4-6 page argumentative paper about solutions to ending police brutality.MLAIntro paragraph:-hook-thesis: In society, the malignant and racist acts of police brutality are recognized, but victims do not receive the justice and peace they deserve, and the officers are acquitted of their inhumane crimes.-SofO1-SofO2historical paragraph:-history of the topic and how it relates to thesisexploration paragraph:-(SofO1) (the exact same one from the intro paragraph)-3 chunks of evidence and analysis for each chunkargumentative paragraph:-(SofO2) (the exact same one from the intro paragraph)-3 chunks of evidence and analysis for each chunkopposition paragraph:-3 chunks supporting opposition solution paragraph:-3 chunks supporting solutionconclusion paragraph-restating the thesis

Unformatted Attachment Preview

(Research done in mid-1990’s – outdated now, but used to show format / argument)
Hook: Grime covers Basra in southern Iraq. Dust swirls in school playgrounds and consumes
children kicking a plastic ball. Locals and visitors complain about filth in their eyes and
nose and throat. While they all know that American and British forces employed depleted
uranium in the Gulf War of 1990-91, none of them could prevent the United Nations
Security Council from imposing post-war economic sanctions on Iraq. These penalties
denied the use of equipment and expertise to clean up Iraq’a contaminated battle-fields right across from the children’s parks in Basra. They also inhibited the people of Iraq from
getting back on their feet.
The American government should lift economic sanctions against Iraq, because this policy
has done more harm than good for both countries.
SofO1: Various types of sanctions have been employed by the US, the UN, and the EU to deal with
hostile regimes that oppose the US’s and other Western nation’s values and ways of life.
(matches section II – broad, umbrella statement)
SofO2: These sanctions have not accomplished stated goals, have harmed indigenous people, and
have contradicted American and Western values. (matches section III – broad, umbrella
SofO3: While some people believe that sanctions work, better international relations and world
stability can be reached through modified and reduced sanctions and improved
communication with the people of oppressed / opposing cultures and philosophies.
(matches section IV – broad, umbrella statement)
(For this section, ask yourself what you need to know. I came up with the following questions for
the sanctions topic. The answers to the questions will be your two background body paragraphs.
-What sanctions are; which trades / businesses / products they affect; which countries imposed
them on Iraq; why do countries impose sanctions?
-When the Iraq War was; which countries were involved; how long it lasted; the leader of Iraq;
who the coalition forces were; how the war was won; when the sanctions started; if there were any
instances of Iraq or outside countries disobeying the sanctions)
A. Economic sanctions are defined as the “withdrawal of customary trade and financial
relations for foreign and security policy purposes” (Henley 24). Sanctions take a variety of
forms, including travel bans, asset freezes, arms embargoes, capital restraints, foreign aid
reductions, and trade restrictions. Governments and multinational bodies impose economic
sanctions to try “to alter the strategic decisions of state and nonstate actors that threaten their
interests or violate international norms of behavior” (Millers, par. 3). National governments
and international bodies like the United Nations and European Union have imposed economic
sanctions to coerce, deter, punish, or shame entities that endanger their interests or violate
international norms of behavior. Sanctions, while a form of intervention, are generally viewed
as a “lower-cost, lower-risk, middle course of action” between diplomacy and war (Millers,
par. 8). Sanctions resolutions must pass the fifteen-member Council of the United Nations by a
majority vote and without a veto from any of the five permanent members: the United States,
China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom.
B. Prior to 1990, the Council imposed sanctions against just two states: Southern
Rhodesia (1966) and South Africa (1977) (United Nations Sanctions Display, par. 12).
However, since the end of the Cold War, the body has used sanctions more than twenty times,
most often targeting parties to an intrastate conflict, as in Somalia, Liberia, and Yugoslavia in
the 1990s (United Nations Sanctions Display, par. 13). Since 9/11, there has been a pronounced shift toward
targeted or so-called “smart” sanctions, which aim to minimize the suffering of innocent civilians. The
United States uses economic and financial sanctions more than any other country (Herbert 128). Sanctions
policy may originate in either the executive or legislative branches. Presidents typically launch the process
by issuing an executive order (EO) that declares a national emergency in response to an “unusual and
extraordinary” foreign threat, such as “the proliferation of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons”
(Masters, par. 6).
A. The sanctions have not accomplished their goal.
Chunk 1: Saddam Hussein is still in power
Chunk 2:
Chunk 3: Other dictators have withstood sanctions (Fidel Castro), so they generally don’t
accomplish the intended goals.
B. Rather than hurting Saddam, the sanctions only make life worse for the common people of
Chunk 1: The human “cost” is high – the common people suffer health problems; cruel!
Chunk 2: No economic advances / life improvement for common people = no change for
Chunk 3: Population lack academic and mental improvements – a new generation of
“soldiers” for Saddam
C. Goes against American ideals of helping other people
Chunk 1: American identity: US should support and give hope like to Nazi Germany after
Chunk 2: Thousands of Iraqi children die each month if sanctions continue
Chunk 3: Restrictions on medicine and food hurt the poorest people first, not the dictator
who needs to be removed / forced to change
A. Opposition: Sanctions work better than other strategies to eliminate hateful regimes
Chunk 1: Sanctions are necessary to prevent Iraq from supporting terrorists and becoming a
regional problem again
Chunk 2: Lifting sanctions would make the U.S. look weak
Chunk 3: Sanctions don’t work with authoritarian regimes – you can’t negotiate / change
behaviors of madmen
SOLUTIONS BP / WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN NEXT? (You only need 1 bp w/ 2 chunks)
A. Solution / Recommendation for Change: Modify sanctions
Chunk 1: impose a time limit for sanctions so the aggressor is motivated to change, and
change in behavior of the aggressor is rewarded
Chunk 2: eliminate sanctions that affect international communication – reduce
brainwashing of the common people by keeping channels of communication open; apply
sanction that hurt the leadership more than the people
B. Solution / Recommendation for Change: Work on public relations
Chunk 1: since tyrants / terrorists encourage hatred ag. US / UN, work on enlightening the
Chunk 2: no sanctions on Internet / social media → population needs access to information
outside of their regime
Chunk 3: Keep US / UN on the ground or in embassies if possible → connection to the
people; or keep allies involved locally if not possible for US / UN

Our essay writing service fulfills every request with the highest level of urgency.