Post-Cold War Realities
Post-Cold War Realities INTRODUCTION: THE ANTI-AMERICAN ALLIANCE In June 1995, the Speaker of the Majlis (parliament) told the visiting Deputy Chairman of the Russian Duma, Alexander Vengerovsky, that the two strategic states of Iran and Russia should form an alliance to limit the expansion of U.S. hegemony in the region.[1] This proposal effectively sums up the entire history of the Russian-Islamic Republic ‘strategic partnership’—anti-Americanism. During the final decade of the Cold War, mutual loathing for the United States held together a relationship of slightly less suspicion and disdain for each other. As the protracted conflict between Moscow and Washington began to thaw, so did relations with Tehran. Subsequently, in the face of intruding U.S. presence in the greater Middle East, the benefits of cooperation in the obstruction of Western influence became increasingly evident and useful. Both share an aversion to a unipolar world in which the United States wields unchallenged primacy, controlling the United Nations, dictating supplier unions, and deciding who receives advanced arms, technology, and industry. As a result, they have found common ground to further their own political, economic, and hegemonic aspirations. For Iran, Russia provides distinct opportunities to advance its goals of conventional and nuclear military buildup; extension of
Disadvantages of Capitalism.
Disadvantages of Capitalism As discussed in the advantages of Capitalism the consumer has all the power in the economy. However individuals purchasing power is drastically unequal because of the inequality of wealth within the economy. This is due to the fact that some people will always be able to work harder, be more innovative and be more talented than others, and therefore be more profitable and promote themselves higher in the economy whilst others will fail. Because of the inequality of wealth in a truly Capitalist society with no Government welfare great poverty will occur. This will lead to homelessness, slums, disease, etc. Forced migration will also increase these problems in large cities and towns. The people who cannot make any money in the countryside will move to the towns and cities with the belief of finding work and making money. In reality they will just add to the ever growing population of the poor classes. In a Capitalist society the rich get richer and the poor stay poor. In the end this will lead to great unrest and low morale in the society. ESSAY In order to debate between Capitalism and Socialism, it is necessary to understand what the differences, advantages, and disadvantages are of both systems. Basically, Capitalism advocates private property, and that society does better when an individual can purchase and produce as they see fit.
While surfing the channels on TV you might hear a lot of news about terror attacks. Only think of the latest tragedy in Moscow when a Chechen terrorist group occupied a theater full with tourists; or just think of bombings in Bali
The War Against Terrorism - thought - provoking questions - - ( Intro.) What does the term 'terrorism' really mean? Who are the so-called terrorists? - What kind of terror attacks do we hear about in the news? Who are the main terror groups? Why do we compare the Arabian world with terrorism as a first association? In which parts of the world do these biggest terror attacks happen? Might it be possible that not all the news about terror attacks reach us? - What is the basis of the antipathy against Israel from the Arabian side? Where does it come from? - What is the basis of the hate that the Arabian world feels towards the USA? - What is the connection between the hate against Israel and the USA? - What are the steps made against Arabian terrorists and the steps to help in solving the argument between Israel and Palestinians? - What are the last years' main happening? What are the terror attacks we have heard about? What kinds of steps were made to stop terrorism? - The big bum: 9/11. What have happened? - Interview with Americans. What did they feel that day? Do they think that America has its faults? What do they think the US should change in her behavior? - Are the Americans right in their acts against terrorists in the Arabian world? Are they doing what they should? - Is there anything that a civil can do against terrorism? - As a summary: terrorism = new
UNIT 6: PAPER 6b: THE SOVIET UNION AFTER LENIN
