| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "NATIONS WAR": |
|
|
"Why Nations Go To War, 2002.
An analysis of John Stoessinger's book, "Why Nations Go To War".
3,400 words (approx. 13.6 pages), 1 source, £ 86.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines and analyzes John Stoessinger's book, "Why Nations Go To War" and takes a look at his themes chapter by chapter.
| |
|
Nationalism and the First World War, 2002.
A discussion of the nationalistic roots of the First World War.
1,680 words (approx. 6.7 pages), 7 sources, MLA, £ 37.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents various explanations why the First World War began, what were its primary causes, and concentrates particularly on the significance of the rising imperialism during the 19th century, most especially among the European nations (Germany, Great Britain, and Austria- Hungary).
From the Paper
"The First World War was the first-ever war that had brought great destruction and required greater involvement of many countries, most especially the European nations. Evidence of the impending world war started during the early 19th century, wherein colonization and strengthening of military power is the most prevalent activity of all European nations at that time. The World War I was said to have many causes, although the most important and more popular cause discussed by historians today is that the First World War started because of the rising imperialism among competing European nations. The war had two competing groups, the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente. The Triple Alliance was composed of Germany, Austria- Hungary, and Italy, while the Triple Entente was made up of Great Britain, France, and Russia. These groups were not originally formed as a triad; rather, each nation became affiliated with each other before and during the course of the war. One of the earliest alliances that were formed (prior to the First World War) is the pact between Germany and Austria- Hungary against Russia in 1879, which is then called the Dual Alliance (Spartacus Educational 2002). The other alliances (that of the Triple Entente, in particular) were formed upon the declaration of the war. The other nations that participated in the war, like Japan and the US, only participated when the war is already escalating. Prior to the First World War, there is already tension between these countries (comprising the Triple Alliance and Entente) because of succeeding events (pre-1914 events) that became the primary reasons for the war to inevitably begin."
| |
|
A Nation At War With Itself, 2008.
This paper explores the failure of the Sudan to become a cohesive and peaceful nation.
1,216 words (approx. 4.9 pages), 4 sources, APA, £ 28.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper relates that colonialism attempted to sew together a loose confederation of warring tribes and regions with different religions and tribal ties, creating the state of Sudan. The paper then discusses how the Sudanese have acted barbarically towards one another, practicing genocide on members of their own nation who do not support the current government or observe Islamic law. The paper emphasizes that this inhumanity, especially towards women, retards Sudan's economic and political development. The paper concludes that there is a need for a functional, non-state affiliated agency to negotiate peace settlements in place of the state government.
Outline:
Introduction
Religion and politics
Ethnic-cultural divisions
Women and Development
Conclusion
From the Paper
"To some extent, what we call the nation of the Sudan is a fiction. It is a product of colonialization, or rather the drawing of artificial boundaries that occurred after European colonialization in Africa. It is a polymorphous conglomerate of many different tribes, nations, and regions sewn together by a national government that strives to govern and manage the many inherent tensions and conflicts within the official Sudanese borders. Throughout the nation's history the government has often acted in a highly partisan fashion. A cynic or simply an honest observer might say that Sudan is not so much a nation as a war zone."
| |
|
The League of Nations and the United Nations, 2005.
This paper discusses the participation of the U.S. in the League of Nations and the United Nations as an element of the American national interest.
1,730 words (approx. 6.9 pages), 15 sources, APA, £ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, although the U. S. failed to support the League of Nations, America supported the United Nations because the supreme national interest of America was to obtain a world atmosphere in which the United States could grow its inner social values devoid of undue commotion or danger from the outside. The author points out that collective action via the United Nations instead of unilateral action was considered politically viable on key political issues. The paper concludes that the League of Nations and the United Nations disappointed hopes the following the two world wars because, in no way, can they be an autonomous political power; at best, the U.N. is a mirror image of the opposing interest of autonomous states.
