdrawal and Taliban Takeover in Afghanistan: Frequently Asked Questions,
coordinated by Clayton Thomas.
Iraq—Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)
In mid-2002, the George W. Bush Administration began deploying U.S. troops to Kuwait. During
the 107th Congress (2001-2002), Congress debated whether to send U.S. troops to Iraq, and on
October 16, 2002, H.J.Res. 114 was signed into law as P.L. 107-243, Authorization for the Use of
Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. This law authorized the President to use military
force to “defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by
Iraq” and “to enforce all relevant U.N. Security Council resolutions against Iraq.”
37
On November 8, 2002, the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 1441. This resolution found
Iraq in breach of past U.N. resolutions prohibiting stockpiling and importing weapons of mass
destruction (WMDs).38 The Hussein government in Iraq continued to be uncooperative with U.N.
investigators, which heightened the situation through spring 2003.
February 29, 2020, p. 1, at https://2017-2021.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Signed-Agreement-02292020.pdf..
33 The White House, Speeches and Remarks, “Remarks by President Biden on the Way Forward in Afghanistan,” April
14, 2021, at https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/04/14/remarks-by-president-biden-onthe-way-forward-in-afghanistan/..
34 DOD, “Statement by Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin III on the End of the American War in Afghanistan,” news
release, August 30, 2021 at https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2759181/statement-bysecretary-of-defense-lloyd-austin-iii-on-the-end-of-the-american-w/..
35 DOD, “Military Phase of Evacuation Ends, as Does America’s Longest War,” news article, August 30, 2021, at
https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2759031/military-phase-of-evacuation-ends-as-does-americaslongest-war/..
36 DOD, “Casualty Status,” accessed November 28, 2022, at https://www.defense.gov/casualty.pdf.. Note: The total
number of deaths was obtained by combining the total deaths listed worldwide for Operation Enduring Freedom and
Operation Freedom’s Sentinel. This number includes both U.S. military casualties and DOD civilian casualties. This
report is updated periodically by DOD.
37 P.L. 107-243, “Authorization for the use of Military Force against Iraq Resolution of 2002,” at
https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ243/PLAW-107publ243.pdf..
38 United Nations, Security Council Resolution 1441 adopted on November 8, 2002, at its 4644th meeting at
http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/documents/1441.pdf..
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service 10
In an address to the nation on March 17, 2003, President George W. Bush gave Iraqi President
Saddam Hussein and his sons a 48-hour ultimatum to leave Iraq.39 On March 19, 2003, President
Bush announced to the nation that the early stages of military operations against Iraq had begun
and designated them Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF).
40
On May 1, 2003, in an address to the nation, President Bush declared that “major military combat
actions in Iraq have ended,”
41 yet U.S. troops remained in Iraq.
A ceremony at Camp Victory in Baghdad on January 1, 2010, marked the end of the
Multinational Forces-Iraq (MNF-I) and the beginning of United States Forces-Iraq (USF-I),
which merged five major command groups into one single headquarters command.42 As General
David Petraeus, head of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), noted, “This ceremony marks
another significant transition here in Iraq. It represents another important milestone in the
continued drawdown of American Forces.”
43 Troops from 30 countries have served in MNF-I
since 2003.
On August 31, 2010, President Obama announced that the American combat mission in Iraq had
ended. A transitional force of U.S. troops remained in Iraq with a different mission: advising and
assisting Iraq’s security forces, supporting Iraqi troops in targeted counterterrorism missions, and
protecting U.S. civilians.
44
On May 9, 2022, President Joseph R. Biden Jr., issued a Notice—Continuation of the National
Emergency with Respect to the Stabilization of Iraq: “[I]n accordance with section 202(d) of the
National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national
emergency with respect to the stabilization of Iraq declared in Executive Order 13303. This notice
shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.”
45
Iraq—Operation New Dawn (OND)
Effective September 1, 2010, the military operations in Iraq acquired a new official designation:
Operation New Dawn.46 A short ceremony marked the transfer in which Army General Ray
Odierno passed command of USF-I to Army General Lloyd J. Austin. On December 15, 2011,
U.S. Armed Forces in Baghdad marked the official end of the war in Iraq. The Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff and other top U.S. military leaders observed the official end of U.S. Forces
Iraq’s mission after nearly nine years of conflict that claimed the lives of nearly 4,500 U.S.
39 U.S. President (G.W. Bush), “Address to the Nation on Iraq,” Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, March
24, 2003, vol. 39, no. 12, pp. 338-341.
40 Ibid, pp. 342-343.
41 Ibid, May 5, 2003, vol. 39, no. 18, pp. 516-518.
42 Staff Sgt. Luke Koladish and Sgt. Kat Briere, “New Command Marks Milestone in Iraq,” U.S. Army website,
January 2, 2010, at http://www.army.mil/article/32437/New_command_marks_milestone_in_Iraq/..
43 Ibid.
44 The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, “Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation on the End of
Combat Operations in Iraq,” August 31, 2010, at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2010/08/31/
remarks-president-address-nation-end-combat-operations-iraq.
45 The White House, Briefing Room, “Notice on the Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to the
Stabilization of Iraq,” May 9, 2022, at https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidentialactions/2022/05/09/notice-on-the-continuation-of-the-national-emergency-with-respect-to-the-stabilization-of-iraq-2/;
and 87 FR 29021.
