History of bahrain Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

History of bahrain - Essay Example Bahrain’s Economy With a 19.36 billion dollar GDP, and a real time GDP growth rate of 2.9%, Bahrain’s major natural resources include; oil, aluminum, textiles, natural gas, fish and pearls. Financial services are responsible for nearly 25% of the GDP, with government services holding firm with 14.8%. Oil and gas and manufacturing are lagging behind them with 13.1% and 12.4% respectively. Acknowledged as the first Gulf state to discover oil in 1931, their reserves are expected to last over a decade. Revenues from the state’s oil and natural gas capabilities account for an estimated 10% of the GDP. In addition, revenues from oil have been used to fund health and educational projects and accounts for an estimated 60% of the country’s exports. Bahrain is no stranger to economical successes since it was the important center linking trade routes between Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley as early as 5,000 years ago. As reported by the US Department of State, in ke eping with its financial sector which is their largest GDP contributor, Bahrain holds a reputable regional and international financial business center that operates both on and offshore. Undoubtedly, Bahrain is a leader in its field with over 370 banking units offshore. In addition, regulations are being implemented to ascertain the title leading financial center in the Arab world. With reference to literature consulted it can be concluded that Bahrain has experienced a blossoming economy driven by its abundance of natural resources. Politics in Bahrain As mentioned before, Bahrain has been the subject to multiple ruling powers prior to their independence from the United Kingdom and a Constitutional Hereditary monarchy type of government. Bahrain was first ruled by Persia in the 4th century A.D, after which the Arabs took control until 1541, when the Portuguese invaded them. Then Persia regained control of these islands in 1602. By 1783 Shaikh Isa bin Hamad Al Khalifa took over and the al-Khalifas remained the ruling family until today. By 1820 Bahrain became a British protectorate. With reference to the US Department of State, Shaikh Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa acceded to the throne in March 1999, after the death of his father Shaikh Isa bin Hamad Al Khalifa, Bahrain's ruler since 1961-10 years prior to their independence. Shaikh Hamad channeled a democratic reform to transform Bahrain from a hereditary emirate to a constitutional monarchy shortly after he took the throne. His actions were publicly endorsed by his people. Bahrain was pronounced a constitutional monarchy on February 14, 2002. Now operating under a constitutional monarchy, it has an executive appointed by the King of Bahrain and a bicameral legislature with the Chamber of Deputies elected by universal suffrage, and the Shura Council which is also appointed directly by the King. Like many other countries, Bahrain has had their fair share of political unrest, which started as far back as 1994 and st ill continues today. Particularly this year, it can be said that Bahraini protestors were influenced by events in Egypt and Tunisia. Euronews.net reported that reasons for this political unrest are; a new constitution, the release of all political prisoners, an enquiry into torture allegations, freedom of speech and an independent justice system. Social Life 1.1 Education The Bahraini Government introduced a free

Self Report And Reflection Conmmuication Essay Example for Free

Self Report And Reflection Conmmuication Essay Communication in the work place is important between all team members and families when taking care of patients. During the self-report scale assignment, I realized how much communication is important during my everyday job. As an emergency room nurse, you can become very task oriented because things are happening at a very fast pace. These are the times that things can go wrong if we are not careful and question every order. The relationship between the nurse and patient is not the only relationship that needs to be open and honest. All team members involved including the doctors, physician’s assistances, other nurses and ER tech’s need to have the patient’s best interest as their primary goal. Being open, honest and relaxed I find is very helpful when building report with patients and all team members involved. I am constantly learning new things in the ER but I do have areas where I need work. Time management is an area that I struggle with at times. I believe I can prioritize well but I can always do better. Another area I can grow and learn from is making decisions before I have all the information. This question made me think about how I assume what a patients diagnosis is. I make decisions quick but I know that there are times when I need to have more information and facts to be confident in the plan of care. I try my best to build trusting relationships with my patients the moment I introduce myself. I can become frustrated at times with a noncompliant patient and I remind myself not to let my emotions interfere with their care. This is a time where I make sure my body language and tone of my voice are appropriate at the bedside. I have learned so much in the clinical world of nursing but the foundation of it all was in nursing school. I make most of my decisions based on clinical experience but always remember the basics and root of where it came from. I should remind myself of this more because not  all patients are the same. This self-report has opened my eyes to how I am in the workplace, treat my patients and colleges and how make decisions. I learned a lot about myself that I didn’t know by answering the questions truthfully.