Table of Contents
Introduction
America's Rejection to Support the League of Nations
The Historical Background
The Fundamental Principals that Lead to the Rejection of the League of Nations
America's Support for the United Nations
Using United Nations to Achieve the Goals of American Foreign Policy
The Fundamental Goal of Military Security
The Fundamental Goal of Political Security:
The Fundamental Goal of Stability and Welfare
The Fundamental Goal of World Order
Conclusion
From the Paper
"In the United States of America the major disagreement on both the groundwork venture and the refined Covenant of the League of Nations had been on the base that the League would function as an intrusion with the sovereignty of America and with the Monroe principle, that it concerned desertion of the traditional American policy, which had not been in favor of entrapped coalitions, and that the government did not have the power, within its Constitution, to insert such an agreement . Independence has revealed to be just so much freedom of action on the behalf of countries as is coherent with their responsibility, within international law and principles, to authorize the application of uniform independence or freedom of action by their sister countries. The League agreement had assured all States in their application of this sovereignty free from coercion by other Countries, and he who desires more is actually in search of the authorization thoughtlessly to ignore these commitments -- to refuse, for instance, the fair rulings of a properly established tribunal -- which is the German perception of independence."
| |
|
The Korean War and the Korean War Veterans' Memorial, 2005.
This paper discusses the forgotten war, the Korean War, and describes the Korean War Veterans' Memorial.
1,050 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, although statistically the Korean War took more lives than the Vietnam War, the Korean War has been branded as America's "Forgotten War" because it was over-shined by two "greater" wars, the Second World War and the Vietnam War, which dragged on for more than a decade. The author points out that the Korean War is important because it (1) started the end of the communist expansion in the world, (2) laid the ground for the entry of democracy in the states in Eastern Europe and Russia and (3) began the American foreign policy of military intervention to gain or maintain security, freedom and democracy in the world resulting in a number of military conflicts which continues today. The paper describes in detail the Korean War Veterans' Memorial, adjacent to the Lincoln Memorial directly across the reflecting pool from the Vietnam Veterans' Memorial in Washington, D.C., which was dedicated in 1995 by Bill Clinton and Kim Young Sam, then presidents of the U.S. and South Korea.
From the Paper
"The symbolisms in the memorial are brilliant pictures of a war that will never be forgotten. For as long as the memorial continues to exist, the memories of a war, which advanced freedom at the cost of the lives of millions of people, will eternally be thought of and etched in the minds of guests. Moreover, this memorial also serves as a reminder that freedom, though sweet and liberating, must never be taken for granted and must certainly be forever guarded, secured and remain dear in our hearts. It must also be remembered that there are still countries in the world that do not enjoy the rights given by a true democracy. The pursuit for the expansion of democracy must certainly not be abandoned. Still, millions of people are yearning for a free, equal state where social, economic and political justice stands and endures."
| |
|
The Persian Gulf War, A War Without Formal Declaration, 2002.
Looks at how the United States government engaged in the Persian Gulf War and several other wars after WWII without officially declaring war.
1,208 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 28.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the history of U.S. military engagement since the end of WWII, with particular emphasis on the Persian Gulf War of 1990. It points out that Congress has not formally declared war since December 11, 1941, against Germany and that, during the course of the last several decades in United States history, the citizens of the U.S. have been continually forced into war without a formal declaration of war supported by the U.S. Congress. The paper then discusses the War Powers Act, which has made it possible for Congress to avoid making actual declarations of war while still permitting major military engagements such as the Persian Gulf War.
From the Paper
"Congress has not formally declared war since December 11, 1941 against Germany in response to a formal Declaration of War by Germany against the U.S. (Paul, 2002). When Congress does formally declare war, a task that requires small effort on the part of representatives, an enemy is clearly defined and the task at hand is readily made clear. A clear cut victory is also expected as was the case of the Declaration of war against Germany and Japan. During the course of the last several decades in United States history, the citizens of the U.S. have been continually forced into war without a formal declaration of war supported by the U.S. Congress. The most recent example prior to 2003 of this was the war started in the Persian Gulf. Such action taken by the president of the U.S. exemplifies the pomposity and overbearing authority the president has placed upon himself over the citizens of this country."
| |
|
The Vietnam War and the Iraqi War, 2004.
This paper compares the similarities of the Vietnam War and the Iraqi War.