46 U.S. Army, “Operation New Dawn,” August 31, 2010, at https://www.army.mil/article/44526/operation_new_dawn..
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service 11
troops.47 On the military side of Baghdad International Airport, Army General Martin E.
Dempsey, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, Army General Lloyd J. Austin III, commanding
general of U.S. Forces Iraq, and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq James F. Jeffrey addressed U.S. and
Iraqi officials and more than 150 troops and media from around the world.48
For more information, see CRS Report R45025, Iraq: Background and U.S. Policy, by
Christopher M. Blanchard, and CRS In Focus IF10404, Iraq and U.S. Policy, by Christopher M.
Blanchard.
Islamic State-Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR)
On October 15, 2014, the DOD announced the designation of U.S. and coalition operations
“Operation Inherent Resolve”
49 against the terrorist group the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant
(ISIL, another name for the Islamic State or the Arabic acronym Da’esh) along the Syrian-Iraqi
border. The commander of U.S. 3rd Army and Army Forces Central Command was designated the
commanding officer of the Combined Joint Task Force–Operation Inherent Resolve (CJTF-OIR)
effective October 17, 2014.50 As of June 30, 2017, the total cost of operations related to ISIS since
kinetic operations started on August 8, 2014, was $14.3 billion and the average daily cost is $13.6
million for 1,058 days of operations.51 Between 2017 and 2020, CJTF-OIR led air strikes “in
support of decisive battles” against ISIL.
52 By March 23, 2019, ISIL had lost control of all
physical territory and was “reduced to an underground organization.”
53 In 2020, CJTF-OIR
reported that OIR transitioned from “training and assisting to advising and enabling” Iraqi and
Syrian partner forces.54 Despite the loss of physical territory, ISIL fighters continued to maintain a
presence in both countries and pose a potential terrorist threat.55
In the first quarter of FY2022, CJTF-OIR provided approximately $219 million in assistance to
Iraq partner forces and vetted Syrian partner forces through the Counter-ISIS Train and Equip
Fund (CTEF) in “continued efforts to maintain the enduring defeat of Daesh.”
56 As of September
47 Cheryl Pellerin, “Dempsey: Iraq Campaign Was worth the Cost,” Federal Information & News Dispatch, December
15, 2011.
48 Ibid.
49 DOD, Operation Inherent Resolve, at https://www.centcom.mil/OPERATIONS-AND-EXERCISES/OPERATIONINHERENT-RESOLVE/.. DOD, “Iraq and Syria Operations against ISIL Designated as Operation Inherent Resolve,”
October 15, 2014, at https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/603462/centcom-designates-opsagainst-isil-as-inherent-resolve/..
50 CJTF-OIR, Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve at https://dod.defense.gov/OIR/, and Fact Sheet
at http://www.inherentresolve.mil/Portals/14/Documents/Mission/History.pdf?ver=2016-03-23-065243-743..
51 DOD, OIR, “Cost of Operations” at https://dod.defense.gov/OIR/Cost/.. Note: Weekly Islamic State of Iraq and the
Levant (ISIL) Cost Report through June 30, 2017, the last reported.
52 CJTF-OIR, “Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve History,” at
https://www.inherentresolve.mil/Portals/14/Templates/CJTF-OIR_History_2022x2023.pdf..
53 Ibid.
54 DOD Office of the Inspector General (OIG), Operation Inherent Resolve: Lead Inspector General Report to the
United States Congress, July 1-2020-September 30,2020, October 30, 2020, p. 2, at
https://media.defense.gov/2020/Nov/03/2002528608/-1/--
1/1/LEAD%20INSPECTOR%20GENERAL%20FOR%20OPERATION%20INHERENT%20RESOLVE.PDF.
55 Ibid.
56 CJTF-OIR, “Coalition program provides $219M in assistance to Iraqi, Syrian partners in FY22 Q1,” CJTF-OIR
Public Affairs, May 14, 2022, at https://www.inherentresolve.mil/NEWSROOM/News-Articles/StoriesDisplay/Article/3031985/coalition-program-provides-219m-in-assistance-to-iraqi-syrian-partners-in-fy22/..
U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts
Congressional Research Service RS21405 · VERSION 33 · UPDATED 12
2022, ISIL continues to conduct a low level insurgency across Iraq and Syria.57 CJTF-OIR
remains dedicated to its mission to “advise, assist, and enable partner forces until they can
independently defeat” ISIL in Iraq and Syria.58
For more information, see CRS In Focus IF10328, The Islamic State, by Carla E. Humud and
CRS Legal Sidebar LSB10391, UPDATED: Recent U.S. Airstrikes: Legal Authorities and
Questions, by Stephen P. Mulligan and Jennifer K. Elsea.
Author Information
Barbara Salazar Torreon
Senior Research Librarian
Carly A. Miller
Research Librarian
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
57 DOD OIG, “Operation Inherent Resolve: Leader Inspector General Report to the United States Congress, July 1,
2022-September 30, 2022, November 1, 2022, p. 3, at https://media.defense.gov/2022/Nov/01/2003106275/-1/--
1/1/OIR_Q4_SEP22_GOLD_508.PDF.