Serving the political objectives of the principal participants

Serving the political objectives of the principal participants The Korean War officially began on 25 Jun 1950 when forces of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK North Korea) invaded the Republic of Korea (ROK South Korea). After initial stunning successes by both sides, there then followed over 3 years of bloody conflict which ultimately ended in an uneasy status quo ante bellum which still persists. The central hypothesis to this paper is that the use of military force was an effective policy tool for all parties involved to meet defined political objectives. The degree of success that each state/organisation achieved will be examined in detail. This essay will be limited to analysing the conflicts immediate aftermath and will not consider events beyond the Geneva Conference in Apr 1954. Specifically, this essay will investigate the rationale that led the DPRKs leader (Kim Il Sung) to consider the use of military force to achieve his primary objective of unifying Korea. The causes of the Korean War will also be briefly examined to set analysis in context. Causes The decisive event that caused the Korean War was the decision by two US Army Colonels on 10 August 1945 to divide Korea at the 38th parallel  [1]  . The decision was taken on Aug 10 1945 and for no better reason than à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦it would place the capital city [Seoul] in the American zone.  [2]  From the moment that the Korean partition decision was made public, the leaders of the DPRK and ROK were essentially determined to establish a unified country by diplomatic or military means. Indeed, many in the United States were worried that the ROK would invade the DPRK first, such was the bellicose rhetoric emanating from the ROK President Synghman Rhee. The dividing line on the 38th parallel did not have any historical significance to Koreans of any faction and the imposition of an arbitrary dividing line by the joint Soviet/United Commission in Korea came as a total shock  [3]  . Indeed, Bruce Cumings asserts that the interim United States occupation forces nearly became as unpopular as the newly ousted Japanese once the 38th Parallel decision became widely known  [4]  . It can therefore be argued that nascent nationalism, coupled with diametrically opposed ideologies and the unfortunate choice of an arbitrary dividing line provided the catalyst for the DPRK invasion of the ROK on 25 Jun 1950. It can also be postulated that Kim Il Sung was left with little option but to resort to military means to bring about his desired end state of unifying Korea. Military outcomes From its inception, the Korean War was viewed as a limited war by the principal combatants, who (albeit for different reasons) had no wish to see the conflict escalate into a wider conflagration. The military outcome of the Korean War was indeterminate, with neither side emerging as a clear victor. After the initial period of manoeuvre (from Jun 1950 Jun 1951) the Korean War settled into a stalemate reminiscent of World War 1 trench warfare. With neither side willing to escalate the conflict to gain a decisive edge, continued operations by UN and Communist forces essentially became a series of (relatively) pointless battles  [5]  in order to gain territory or exert political leverage at the Armistice negotiations in Panmunjom. When the Korean Armistice was formally signed on 27 Jul 1953, a heavily fortified Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) was established following front line positions. Neither side could claim victory in the true sense of the word. Political and Strategic Objectives of the Soviet Union Due to chronic instability in the ROK, the Korean peninsula perhaps presented the best opportunity for a communist leaning buffer state to be established that would protect Soviet and Chinese borders from any perceived American threat. The northern portion of Korea was occupied by Soviet troops, who quickly moved to support indigenous communist orientated commissariats. Kim Il Sung emerged as the favoured choice of the Soviet leadership and the DPRK was established in 1948. Once it became clear that Korea would not be unified by political means alone, and the Soviet Union had successfully tested an atomic bomb, Stalin eventually gave his consent and backing to Kim Il Sung  [6]  to proceed with the invasion of the ROK, but was purportedly unwilling to widen the conflict and risk a wider war with the USA  [7]  . Stalin viewed the Korean conflict as a key part of a wider Soviet strategy to embroil the USA (and its allies) in a protracted struggle far away from what both sides regarded as the Centre of Gravity in Europe. In this the Soviets largely succeeded as the USA became wedded to the defence of the ROK on a point of principle after the DPRK invasion. Stalin also determined that it would be perhaps better for the Soviet Union to engage in conflict with the United States at an early juncture, rather than to wait for Germany and Japan to be re-armed, which would greatly increase Western military capability: [Stalin] à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦added that even if the USA provoked a big war, let it take place now rather than a few years later, when Japanese militarism will be restored as an American ally, and when the United States and Japan will possess a military spring-board on the continent in the form of Rhees Korea.  [8]   The Soviet Unions relationship with China was crucial. Stalin viewed newly communist China as the junior partner in the communist world. While content to provide administrative, technical and planning advice, Stalin determined that the Soviet Union would not become overtly involved in any Korean conflict in order to avoid a direct confrontation with the United States. Kim Il Sung visited Moscow in Apr 1950; during this period, Stalin laid out the terms of any DPRK invasion of the ROK as: The Chinese (specifically Mao Zedong) must approve the invasion; The DPRK invasion must appear as a counter to an ROK move into the DPRK; and that Kim Il Sung would not be able to rely on overt Soviet support if the USA intervened, but would have to rely on Chinese support  [9]  . In essence, Stalin determined that there were great advantages to a conflict being fought by proxy between the fledgling communist Chinese state and the United States. A conflagration in Korea that pitted the United States against China would make any chance of rapprochement between the two states highly unlikely and would also fix American attention far from the Soviet vital ground in eastern Europe. Another key piece of evidence of Soviet strategy was revealed by the former Sovier premier Nikita Khrushchev. In his memoirs, Khrushchev gave an explanation of why Stalin decided to support Kim Il Sungs proposed invasion of the ROK. Khrushchev stated that when the United States Secretary of State (Dean Acheson) publicly stated that the ROK was outside of the United States Defence Perimeter  [10]  , this inadvertently sent a strong signal to Stalin that the ROK was a soft spot that was worth exploiting  [11]  . Stalin therefore reasoned that the United States would not commit forces to support the ROK regime in the event of a DPRK invasion  [12]  . Once it became clear that the Korean Peninsula would not be unified by diplomatic means, Stalin was content to sanction the use of military force (by his DPRK proxy) to bring about unification of Korea. The eventual outcome of the Korean War did not meet the Soviet primary political goal of establishing a communist, unified Korea as the eventual cease fire line ran almost exactly along the 38th parallel. Despite this, it can be argued that the Soviet Union greatly benefited from the outcomes of the Korean War. The United States was badly shaken by the Chinese intervention in Nov 1950  [13]  and the loss of American prestige was tangible when United Nations forces were forced into a pell-mell retreat south after the Chinese riposte in Nov 1950. The Korean War diverted the United States from what the Soviet Union determined as its vital ground in Europe. Korea also provided a means to test Soviet military capabilities in combat against the United States, especially in the air. Finally, Korea also allowed the Soviet Union to cement its relationship with China and prevent any rapprochement between China and the United States. The Soviet Union, by financing and supporting its Chinese and DPRK proxies was thus able to meet the majority of its aims, without becoming overtly involved in the fighting. On the minus side, Soviet support for the DPRK invasion unwittingly provided the justification for huge increases in United States military spending and the rearmament of West Germany and Japan. The Soviets were henceforth viewed as aggressors bent on spreading communism throughout the world, which the United States was clearly going to resist. United States Political Objectives and Strategy Prior to the outbreak of the Korean War, debate was intense as to how the United States should respond to the perception that Soviet aggression in Europe and elsewhere was on the increase. With memories of the Berlin Airlift still fresh and communist ideology seemingly in the ascendancy everywhere, US policy makers sought to determine what course the United States should follow in response to perceived Soviet aggression. A key strategy document outlined the United States response to the communist threat and was drafted in early Jan 1950 by the National Security Council (NSC). The resulting paper (NSC 68) aimed to define how the United States would respond to Soviet expansionist aims and also made predictions about the future nature of conflict between the superpowers in a bi-polar world post World War 2. While it was recognised that the main Soviet threat was most likely in Europe, NSC 68 recognised that the communist threat was global and would have to be countered. NSC 68 defined t he United States options as: Option 1: Maintain current policy; Option 2: Adopt an Isolationalist stance; Option 3: Go to war with the Soviet Union; Option 4: Fund and authorise a rapid build up of political, military and economic strength.  [14]   NSC 68 painted a dire picture of Soviet intentions and recommended that Option 4 was the preferred course to chart. The principal author (Paul H. Nitze) proposed radical steps, many of which were politically highly sensitive. Key recommendations were that West Germany should be rearmed as a priority and that a policy of Containment be adopted. Containment was defined as: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦It is one which seeks by all means short of war to (1) block further expansion of Soviet power, (2) expose the falsities of Soviet pretensions, (3) induce a retraction of the Kremlins control and influence, and (4) in general, so foster the seeds of destruction within the Soviet system that the Kremlin is brought at least to the point of modifying its behaviour to conform to generally accepted international standards  [15]  . President Harry S. Truman was presented with the conclusions from NSC 68 in Apr 1950. Its findings placed Truman in a dilemma; although the United States still had many more nuclear weapons than the Soviet Union,  [16]  the United States could not afford the increase in conventional military spending and support to European nations proposed by the paper. The United States Congress had strongly opposed increased military spending in favour of more spending within the United States. A fierce debate thus raged in the United States as to how perceived Soviet aggression should be responded to. United States policy towards the ROK was somewhat haphazard. As already mentioned, Acheson had publicly stated that the ROK was outside of the United States Defence Perimeter and relations with Rhee were often difficult given his bellicose nature and frequent outbursts about reunifying Korea by force. This prompted the US Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) to press for remaining US troops to be withdrawn in order to concentrate on more important commitments elsewhere. The last US troops were withdrawn late in 1949, which again seemed to signal to Kim Il Sung and Stalin that the United States would not intervene in the event of an invasion of the ROK. Meanwhile, the debate over the implications of NSC 68 continued to rage in Washington, with those in favour of increasing military spending gaining little traction in the face of harsh budget realities. The invasion of the ROK on 25 Jun 1950 was greeted with shock in Washington and no doubt a degree of satisfaction by those that had signposted the Soviet inspired communist threat. American policy was thus immediately polarised and global US Political objectives were quickly wedded to the idea of Containment. The DPRK invasion of the ROK acted as an accelerant that ignited the United States commitment to defending what it perceived as the free nations of the world. Due to an ongoing Soviet boycott of the Untied Nations, the United States was able to secure the UNs approval for the use of force and quickly committed substantial forces in support of the United Nations Command (UNC) in order to restore ROK sovereign territory. With the support of the UN and the containment of DPRK forces at Pusan, many in the United States began to call for a more aggressive strategy to Rollback communism. The United States implemented its Rollback strategy in Korea after the successful landings at Inchon on 15 Sep 1950 had severed DPRK supply routes and seen communist forces retreat in disarray back over the 38th parallel. UN Security Council Resolutions 82 85 condemned DPRK actions and eventually gave UNC forces authority to proceed north across the 38th parallel with the express intent of removing Kim Il Sung and reunifying Korea as a nation state. What set out as an ideological stance taken in Washington to Rollback communism was thus implemented in reality i n Korea, with poor results after decisive Chinese intervention. While it will be debated later in this essay if the UNC advance precipitated Chinas entry into the conflict, it certainly was a contributory factor. The United States was justified to seek UN approval to use force to restore ROK territorial integrity; Containment was a valid political objective that justified the use of force in response to the perceived Soviet threat. The Rollback strategy was (with hindsight) unjustifiable and did not warrant the use of force in a vain attempt to unify Korea. Overall, and despite the ambiguity of its outcome, the Korean War had important implications for American foreign policy. In the short-term, the conflict globalized the policy of containment and was the impetus for vastly increased Defence spending and extensive US military deployments in Europe and elsewhere. The Korean War deepened the United States already combative relationship with the Soviet Union and effectively scuppered any possibility of cordial diplomatic relations with Communist China for twenty years. The outcome of the Korean War was satisfactory for the United States. Communist advances had been contained and the ROK preserv ed as a bulwark against communism in Asia. Korea also had a far ranging impact on US policy and the policy of containment was to be applied to South Vietnam with disastrous results. China In Apr 1949, the Chinese Civil War ended in the decisive defeat of the Chinese Nationalists. A newly unified China under the leadership of Chairman Mao Zedong was keen to assert much greater influence in the region and this was to be a critical factor for the duration of the Korean War. United States support for the remnants of the Chinese Nationalist regime in Taiwan continued to be a major source of friction between the United States and China and was an underlying theme that determined Chinese political and strategic objectives in the region. As a result of the United States overt support of the Nationalist regime and the lack of Chinese counters to US military strength (particularly Naval), Mao was keen to determine if there was an indirect means to confront the United States and perhaps even extract concessions over the future of the Nationalist redoubt in Taiwan. Chinas decision to enter the Korean War was determined by Chinese leaders interpretation of Chinas security interests and their judgment as to how Chinas security would be affected by entering the conflict. At this early juncture after the conclusion of the Chinese Civil War, the Chinese leadership was highly sensitive as to how Chinas stature, capability