Analysis of Howard Zinns Argument in his Article Dying for the Governm

Analysis of Howard Zinns Argument in his condition Dying for the Government In June of 2003, Howard Zinns Dying for the Government was published in The Progressive newspaper. He discusses the governments claim to troops victory in Iraq, and he believes that many innocent people ask died for an unjust cause in that war. His claim is that soldiers died for their government, not their country. An important erupt of his argument is his discussion of democracy, which he says is what our country is supposed to be establish on. He also brings up slightly history of U.S. wars and quotes Mark matchs bidding about the invasion of the Phillipines by the United States. level(p) though some of his assertions lack evidence, Zinn uses authority and anatomical structure genuinely well to make his argument effective. Some of Zinns assertions are a fight sketchy in his essay because there is no evidence that proves them true. ace that really stands out is when he writes, they die d for Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld. And yes, they died for the greed of the oil cartels, for the involution of the American empire, for the political ambitions of the President. They died to cover up the theft of the nations wealth to catch up with for the machines of death (159). His argument may seem true to many, but he does not provide us with any evidence that these statements are accurate. He does not say where he got this information, so it may be intemperately for some to believe this, unless they share the same opinions as him. Another statement he makes is that we have not been given in the American media (we would carry to read the foreign press) a full picture of the kind injury caused by our bombing (159). This is a very strong assertion, but he does not tell us if he... ...ifth of whom grow up in need? (161). Questions like these make his argument very strong, and they are purposely added towards the abolish to make the reader consider their own thoughts about them after already having been given information on the topic. It is obvious that he is against the expansion of U.S. power, and he is very passionate in his writing about it. Authority and structure make Zinns argument very effective, even though some of his assertions do not have much evidence. Throughout the essay, he makes it very clear how he feels about the government and war. He feels soldiers are end for their government so the U.S. can gain more power. Towards the end of the essay, he writes, instead of being feared for our military prowess, we should want to be respected for our dedication to human rights (161). I could not have said it better myself.