58 Ibid.
End by saying this exactly, “The information I’m using to check the facts comes from a Congressional Research Report, ‘U.S. Periods of War and Dates of Recent Conflicts’. You can see this report here: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RS/RS21405”
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
You should speak with an 8th grade reading level.
I want you to read over the writing and identify the 3 core points of the writing. In each core point, I want you to read over the text and give a few sources that can help strengthen the core points.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Transcript of TTT meet up on January 3, 2024 (video below)
David: Hey, Rohan nice to meet you.
Rohan: Hello.
David: My name is David.
Jenell: I’m Jenell.
Paul: Hi Rohan, welcome welcome. Were you in orchestra practice or where were you?
Rohan: I was watching the concert. Oh, okay. So there was a concert tonight? Yeah. Oh, okay.
Paul: Rohan, move down a little bit off the table and then introduce yourself if you don’t mind. Thank you for coming by. And maybe some others of your, other students will be coming as well.
Rohan: I’m not able to move myself.
Paul: Click on the screen and see if that does anything. There you go. Sometimes it gets stuck. I don’t know why. So introduce yourself a little bit. Say what you’ve been up to. Say who your teacher is. And yeah.
Rohan: I’m an eighth grader and, I’m in Ms. Stedronsky’s class. I’ve created like two key partners to help me, guide me while I’m writing.
Paul: Cool, cool. Say a little more. What are you writing and what was your partner?
Rohan: In class, we’re writing about, we’re writing our “say something” articles, like an article of something we’re passionate about. And I created two thinking partners. One of them was called “Simple Advice,” which gives a few core points in simple words, like with an Eighth Grade reading level, vocabulary level, what you should change. And I created “Rowan’s Inner Voice” also. And that is like, it like finds your inner voice and tries to tell you how to strengthen it.
David:
David: Oh, wow. Wow. What was that like Rowan, your inner voice?
Paul: When you said, help me with my inner voice, what came back? Do you want to show it? Do you have a minute to?
David: Yeah. Did it feel good? Did it work? Did you get the stuff you thought, oh, that’s helpful.
Rohan: Yeah, it got stuff I needed out. Really, nice.
Paul: So just Jill Stedronsky, who wasn’t able to make is saying things like… she’s saying… I like the feedback they get way better than student peer groups.
David: Ah. ure.
Paul: You’re bringing up your screen, Rohan? I’m just filling in until you do. Go ahead.
Rohan: Should I present?
Paul: Yes, go ahead and present. Anyway, and Jenell, just some context here. We’ve developed, who knows how many by now, right? 80, 100 thinking partners. And instead of using the amazing ones that we’ve created, the students are like, I got this one, I’m gonna make it. The first one Rohan mentioned, you’re logging in there? Yeah, you gotta sign in, then you’ll find it. He actually told it, don’t give me all that positive stuff, right? Just tell me, just tell me what I need to know, which is interesting.
Rohan: Yeah, this is “Rohan’s Inner Voice.”
Paul: But go to the first one first.
Rohan: This one?
Paul: Yeah, the simple advice one.
Rohan: Yeah.
Paul: So which did you find more useful? Let’s put it that way, as a writer.
Rohan: I haven’t had time to look over my work yet. I mean, like change stuff yet, but I think one of the things that are most useful for me is double checking facts and simplifying my point.
Paul: Can you scroll up to your original?
Rohan: This?
Paul: Yeah, your original writing that you’re referring to.
Rohan: This.
Paul: So you’re writing about endless wars in the United States.
Rohan: Yeah, I was writing about how the United States gets into so many wars, and most of them don’t really affect them, the Korean War and stuff.
Paul: Cool, cool. Would you mind reading just your first paragraph for us?
Rohan: You can pick almost any point in US history to find a nation engulfed in a war. Backed up with the US after taking various classes in New Jersey. I know the most powerful nation started off with American Revolution. Less than 100 years after the birth, the country fought a huge civil war. Over the next 100 years, the US took part in two world wars without a break, the country took part in the Vietnam War and Korean War losing both.
Paul: Okay. Now show the first one you did, or just scroll down slowly and let’s look at what you did.
Rohan: I think this is simple advice.
Paul: Okay.
Rohan: And this is inner voice.
Paul Yeah, show the inner voice. And I don’t know if you’ve seen it yet, but I made another one for you.
Rohan: Yeah, I saw.
Paul: Okay, but let’s look through the inner voice one first.
Rohan: This?
Paul: Yeah. Nice.
Jenell: Thanks for zooming in there.
Paul: You can actually zoom too, Jenell, in the upper right-hand corner. There’s a zoom.
Jenell: Excellent. Thank you.
Paul: Yeah, yeah. So describe what you got from the inner voice. What are those three things? How do you understand them a little.
Rohan: So what I got from the inner voice is really, it just kind of giving me like really deep feedback. So like, I think this is almost like, the simple advice, except it’s like more deeper, like over here, it’s just given like, in simple words and stuff, like just five short things that you should change, like get your side straight. But over here, it’s putting one of them, and it’s expanding it almost.