and willingness to defend its position were perceived by outsiders and particularly the West. China had suffered greatly at the hands of Great Britain and the USA and others during a prolonged period of foreign intervention in its affairs and Mao determined at an early stage that China would become involved in a Korean conflict if the situation dictated  [17]  . Once UN Forces crossed the 38th parallel in force and the Rollback strategy was openly advocated by the United States, the Rubicon was clearly crossed for the Chinese leadership and in particular Mao Zedong leaving them little choice but to act to defend its interests in the region. In essence, if all of Korea was occupied by UNC forces, then this would (in the eyes of the Chinese leadership) create a fatal danger to the fledgling Chinese revolution. Chinas use of force to meet its strategic objectives was fully justified in the minds of the Chinese leadership. The sanctity of the Chinese revolution appeared to be under threat once Rollback gained significant support in the UN. It can also be argued that Mao saw a fleeting opportunity for China to deal an embarrassing blow to UN Forces by committing large numbers of Chinese volunteers at a decisive moment in the campaign. By committing Chinese forces to an ideological struggle such as Korea, Maos reasoning can be assessed as sound; China would bolster its credibility within communist circles and perhaps emerge from the conflict as a beacon for other fledgling communist states so long as the west was prevented from securing success in Korea. Underlying much of Chinese strategic thought was the possibility that prolonged involvement in any Korean conflict had the potential to secure concessions from the United States over the future of Japan and crucially Taiwan. Chinese intransige nce during the later stages of the Korean War can be attributed to not wishing to terminate the conflict until a more favourable situation had been achieved by communist forces and also Stalins wish to prolong the conflict to keep the USA involved in a peripheral action. DPRK Strategy and Political Objectives DPRK strategy was relatively simple once the division of Korea became permanent. Under the shrewd leadership of Kim Il Sung, the DPRK charted a course that played the Soviet Union and China off each other in order to serve the DPRKs best interests. Once any hope of a diplomatic solution had vanished to unify Korea, Kim Il Sung determined that a narrow window of opportunity existed for the military unification of Korea. Indeed, the DPRKs invasion of the ROK perhaps provides the best example of Clausewitzs dictum à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦that war is not merely a political act, but also a real political instrument, a continuation of political commerce, a carrying out of the same by other means  [18]  . On 7 March 1949, while talking to Stalin in Moscow Kim Il Sung said: We believe that the situation makes it necessary and possible to liberate the whole country through military means. The Soviet leader apparently disagreed, citing the military weakness of the North, the Soviet-USA agreement on the 38th parallel division and the possibility of American intervention if the DPRK intervened militarily in the ROK. Stalin added that only if the ROK/USA attacked Pyongyang could the DPRK try military reunification by launching a counterattack. Then, the Kremlin chief explained, your move will be understood and supported by everyone.  [19]  On 17 January 1950, Kim Il Sung complained to the Soviet ambassador Shtykov: I cant sleep at night because I am thinking of the unification of the whole country. If the cause is postponed, then I may lose the confidence of the Korean people. Kim Il Sung apparently requested permission to make a new visit to the USSR to receive orders and permission fr om Stalin for the offensive  [20]  . This is a key point; for Kim Il Sung, the war was as much about maintaining popular consent for his regime as it was for unifying Korea. The DPRK was essentially justified in resorting to the use of force in its attempt to unify Korea. This is a contentious point of view, but it can be argued that as the Korean War was essentially a civil war, then once diplomatic means had been exhausted, the only way left to Sung was to exhort the Soviet Union and China to support a military endeavour to unify the Korean peninsula. It could also be argued that had the ROK not been supported by the United States, then the ideological and nationalist tensions in Korea would have played out after a period of internal wrangling. Korea would have likely emerged after the end of the Cold War as a stable, unified state that would have been open to capitalist influence (like many former Warsaw Pact states) and not the insular, paranoid autocracy that still persists. The outcomes of the Korean War essentially did not meet the primary aim of the DPRK to unify Korea, but did ensure the continued support and investment of the Soviet Union and C hina, much as the United States supported the ROK. ROK Political and Strategic objectives ROK strategy was again relatively simple. By continually agitating against the communist DPRK regime, Rhee hoped to draw the United States into a Korean Civil War in order to enable the unification of Korea by force. Many accounts of the time place the blame squarely on the DPRK for invading the ROK, but this is too simplistic. Rhee continually blustered that he would lead an ROK invasion of the DPRK to reunite Korea. On a visit with The US Secretary