850 words (approx. 3.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 20.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses that the world of nations is becoming embittered because the United States demonstrated an unethical utilization of military and political power in the Vietnam War and the Iraqi War. The author believes that the War on Iraq, like the War in Vietnam, was a mere ploy of politicians attempting to prove their superiority. The paper relates that the Vietnam War was fought to free the Vietnamese from a dictator the U.S. previously supported and that the war on Iraq was fought, again, to free the Iraqis from a dictator the U.S. previously supported.
From the Paper
"The Vietnam War was fought on the basis of freedom, democracy and the need to hinder the spread of the evil of Communism. The slogan of the times was that if the spread of communism was not stalled America would soon lose its freedom and democracy the world over would be wiped out. These words may seem dramatic to the rational mind but to really understand the mood of the time such words must be used. The government of the time played on the emotional fear of the people through propaganda to make them believe that unless they supported the Vietnam War they would be unpatriotic and cause the nation to lose its sovereignty. Though Vietnam was thousands of miles away the war soon reached the borders of the US for as the war began so did dissent."
| |
|
Nation - Nation State, 2002.
Defining the difference between a nation and a nation-state.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 6 sources, MLA, £ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Even though these concepts seem very similar, this paper uses contemporary examples to show the difference between a nation and a nation-state. It discusses the history of Zionism, the "Nation of Islam" quest by African-Americans, and the ongoing wars in the Balkans. It also looks at different factors taken into account when defining these concepts - religion, history and culture.
From the Paper
"Defining the difference between a nation and a nation-state can seem more like a bit of philosophical hair-splitting than a useful distinction for a political scientist to make in analyzing the present global situation. However, to better understand the assumptions that underline the terms of ?nation? and ?nation state? it is useful to unpack such concepts before passing judgement on what is a nation or a nation state in the real world of lived political existence."
| |
|
War in Iraq War on Terror, 2007.
A discussion of how the war in Iraq and war on terror became linked as election issues.
2,646 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 13 sources, MLA, £ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper the author argues that the war in Iraq was utilized as a persuasive tool to win an election, in which the war was linked to the more global and less definable "war on terrorism." The author further contends that in the 2004 presidential elections the voters were seeking security, and therefore they linked the two issues. This paper demonstrates that the war on terror and the war in Iraq are not connected and in fact contraindicated for the long term safety of the US, specifically with regard to future acts of terrorism. Salient quotes from primary and secondary sources are used to support the author's thesis.
From the Paper
"The importance and reality of this link are now being questioned at every level. People, in both high and low places are questioning the validity of the connection and asking if this aggressive move, on the part of the US, even in the face of much international opposition was in fact appropriate to improve security in the US and her interests all over the world. The political positioning that has become increasingly obvious has undermined the faith of individuals in the nature and necessity of the War in Iraq, as people feel they were sold a bill of goods, rather than leveled with in regards to the strategic importance of the Iraq in the global war on terrorism in both the short and log term. In fact this work argues that the only connection between the war on terrorism and the War on Iraq is that the later has and will continue to serve to increase terrorist activities and actions against the US, no matter how the government spins it."
| |
|
The Just War Theory on the War Against Drugs, 2001.
A detailed analysis of the increasing war against drugs and whether this war is a just and valid one.
1,260 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 4 sources, £ 29.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks into the Just War Theory of St. Augustine, and determines whether the war against drugs is war that is just and fair, or one that should be given up. The author argues that the war on drugs is something that can never be fully eradicated and rather one that can only cause for the reduction of drug use. Included are statistics as supporting evidence.
From the Paper
"The war against drugs in the United States is one that has been fought for many years, and seems to have no end. Its ?soldiers? always seem to come upon new enemies, which there are already countless numbers of to begin with. Many proponents of the war against drugs point to the facts that drug use has declined over the years, and the numerous amounts of arrests and drug busts that are made. While those proponents support the governments quest in the elimination of drug trafficking, there are also those who disagree.The opponents say that there is no end in sight, that the drugs will continue to be produced no matter what, these people desire the profit from the occupation, and will do anything to get it. Chances are, neither of the majorities of either of these groups have looked into whether this war against drugs is a just one, and should continue, or end. Which leaves the question, should we as Christian?s be supporting this war, or would it be wrong and immoral to do so. This knowledge can only be obtained by looking into the just war theory, and making a decision from there. "
| |
|
James Turner Johnson and George Weigel's "Just War and Gulf War", 1995.