UNIT 6: PAPER 6b: THE SOVIET UNION AFTER LENIN . Did Stalin preserve or destroy Lenin's legacy? A. Stalin and his struggle for power: the 'left' and 'right' opposition groupings Lenin was virtually incapacitated from 1922 onwards. In 1922 he had dictated his 'Political Testament' in which he discussed the other Bolshevik leaders and their strengths and weaknesses. * Trotsky was guilty of an 'excess of self-confidence'. * Stalin could not be trusted to wield power with 'sufficient caution'. * Kamenev and Zinoviev had opposed revolution in October 1917 because they lacked revolutionary zeal. * Bukharin was regarded as theoretically suspect and thus likely to deviate from the Party line. * In 1923 Lenin added more about Stalin. Stalin was described as 'disloyal, intolerant, discourteous and rude' and called for his dismissal as Party General Secretary. The Bolsheviks were keen not to repeat what they saw as the mistakes of the French Revolution. * The French Revolution had ended up as a military government led by Napoleon. * Trotsky, as leader of the Red Army, was thus regarded with suspicion by most of the other leading Bolsheviks, in case he led a military coup. * An informal group - Stalin, Kamemev and Zinoviev combined to limit the influence of Trotsky. * Trotsky had only joined the Bolsheviks in 1917, having previously been a Menshevik, and was thus viewed with
America In Vietnam, 1953-73
AMERICA IN VIETNAM, 1953-73 By 1973, the American President, Richard Nixon, had withdrawn all ground troops from South Vietnam under his programme of 'Vietnamisation' and during the summer, the American Congress passed an act over Nixon's veto, the War Powers Act, which removed Nixon's power to order the American Airforce to bomb NVA positions in Vietnam. THIS WAS THE END OF AMERICAN INVOLVEMENT IN VIETNAM!! Since that time, people have asked why was one of the World's Superpowers effectively defeated(The US military deny defeat) by a pre-industrial peasant country. AMERICA WAS FORCED TO WITHDRAW BY 1973 BECAUSE: A. 1961-1968 The US government and military were losing the war before the 1968 TET OFFENSIVE in South Vietnam because of: 1. LACK OF PRESIDENTIAL COMMITMENT Johnson, 1965-68 President Johnson's Secretary of Defence, Robert McNamara, said in 1967 that American aims in South Vietnam were, "70% to avoid a humiliating US defeat. 20% to keep South Vietnamese territory from Chinese hands. 10% to permit the people of South Vietnam to enjoy a better, freer way of life. Johnson did not want to lose Vietnam but also did not want to commit all the resources of America to winning in Vietnam because he wanted to divert money to his Great Society Programme so he gave General Westmoreland just enough troops NOT to lose but not enough to win in the face of
US President George Bush labelled Iran and Iraq as part of an "axis of evil". Bush claimed that these two states are developing weapons of mass destruction and that they are supporters of terrorist organisations and a threat to world peace and stability -
On September the 20th, 2001, US President George Bush labelled Iran and Iraq as part of an "axis of evil". Bush claimed that these two states are developing weapons of mass destruction and that they are supporters of terrorist organisations and a threat to world peace and stability. This research project will attempt to outline what evidence exists in the public domain that supports this claim. North Korea was also included as part of Bush's "axis of evil". However, due to word restrictions and the lack of information about the secretive state, I will concentrate my research project on Iran and Iraq. Ever since the terrorist attacks on September 11th, 2001, the United States has waged a "War on Terrorism". Shortly after the terrorists attacks in the US, the US invaded Afghanistan in an attempt to flush out the Al-Quida terrorist group, accused of master minding the attacks on September 11, and the Taliban government who were accused of sponsoring Al-Quida. After a seemingly decisive victory in Afghanistan, the United States has now turned its attention to other potential threats to the United States and its allies, particularly Iraq. In his State of the Union speech on January 29, 2002, George Bush accused Iraq, Iran and North Korea as been part of an "axis of evil ... arming to threaten the peace of the world". President Bush justified his comments arguing that these states
In what ways did the Second World War affect the lives of ordinary people at home?