of State (John Foster Dulles) a reporter (William Mathews of the Arizona Daily Star) recorded that: He [Rhee] is militantly for the unification of Korea. Openly says it must be brought about soonà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Rhee pleads justice of going into North country. Thinks it could succeed in a few days à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦[I]f he can do it with our help, he will do it  [21]  . Rhee was an ardent nationalist and was clearly set on reuniting Korea by any means, so long as he had the support of the United States to do so. ROK forces were responsibl e for repeated violations of the 38th parallel and ROK initiated artillery exchanges were commonplace from Spring 1949 onwards  [22]  . Continued United States military support was thus at times difficult to justify in the face of pressing commitments elsewhere and the Joint Chiefs of Staff finally withdrew all but a token force of advisors in late 1949  [23]  . The primary political objective of the ROK can thus be clearly identified as seeking to secure and maintain United States military, economic and political involvement in the ROK. In this, the Rhee regime was entirely successful as the Korean War precipitated massive United States military, economic and political support which extends to the present day. Indeed, the prolonged nature of the conflict served to ensure that the Korean conflict was centre stage of the Truman/Eisenhower Presidential Election. Rhee and his regime survived the war intact and the experience of the conflict had a direct influence on ROK politics for two generations with successive semi military dictatorships controlling ROK affairs. The United Nations Facing its sternest test, the United Nations had weathered a challenge, which, if unanswered, might have resulted in disaster and eventual disintegration. Under the U.N. flag, the original objective of the intervention in Korea-halting Communist aggression-had been successfully carried out and the independence of its foster child, the Republic of Korea, had been preserved. This practical demonstration of how the United Nations could function when peace was threatened greatly enhanced the prestige of the organization and established a precedent for future U.N. military action if the need should again arise. The effort had not been given unanimous support by U.N. members, it is true, but twentyone nations had contributed forces of one kind or another to sustain the U.N. decision. Although many of these countries had supplied only small token units, the mere fact that they had participated at all was encouraging, since it indicated their belief in the U.N. and their willingness to put teeth in the enforcement provisions of its charter. The Korean War marked a real departure from the dismal experience of the League of Nations in this respect. Conclusions

A précis concerning Burleigh Wilkins, Can Terrorism Be Justified :: Terror Attack Septermber 11 Essays

A prà ©cis concerning Burleigh Wilkins, â€Å"Can Terrorism Be Justified† I. On September 11, 2001, I along with the rest of the nation, witnessed historical terror and devastation as the Twin Towers, a long-standing symbol of American prosperity, crumbled to the ground after two hijacked airplanes flew through them early that morning. Almost simultaneously in Washington D.C., a third airliner flew into the Pentagon, and shortly after, a fourth hijacked plane crashed in Somerset Country, PA. Few survivors emerged from the rubble; in the end, thousands were dead, and, without explanation or apology, millions of lives had been changed forever – all in a matter of minutes - a painful contrast to the far reaching affects that this sudden, single act had perpetuated. Over a month later we are only beginning to recover, further affirming the notion that will someday read like a line in a history book, that this was, is, and always will be one of the most horrible terrorist atrocities to ever plague our country. Terrorism has long been a global issue; for centuries it has gone on around the world. People with imperialist hopes for world domination often use acts of terrorism to scare smaller countries into support and subordination of the greater entity. Also, terrorism is often used to personify the hatred of one country for another. Burleigh Wilkins, who authored the piece, "Can Terrorism Be Justified?," raises the issue of whether acts of terrorism are ever morally justifiable, and utilizes situations where "a large number of people share guilt for a tragic situation," in what is known as collective guilt. According to Wilkins, terrorism is any act of violence against a group a people, whether they are the attackers or the victims of the attack. The answer to the title of the piece lies not in the definition of terrorism, but in the delineation of whether or not a terrorist act is justifiable. Wilkins uses this maxim: It is generally agreed that it is justifiable to do violence to another person in self-defense; some wars can be accommodated under the category of self-defense where this is construed in terms of a community of persons defending themselves against aggressors." Wilkins says that if we condemn unjust wars or unjust acts in wartime, then we also condemn terrorism where violence (or the imminent threat of

Genocide Paper Essay