Paul: Feel free to jump in with us. Both of them are going out a little bit. OK. There, you’re back. So then…
David: So Rowan, I have a question, Rowan. Please. So after you go through your first five quick things to look at, and then you get seeking understanding. That’s like a really big idea. What’s your take when you get that? Your writing suggests you want to dive deep and understand why the US has participated that kind of runs off screen. Do you pause and think what’s your response to that kind of feedback from the bot? Are you thinking? Oh Okay, I’ll go do X or I’ll go do Y. I’m serious.
Rohan: Where is it that you’re talking about?
David: I’m talking I’m just reading the seeking understanding response that the learning partner gave you When you’re going through your editing and you’re thinking about making your drafts, you know adding to it or revising or making it stronger and you read that seeking understanding comment What’s your response to that? It’s not like it’s saying go fix a comma. It’s inviting you to do a bigger thing. I’m curious what your response was.
Rohan: I haven’t really gone into my writing yet, so.
David: Oh, okay, sure.
Paul: We’re all interested to know how you incorporate some of this. Yeah, but one of the things, you were on last week and you mentioned that one of the things that it told you is to do some fact checking, yes?
Rohan: Yeah.
Paul: And I just explained (earlier in the meetup) that this is something I was wanting to mess around with. So I used yours as an example. And what I did was I went and found what’s called the Congressional Research Service, right? And it had an article that lists all of the wars of the United States, right? As sort of the facts of all of them, right? And I put that into a prompt, just to let Rowan, you know, and then asked it again, what’s accurate, what’s not accurate, and what other things might I think about? And… fhis is what it came up with, right? Did you read through this yet?
Rohan: Not yet, but I’m taking a glance at it.
Paul: Can we do it now? Yeah, sure. No, go ahead.
Rohan: What is accurate? What is accurate? The United States engaged in World War I and World War II. The dates provided in the CRS report align with the common historical record. The US was involved in the Korean and Vietnam War, which you mentioned both in the CRS report as a Korean conflict in Vietnam era respectively. The United States did engage in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq recently known as Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom respectively, transitioning to the Operation Freedom Sentinel in Afghanistan. Operation New Dawn in Iraq.
Paul: Yeah, go ahead. Keep going.
Rohan: What is not accurate? The text says the United States lost the Vietnam and Korean War. All these conflicts did not build some clear boundaries. The outcomes are more complex and being categorized as losses. They mentioned…
Paul: Let’s stop there for a second. How do you feel about that? What are you going to do with that?
Rohan: I’m probably going to edit my writing where it says that. Or like maybe I’ll like look in the source about like the end of the Korean War, I mean the Vietnam and Korean War.
Paul: Cool, cool. Keep going for a little bit.
Rohan: They mention that troops are in Taiwan, are placed in Taiwan preparing to fight their next war against China is not.
Paul: And that’s a quote from your text, right? Yeah, go ahead. Yeah.
Rohan: It’s not a substanated, substan…
Paul: The word is substantiated, yeah. Which means it’s not supported by, yeah, go ahead.
Rohan: It’s not, yeah, by the CRS or any clarification. The assertion that the United States has been placed troops in Iran is inaccurate. While the US has been involved in the region. Notably in Iraq and Afghanistan, there’s not been a war with the US deployment troops into Iran. Yeah, I can see I got a bit confused with this because I’m not like an expert in this stuff. So like, yeah, I think this is really helpful. Like, like, you know, like kind of like a double, a fact checker.
Paul: You’re becoming an expert.
Rohan: Yeah, because the world around us is not supported by any mainstream historical analysis. The primary factors of the Great Depression were linked to economic practices in the late 1920s, not World War I. The idea that the US joined wars to strengthen their economy to crash is an oversimplification of a conflict-free political situation and economical results.
Paul: So some of those words are bigger than you’re used to, yeah?
Rohan: Like this last sentence here.
Paul: So one of the things you could do, by the way, is go to Reply AI, ask it to summarize, and simplify some of that language for me, just to say. No, don’t go there now. I’m just saying. Yeah, we could. And then it gives you some other things. Now here’s what I’m worried about. I want us here. We don’t have the whole story on any of this yet because we don’t see what you’ve done with this, right? We kind of get your impressions about it but some writers would get this and say, wow, this is way over my head. Maybe I shouldn’t be doing this and sort of just sort of just shut down. Other writers might engage. Where are you on that? How are you feeling about it?
Rohan: It does look a bit overwhelming. I’m gonna go to like each point here (pointing to the section about inaccuracies) and like thoroughly like find a place and change it or like do more research or something.
Paul: Cool, cool. And you see the link there at the top where you can find the actual report itself?
Rohan: Yeah.
Paul: Okay.
Paul: Now you just need more time to do this.
Rohan: Yeah. Ms. Stedronsky said we’ll have a class tomorrow to work on our articles.
Paul: All right.
Jenell: Rohan, if I could ask you a quick question, does your teacher ask you to say in your writing where you got your information from?
Rohan: Yeah. In our writing, at the end, we cite our sources.
Jenell: At the end of the article?
Rohan: Yeah.
Jenell: So one thing I would ask is, are you planning on going to that original article, or would you take information right from the bot? What’s going to be your choice in relationship to what you’re hoping your teacher will ask you to do when it comes to citing your work?
Rohan: Are we are you asking like if this is a good source here?