In what ways did the Second World War affect the lives of ordinary people at home? World war two was officially started with the invasion of Poland, September 1939 where the British being an ally of Poland and disagreeing with Hitler's actions, declared war against Germany. The war lasted for 6 years in Europe until 1945. It managed to involve most of Europe and Asia, America, Canada, Australia, Africa. Debatably more the 30 million perished as a direct result of the war and generally it was the war that the world collectively lost more in than any other through out history. Not surprisingly it was proclaimed to be ' the war to end all wars'. In my essay I will be discussing and evaluating how the turning points of Dunkirk, battle of Britain, battle of the Atlantic and D-day affected the British home front. I will also go into more detail on the subjects of evacuation, rationing and women's role. I will justify my statements by analysing and evaluating sources relating to the titled subjects. These factors of the war that I am going to research are relevant because; - each turning point in the war would have had a major effect on the morale of people, and roles of women, rationing and evacuation were all aspects in which significant changes in societies attitude were provoked. The war was described as a 'Total war' because the complete economy and populations of the
Russia: a Century of Upheaval.
Question 1 Picture this: the largest country in the world, the stretching plain, a land with important mountain ranges, a land that covers a sixth of the globe... This is Russia, a proud nation, with a rich and varied history, a nation that has, after years of isolationism we usually attribute to the USA, come out and taken its place as a capitalist power in the East and the West, yet, despite the social and political upheaval Russia has seen over the years, has anything really changed. It is true that a capitalist country is by no means always a democracy, but why is it that Russia, despite some huge political changes, is still viewed with a suspicion and scepticism that is usually reserved for the 'republics' of the Middle East, and the Backward, Stalinist regime of North Korea? Maybe it is because people remember what Nation inspired the north Koreans, what Nations leaders have become shining examples to the jumped up dictators of the modern world. The new world faces many problems, and many of them can be linked to the huge conflicts of this century, ahh, I hear you say, at last you know what I'm on about, the first and second world wars. Well yes, but there is another, more recent conflict, a hidden one, that has by no means seen as many deaths, but has arguably done more to mess up this world than the others put together. To truly understand we have to come back to
How Significant were the Normandy landings in Defeating Germany in World War Two?
. Using source A and your own knowledge explain why the D-day was such an important event of World War two? D-Day was such an important event of World War Two for numerous amounts of reasons. The term 'D-Day' actually means 'The Day'. As said by Major Elson, it is the day where "everyone does something". Major Elson fought on the Italian front, which is demonstrated on the map. D-Day was to be June 1944 minutes between night turning to morning on the 6th. The Germans had occupied France and France needed Britain, Canada and America to come together to regain the French territory for them. As well as this, Russia was fighting of Germany in the East and needed the Allies to relieve pressure. D-Day was a very important part into ending the war but other factors include the Battle of the Atlantic, the fighting in North Africa and the Battle of Britain. Arriving at Normandy using the Mulberry harbours, the Allies captured all of the five designated beaches (Omaha, Juno, Gold, Sword and Utah) despite strong German coastal defences. This is mainly due to the opposing armies having no idea to where the Allied forces would be landing because no place in France were called those names. The map shows where the troops entered France and this also clearly enforces the sheer scale of the invasion and its importance into keeping it top secret. Meanwhile, parachutists were flown in nearly
Why did hitler bomb british cities?
The Blitz: 'Why did Hitler bomb British cities?' Part way through the Second World War Hitler occupied nearly all of Europe, including France. He decided to take Britain next. His first plan failed. So he resorted to the blitz. The blitz was the constant bombing of major cities in Britain, along with other targets such as food and railways. But this wasn't Hitler's ideal way to take Britain. But to understand why this and everything else previously occurred, we need to go back to the end of the First World War, when the allied countries, Italy, America, France, Britain and Belgium put together the treaty of Versailles. This treaty blamed Germany for the war, and made them pay compensation to the allied countries for the cost and damages expenses of the war. Their army was reduced to 100,000 men and 10% of their land was taken away. Soon after the end of the war came the Wall Street crash, this came as a result of the treaty of Versailles. The German people were in a mess, as was their country. They were looking for a strong leader who felt the same way as they did, and would promise them improvement. Hitler fitted the bill. In 1933 Hitler became the chancellor of Germany, and from then on he worked solely for war. He even went behind the backs of the allies to do so. He wanted to regain the land that had been taken from them, and he wanted to take extra to make room for