This paper reviews James Turner Johnson and George Weigel's "Just War and Gulf War" justifying the Gulf War against Iraq on moral and practical grounds.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 1 source, £ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"James Turner Johnson and George Weigel, in Just War and the Gulf War, present a reasonable argument that the Gulf War, from the point of view of those prosecuting the war against Iraq, was indeed a just war, according to the moral criteria of that tradition. At the same time, the authors are not naive about the victory and its results. They point out that "the only peace that can be achieved in this region is one limited to that defined by international law, not a 'new order' that will be extraordinarily difficult to bring into being" (40). This is important to note because it emphasizes that the just war doctrine should be applied to each war individually. The authors are not saying, in other words, that any threat to peace in the Middle East, for example, should be answered by the kind of international effort posed in the war against Iraq. "
| |
|
Nationalism and the Modern Nation State, 2004.
A comparison of Umut Ozkirimli?s work, entitled "Theories of Nationalism: A Critical Introduction" and Stuart J. Kaufman?s "Modern Hatreds: The Symbolic Politics of Ethnic War".
842 words (approx. 3.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 20.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines these two writers' views on nationality and concludes that, although Kaufman is more inclined to speak of ?hatreds? rather than ethnic identities, Kaufman also, like Ozkirimli, stresses the importance of understanding the emotional significance of ethnic and national identity when constructing a nation state, rather than the idea that ethnicity exists as a linear, enclosed historical trope within definable and easily recognizable boundaries;ethnicity is ?felt,? rather than historically in evidence, for both authors.
From the Paper
"The overview present in Umut Ozkirimli?s analysis is a warning not to dismiss the importance of nationalism, and also a caution not to accept certain groups? claims to nationhood wholesale and at their face value, as the concept of what constitutes ethnicity shifts and changes, depending on individual?s particular political alliances in a particular historical context. Ozkirimili?s work has a far more dispassionate tone, in contrast, to Stuart J. Kaufman?s Modern Hatreds: The Symbolic Politics of Ethnic War. Kaufman?s work, in contrast to Ozkirimli, is more stridently prescriptive in nature. However, Kaufman is also more rigorous in his use of international political theoretical frameworks to justify his suggestions to policymakers."
| |
|
The War on Terrorism and the War on Drugs, 2002.
An examination of the similarities and differences between the fight against drugs and terror.
940 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 7 sources, MLA, £ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An analysis of the relationship between the war on terrorism and the war on drugs. Part II discusses the similarities between the war on terrorism and the war on drugs. In Part III, the relationship between the war on terrorism and the war on drugs is outlined. Lastly, this paper concludes with recommendations for effectively dealing with the war on terrorism and the war on drugs.
From the Paper
"Few events in life have the potential to impact each and every single member of society, whether it is on a macro (indirect) or micro (direct) level. Even fewer such events actually do impact every single citizen. The Columbine school shootings, the Kent State university shootings, the Oklahoma city bombings, Pearl Harbor, and Vietnam are just a few of the events which are forever embedded into the psyche of millions of Americans. On September 11, 2001, two airplanes crashed into the World Trade Center buildings in New York, another airplane crashed into the Pentagon, and a fourth airplane crashed into a field in Pennsylvania. In addition to the sheer magnitude of these airplane crashes, what makes these crashes notable is the fact that all four airplanes were hijacked by suspected terrorists. As a result of these horrific terrorist attacks, thousands of individuals lost their lives in an instant, countless others were left to stand by helplessly, to learn to rebuild their lives without their loved ones."
| |
|
The War Hawks and the War of 1812, 2002.
Discusses the idea that the War Hawks of America were the cause of of the 1812 war against Spain.
2,150 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 13 sources, £ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Historically, the war of 1812 has been attributed to Royal Navy outrages against American commerce and the impressment of sailors on American vessels in the years before 1812. However, a more plausible explanation focuses on the War Hawks and their combined desire to ensure egress for American products, eliminate perceived British support for the western natives and provide an excuse to move against Spain in Florida.
|
|
|