Jenell: Well, yeah, I was just asking like what would you go to the original source to, you know, read that? To you know to tease through to find the information that you are hoping to get or is there something in in the in this response here that you think that you will just change in your original paper? I don’t know. I was just thinking about like citing sources and how do we how do we do that? What were you thinking about doing that?
Rohan: Maybe what I could do is I could take like each point of this and for every point I could let’s like do a quick Google search and see if there’s any more in-depth source.
Jenell: Yeah, do you feel pretty confident you find something easily that that you could also, you know, quickly look through and get the information you’re hoping to get?
Rohan: Yeah, I think I could do that. Because that to me sounds like a lot you’d need a lot of practice in order to to feel confident to do something like that. So yeah, I mean, like, even though this is over here. Yeah.
Paul: You should keep going. Whatever you’re going to say.
Rohan: I mean, even though this looks like a lot of writing a lot of feedback. The only stuff I really need to change here is this, (pointing again to the list of inaccuracies).
Paul: Interesting. OK. Yeah, and I’m interested in how you now have three different, very different sort of kinds. It’s not just like… As a writer, the first one here are the simple things you need to change. The second one, here’s the deep feedback you’re getting. And then this one, here’s a fact checked against your content. You got a lot going on there, right?
Rohan: Yeah, three things at once. So…
Paul: Somebody needs to be watching you and seeing how you manage to figure that all out. You know what I’m saying? We’re fascinated with that. But yeah, but how do you compare? Your teacher is saying things like peer group doesn’t give the same kind of feedback. How would, how do you feel about this kind of feedback you’re getting? And then, and it’s not either or, but you’re getting something else when you read it to a group of three other people in your class. What’s the difference and what’s good about both of those? Let’s put it that way.
Rohan: So if I have a peer group at school, the good thing is that I get a variety of opinions. I’m not giving each person a prompt and wants to give me back. I’m not getting one exact type of feedback every time. I’m just getting multiple types of feedback, good, like a good like very of feedback and stuff. If I ask a small group. Meanwhile, for AI, the good thing is that I get whatever feedback I want. Like I don’t need to like, maybe I already have a pretty good start on my passage, a good start on my essay. So I don’t want to give me feedback on the start of my essay. I want to like my core paragraphs. So that’s how like AI is sometimes. That’s like this the difference with AI.
Jenell: I really appreciate you sharing that Rohana. I wonder if you could share with us, which would you hope to have first? Your peer feedback in the classroom with other students to get that variety of feedback or the AI, which would you hope could happen first in your writing process? What would work best for you?
Rohan: That’s, that’s a hard question, but I think for this, for this specific piece of writing where like most of my feedback is fact checks. I think AI is, AI would be a better, like a better, like AI would be better than like my classmates since, since it’s mainly giving me feedback on like facts and stuff like that.
Paul: Rowan, I want to ask you if you have any thoughts about what else you want to do with the thinking partners. Have you thought about that?
Rowan I haven’t thought about that yet, but I guess I can make different thinking partners for like… point or like big piece of advice that like most people would need like a few things that most people would need in articles is like a grammar checker, a fact checker, like this is also good like a core point checker.
Paul: Jenell earlier asked about audience. Do you have any idea who the audience of your piece is gonna be yet?
Rowan: I do not know yet.
Paul: That’s absolutely fair. That’s fair. Cool, cool. Some of the other kids in your classes, I don’t know if it’s in your class or in Ms. Stedronsky’s class, one of them created a 3D pencil. He asked a Thinking Partner to give him the code for creating a 3D pencil, and he claims it works. So anyway, I’m totally interested in what you guys are coming up with. So… Let me ask you one more question because I’m totally, it’s 2024, it’s an election year. Do you think about the elections at all? Or what do you think about it?
Rowan: I mean…
Paul: It’s okay if you don’t.
Rowan: Sometimes I, with my parents, I like watch like the Republican debate and stuff, but I don’t really think a lot of it, the elections.
Paul: Fair enough.
Rowan: Since I’m young and my parents are immigrants, and so we anyway don’t have the right to vote
Paul: You have a right to have opinions, though. Yeah. That’s an interesting detail given your interest in US wars. Yeah. Is there a connection there?
Rowan: I don’t think so. I don’t know.
Paul: OK. A question that an adult human might ask you that AI might not, by the way. Worth noting, I think. Rohan, you have any further thoughts or questions for us?
Rowan: Not really.
Paul. Thank you for, after the concert coming on and shedding some light on the work you’re doing.
Rohan: Yeah. Thanks.
Jenell: Thanks, Rohan.
Rohan: You too.
Paul: All right. I think we’ll close this one. I’m going to hang around, see if other students leave the concert too and come. But thank you so much and will be in touch. And David, we have a Friday appointment, right? Yeah, I’m going to send out a Zoom link out.
David: Rohan, thanks so much for coming on and sharing your work. It’s really inspiring.
Rohan: Yeah. Thanks. I’ll try joining next week if I can.
Paul: That’d be great. Yeah, if you do some writing, keep track of, like, if you do some writing, also do some reflection on that and say, hey, interesting, I only took the middle of this and I got rid of it. You know, some notes about how you’re writing it would be fascinating to all of us. Great. Okay. Thanks so much. Thanks, everyone.
