Should Animals Be Used In Warfare Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Should Animals Be Used In Warfare - Term Paper Example This paper makes a conclusion that the use of animals for warfare is normally a contentious issue. Proponents of the debate argue that the use of animals for warfare helps to save human lives. They state that human lives are more important than animal lives. Hanson in his defense for the use of animals used the clichà © ‘save people, not pets’ to show the significance of animals in warfare. Due to their well-developed sensory and respiratory systems, animals perform various functions. Some of the common roles or duties performed by animals include the detection of bombs or landmines, and sniffing out the enemy. On the contrary, opponents of the debate cite the concept of animal cruelty as the main reason why they oppose the move. Since there are no laws that protect animals used for war, they are often mistreated. For instance, the American army starves dolphins by tying their mouths. This prevents them from eating food or other fishes. Also, dogs are left behind by tro ops or killed after a war ends because they pose a danger to civilians. In conclusion, animals should be used for warfare because they help save the lives of soldiers and people. When compared to animal lives, human lives are more precious. Furthermore, animals such as dogs have been used for rescue missions to locate lost soldiers or pilots. The use of animals for war fare is contained in the national security exclusions. This gives the military the power to use the animals in any way they like.

Shakespeare Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Shakespeare - Essay Example Two well known film interpretations are Roman Polanski’s 1971 classic and Geoffrey Wright’s 2007 modern version. These two films have been made with contrasting values and attitudes, yet are true to the original text. Wright’s version is however more suitable for a younger audience than Polanski’s classic version as Wright has set it in a contemporary context. The movie’s fast paced narration, its theme of underground Melbourne gang and trendy costumes make it far more appealing to young viewers than Polanski’s seventeenth century approach. Polanski has made one of the grittiest Shakespeare films with some realistic period costuming of Zeffirelli and a cold and clammy castle set for a location. Director Geoffrey Wright in his version attempts to make Macbeth contemporary by setting it in the contemporary Melbourne underworld. Here swords are substituted by guns and royalty by gangsters. Wright’s Macbeth is gritty, violent but critically flawed at times. Roman Polanski has set his play in the middle Ages whereas Geoffrey Wright moves the action into the present with an Australian background. Luxus und Dekadenz sind geradezu spà ¼rbar.Wright’s movie portrays luxury and corruption. The actors are stylish, always fashionable dressed whereas Polanski replicates the Middle Ages with some realistic costuming by Zeffirelli. Fitting a play which was written hundreds of years ago into a modern film with a contemporary setting is difficult, but Wright has done it extremely well. The original play is about Kings, Lo rds and Ladies. Wright modernises this by transforming King Duncan into the Drug Baron and the Lords as members of his gang. The weapons are also replaced by machine guns and the horses and carriages by Audis and dirt-bikes. Technology too is evident in the movie. Macbeth’s house is equipped with security cameras and monitors. This makes the audience feel that the