All: Bye-bye. Bye.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Read over the writing. Talk with an 8th grade reading level.
Fact check the writing. Give a few points where the writing is accurate, and a few points where the facts are a bit off and tell them how to fix the writing.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
New Conversation
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Act like an 8th grader. Greet the reader. Use the following Rubric to asses the essay on the 4 categories. Rate each category on 1 to 100, and return the score you created with a 1 sentence reason for that score. The Categories are attached bellow:
1) Your idea and point for writing
2) Your grammar and mechanics
3) Author’s word choice/ vocabulary so it suits the target audience
4) Organization
At the end, add up the scores and give an overall score out of 100. Also, tell the reader that 80/100 would be passable, so don’t get discouraged.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
In the first sentence, Rohan corrects a factual error from “Iran” to “Iraq.” The original statement referenced “Afghanistan and Iran” which is inaccurate, as the United States deployed troops to Iraq, not Iran.
The second sentence of the first draft, Rohan says that “troops are placed in Taiwan as they prepare to fight their next war against China.” He replaces this with with “Currently, China is becoming a potential enemy for the US as 83% of US adults see China as an enemy.” Rohan is on stronger ground here since there’s no public acknowledgment of the US having troops stationed in Taiwan preparing for war against China.
Instead, he adds a specific statistic and a source for where that information comes from. This is a significant shift from a potentially misleading statement to one that is backed by a referenced poll indicating US public perception towards China, although we still need to see where he is citing this from.
Rohan’s changes are significant as they clarify historical facts and provide context showing an effort to present well-sourced and factual information, enriching the accuracy of the statements being made.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Rohan has changed his source citations, and it makes me wonder how he is thinking about his sources. I wonder if he has list of sources and how he will eventually make a list of them at the end. Rohan seems to be adding specificity and this may suggest that he is moving towards more rigorous citation norms, potentially indicating more careful research or attention to academic standards in source attribution. We need to look at his sources and talk to him about what he is thinking about them.
In a deeper revision, Rohan changes the phrase “After losing the Korean and Vietnam war…” to “After withdrawing from the Korean and Vietnam war…”
This wording change, from “losing” to “withdrawing from”, alters the implication from defeat to a strategic or tactical decision without implying victory or defeat. Although this is more accurate, perhaps, I wonder if Rohan has lost some of the bite of his argument. How can he stay true to his deeper commitments and hue to the facts?
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Rohan splits the final paragraph into two, so we are comparing the last half of the final paragraph in draft one with the last paragraph in draft two.
In the first draft, Rohan writes: " In my true opinion, the US shouldn’t be scared of anyone as the richest and most powerful country in the world. The fact that the higher ups get scared just screams out that this country is weakening by the day. We have to defend each other and stand up together."
In the second draft he ends his essay with these sentences:
“We can continue fighting Endless wars, but we aren’t getting anywhere. As we move on, the US government should be more mindful of the wars they take place in.”
The tone of “In my true opinion” compared to “We can continue fighting…” couldn’t be more different. In his second draft Rohan has made a more controlled, academic argument. His message is more clear, if also less passionate.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Rohan changes the wording of the final phrase in the last sentence from “losing both.” to “both without a clear-cut victory.”
This rewrite shifts the original emphasis from “losing both” the wars in Vietnam and Korea to having fought them “without a clear-cut victory.” Rohan is making a different qualitative assessment of those conflicts. He is aiming for more nuanced language to describe the outcomes of the Vietnam and Korean Wars. He is doing a better job of reflecting the complexity of those wars’ endings and the ongoing debates about their historical interpretations. However, I wonder if he is losing some of the passion that inspired him to write about this topic in the first place.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
In the first three drafts of his essay Rohan writes: “You can pick almost any point in US history to find the nation engulfed in a war.”
In this, his fourth draft Rohan changes the final phrase:“You can pick almost any point in US history to find the nation fighting a horrid war.”
He replaces “engulfed in a war” with “fighting a horrid war.” Rohan’s change in wording slightly intensifies the negative connotation associated with the wars by adding the word “horrid.” Rohan seems to be trying to hold on to his outrage at the U.S. wars.
The replacement of “engulfed” with “fighting a horrid” war also adds emotional depth reflects a deeper change since it alters the tone of the sentence.
Also, in this draft, Rohan adds this sentence to the end of the paragraph “Soon, the US took in part with regional conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, losing against the mountainous terrain.”
This sentence is an addition in the selected text, which is not present in the original draft provided. It brings in recent conflicts the US has been involved in and suggests a reason for difficulty or lack of success, being the “mountainous terrain.” This is a significant addition because Rohan is bringing more recent historical events into his narrative. This new sentence increases the comprehensiveness of the overview of US conflicts.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
In this draft of the second paragraph, Rohan inserts the phrase “on the path to” in the phrase: “China is on the path to becoming a potential enemy.” With this change, Rohan is suggesting that the development of China as a potential enemy is not yet complete, but is a process that is underway. Rohan’s original phrasing could be interpreted to mean that China is already in the position of becoming a potential enemy, indicating a more immediate situation. I’m curious to know what Rohan read to lead him to make this subtle difference.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Rohan makes several changes to the third paragraph in his fourth draft. His revisions are both surface and deep:
- The surface changes include minor alterations in wording and removal of geographic context about isolation by oceans.
- The deeper changes modify the tone and implications regarding the outcomes of conflicts (changing “lost” to “withdrew from”) and omit significant details about demographics and world population shares.
Example One: Here’s an example of Rohan seeming to clarify his writing. In the first three drafts he writes" “Sure, at the beginning the US was playing a major role in the wars and winning by a lot, but lately, after World War 2, the US hasn’t had a similar fate.”
In this fourth draft, Rohan shortens this to: “Maybe the US has a huge impact on regional and worldwide conflicts, but they haven’t got anywhere.”
Rohan changes the phrasing to a more general assertion (“Maybe the US has a huge impact on regional and worldwide conflicts”) and does not specify timeframes or outcomes (“but they haven’t got anywhere” versus “after World War 2, the US hasn’t had a similar fate”). The revised sentence also removes the implication that the US was winning wars in the past.
Example Two: In the earlier drafts of the third paragraph, Rohan writes: “After withdrawing from the Korean and Vietnam war, they lost the conflict in Afghanistan.”
In this draft, Rohan writes: “After withdrawing from the Korean and Vietnam war, the US withdrew from the conflict in Afghanistan.”
He changes the term “lost” to “withdrew from,” altering the connotation from a loss to a neutral action of withdrawal.
Example Three: In the first three drafts, Rohan writes: “Why does the US put itself in such a terrible situation and for no benefit? Even if the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam mainland were under totalitarian dictatorships, the countries are smaller than Colorado and have a population owning 2% of the world [Google Population Demographics], dwarfed by India & China’s 40% share.”
In this, the fourth, draft, Rohan puts it more simply: “Why does the US put itself in such a terrible situation and for no benefit?”
Rohan removes the second part of the sentence discussing the size and population demographics of the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam relative to Colorado, India, and China.
Although Rohan is revising toward more accuracy, I wonder what the removal of some of these details is doing to his overall inquiry or theme where is is trying to explore the impact of U.S. wars through time.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
The only change Rohan made is the substitution of “scared” with “concerned.” This change is relatively surface-level, as it alters a single word and does not significantly change the meaning of the sentence. It could be argued that “concerned” has a slightly less negative connotation than “scared,” potentially suggesting a more rational or considered approach to the decision to engage in the Korean War, rather than a purely fear-driven reaction.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
In the earlier drafts, Rohan writes: “In summary, the US engulfs itself in way too many wars…”
In this, the fourth, draft, Rohan changes this to: “In conclusion, the US has pulled itself in too many wars.”
Rohan’s use of “In conclusion” implies the end of a discussion, while his earlier use of “In summary”suggests a recap or summary of previous points.
Rohan’s new phrase, “has pulled itself” in this draft implies a deliberate action, whereas his earlier phrase, “engulfs itself” suggests a more passive or overwhelming situation.
Rohan also omits the word “way” as an intensifier for “too many” when he argues that the US has been in “in too many wars.”
Rohan makes much bigger changes by adding a summary of his earlier writing: “Looking back since the American Revolution and to date, the outcomes of the war have started to fall away from the US’s favor. WWI and WWII were huge victories for the US, but after that the US started losing its grip in the Korean War and Afghanistan.”
Rohan is pulling together his research and his argument here.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
This is what Rohan was writing before this, the fourth, draft:
“We can continue fighting Endless wars, but we aren’t getting anywhere. As we move on, the US government should be more mindful of the wars they take place in.”
In the fourth draft, Rohan writes this instead:
“Since War outcomes have been getting worse over time, it is apparent that if the US ever has a WWIII, the outcomes might be frightening, even devastating, for the United States of America.”
Both paragraphs are a warning that the U.S. is headed in the wrong direction. Rohan is warning us against endless wars the might lead to a WWIII that would be “devastating.”
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Here’s a comparison of Rohan’s forth and fifth drafts of paragraph two
- Fourth Draft: Currently, China is on the path to becoming a potential enemy for the US as 83% of US adults see China as an enemy.
- Fifth Draft: Currently, China is on the path to becoming a potential enemy for the US as 83% of US adults see China as a potential threat for the US.
Rohan has replaced the word “enemy” with “potential threat.”
With this change in terminology, Rohan slightly softens the language from a definitive “enemy” to a “potential threat,” which could imply a broader range of adversarial positions that are not necessarily as directly confrontational as the term “enemy.”
As we have seen in other places in Rohan’s revisions, each draft is getting closer to the facts and the nuances of the complicated situations that he is referring to. And, at the same time, I wonder if this more accurate, subtle rendering undercuts his main point about U.S. wars.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Rohan introduces a new sentence and a source in this draft “During the Vietnam War, some protests gathered up bodies of 15,000 – 25,000 people in the US Capitol (The March on Washington · Exhibit · Resistance and Revolution: The Anti-Vietnam War Movement at the University of Michigan, 1965-1972, n.d.).”
- “Why does the US put itself in this situation against the will of the American people?”
With this sentence, Rohan adds specific historical context about public opposition to the Vietnam War, which is relevant to the theme of the US involving itself in conflicts against public opinion.
Rohan ends this paragraph by rephrasing his question from the earlier drafts, which now reads: “Why does the US put itself in this situation against the will of the American people?” In the earlier drafts, Rohan just asks broadly about the US putting itself in terrible situations, while the this draft emphasizes the disconnection with the will of the American people.
Rohan’s addition of the Vietnam War protest detail enriches his argument by providing historical evidence of the US engaging in conflicts despite significant public opposition, which relates closely to his sentiments expressed in earlier drafts about the US’s role in conflicts and withdrawal from wars like Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan against public will.
Rohan’s alteration in the final question enhances the focus on the contrast between US foreign policy decisions and public opinion, reinforcing the concern raised in his description about the US putting itself in difficult situations and the perceived lack of benefit from such involvements.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
In his fifth draft of the fourth paragraph, Rohan makes changes that are mostly surface-level: rephrasing and clarifying language, but not significantly altering the content or the deeper context of the original statements. The rephrased sentences present the information in a slightly more formal and academic tone.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Rohan continues to revise his lead sentence. In the first draft it was: "You can pick almost any point in US history to find the nation engulfed in a war.”
In another draft he adds the word horrid: “You can pick almost any point in US history to find the nation fighting a horrid war.” In this sixth draft, he writes: “It is a common occurrence of the United States to find itself in a brutal war.”
Rohn makes these relatively surface-level changes:
-“You can pick” to “It is a common occurrence of”
-“horrid” to “brutal”
Although the changes were made in early drafts, it’s interesting to compare Rohan’s first draft of this sentence: “Without a decade of break the country took part in the Vietnam War and Korean War, losing both.”
This is what Rohan is going with in his sixth draft: “Without a decade of break the country took part in the Vietnam War and Korean War, both without a clear-cut victory.”
He has replaced “losing both” with “both without a clear-cut victory.” This seems to show a change in Rohan’s thinking. While “losing” denotes definitive defeat, “without a clear-cut victory” suggests a more nuanced outcome, possibly without a definitive win but also not an outright loss.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Rohan’s first draft had this sentence: “Currently, China is becoming a potential enemy for the US as 83% of US adults see China as an enemy…”
By the time he gets to his sixth draft he writes: “Currently, China is on the path to becoming a potential enemy for the US as 83% of US adults see China as a potential threat for the US…”
He had changed:
– “is becoming” to “is on the path to becoming”
– “see China as an enemy” to “see China as a potential threat for the US”
Rohan’s substitution of “is becoming” with “is on the path to becoming” subtly shifts the language from stating a current state to implying a progression towards a state, which may suggest a more nuanced view of the situation.
By replacing “see China as an enemy” with “see China as a potential threat for the US”, Rohan softens the language, changing the absolute term “enemy” to the more conditional “potential threat,” which indicates a possibility rather than a definitive status.
Rohan’s changes seem to be both surface-level in terms of wording and more profound in terms of the connotation and implication of the relationship status between the US and China. The changes reflect Rohan’s growing understanding and careful reading of his sources.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
In the fifth draft, Rohan wrote this sentence:
“This was all against the will of the American people.”
In this, the sixth, draft, Rohan replaces that sentence with: “Many of the regional conflicts were against the will of the American people,” which changes the scope from all the withdrawals to many of the regional conflicts, suggesting a broader context that includes not just the wars mentioned but potentially others as well.
This fits with what seems to be Rohan’s change of emphasis to the American people’s perspective on military engagements.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
Most of the changes Rohan made are surface level, meant primarily to clarify language and to provide a more nuanced perspective on the historical events described.
Rohan’s revision from “caused the US economy to crash” to “contributed to significant economic struggles” suggests that he moving away from a single causality toward understanding that there was a broader economic impact.
Rohan keeps his fundamental points and refines the way in which his points are communicated. He seems to be trying to present a more complex and source-based understanding of the historical context.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
In earlier drafts, Rohan writes: “In summary, the US engulfs itself in way too many wars due to fear of having communism spread to them.”
After the fourth draft, Rohan has settled on: “In conclusion, the US has pulled itself in too many wars.”
In the fourth, fifth, and sixth drafts, Rohan has dropped this notion: “These wars cause many crashes in the US economy back at home.” The omission removes a cause-and-effect relationship between war involvement and economic stability from his discussion. I suspect that Rohan is still interested in this connection, but found it too much to include in this essay.
Rohan’s first draft provides personal commentary: “In my true opinion, the US shouldn’t be scared of anyone as the richest and most powerful country in the world. The fact that the higher-ups get scared just screams out that this country is weakening by the day. We have to defend each other and stand up together.”
When Rohan moves away from this ending in his second draft, his next drafts lack the personal opinion, emotional context, and the call to unity present in that first draft. His essay is more accurate and nuanced, but it no longer has Rohan’s judgment of US behavior as fear-driven and the suggestion that perceived fear among leaders signals national weakness.
Both the early drafts and the final ones have the notion that the US has been involved in numerous conflicts. However, the later drafts do not attribute the involvement to fear of communism, impact on the economy, or specify a direct opinion on these actions. Rohan’s moves toward a more neutral stance, replacing his perspective that the US is needlessly engaging in conflicts due to fear with a simple historical accounting.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
General Document Comments 0