I personally think genocide is wrong in every way you can think of. Why would anyone want to deliberately kill a group of people based on race or ethnicity? There have been much genocide to take place around the world, but some are better known than others. Some people have different theories on why genocide takes place. I think that genocide occurs for a couple reasons. The leaders of the genocide may feel that the group they are eliminating could be a potential threat somehow. Another reason may be to spread fear among real enemies, also to implement a belief or religious view. I don’t really see how the Jews were a threat to Hitler but by eliminating the Jews Hitler gained a lot of power. I think the leaders know that the groups of people are not threats I just think the biggest reason is to spread fear real enemies that will defiantly be a threat someday. They do it to make a point and show that they aren’t afraid to kill. I don’t agree with killing millions to prove that at all. Some genocide occurs because of economic wealth. And what I mean by this is that if one groups sees potential in something but another group is standing in the way of success they may just feel the need to eliminate the group so they can have economic wealth. I still don’t see what brings anyone happiness by killing millions of innocent people just because you want to prove that you’re the top country or something like that. Genocide is stupid in my opinion and I see no point for it whatsoever. The more I actually think about genocide the more I become in shock at the fact that there people in world who can kill and not think twice about. I’d feel bad if I killed a deer†¦I can’t even imagine killing a human. I noticed that there has not been genocide in the United States which I am very thankful for. I feel very bad for the people who are in foreign countries where genocide may not be frowned upon. I’m sure there are many people in those countries that wish they could live in the US. Whenever I think I have it bad I always just remember about the kids that were in Bosnia and Cambodia and the other places where genocides have occurred. I’m glad that the United States has helped countries who h ave been in genocide. Hopefully genocide will end one day and people in foreign countries won’t have to worry about it at all. I think they should really be strict about genocide in foreign countries and the US should be quick to help the country because usually the leader of the genocide is very powerful  and most of the time the country itself is not strong enough to defend itself so that’s where the united states could be a huge help because they are a very powerful country and would most likely defeat anyone. I’m just thankful I haven’t had to endure something like the holocaust or anything close to that because I don’t think I’d be able to. I have no clue how those people did it or how anyone who’s been in genocide has done it. I have a tremendous amount of respect for those people, talk about perseverance. I also have respect for the soldiers who try to stop the genocide that is occurring at the time and the sad part is most of them end up not survi ving, but they are sacrificing their lives for the people and I know the people are appreciative or at least they better be, I know I would be super appreciative of what they have done. There are a number of recorded accounts of genocide; the Holocaust, Darfur, Rwanda, former Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Cambodia and many more. The thought of systematically eradicating a group of people solely based on their religious belief, their racial background or political stance would seem superbly extreme to most people, how could genocide continue without notice or without being stopped? Time after time throughout history, there is either a lack of awareness about the genocide or the people that have the power to intercede have looked the other way or decided not to get involved. Whether or not the genocide directly affects us, it is a crime against humanity that should not be overlooked. The Armenian genocide, Beginning in 1915, ethnic Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire were rounded up, deported and executed on orders of the government. The combination of massacres, forced deportation marches and deaths due to disease in concentration camps is estimated to have killed more than 1 million ethnic Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks between 1915 and 1923. Another famous genocide was the holocaust. After coming to power in 1933, the Nazi Party implemented a highly organized strategy of persecution and murder. Their targets were the so-called â€Å"undesirables†: Jews, Slavs, Roma, the disabled, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and homosexuals, as well as political and religious dissidents.The Nazis began with stripping citizenship from German Jews on the basis of their religious identity. Shortly thereafter, in November 1938, the organized pogrom of Kristallnacht marked the beginning of mass deportations of German Jews to concentration camps. As the Nazis conquered large areas of Europe, Jews and others in Nazi-controlled areas  were also deported to camps. When the German Army invaded the Soviet Union, it soon gave rise to mobile killing squads operating throughout Eastern Europe and Russia, which killed more than one million Jews and tens of thousands of other civilians. The construction of extermination camps at Auschwitz-Birkan au, Treblinka, Belzec, Chelmno and Sobibor led to the Nazis’ killing of 2.7 million Jews and others through the use of cyanide gas, summary executions and medical experimentation. Poor living conditions in non-extermination camps led to the deaths of millions more. It is estimated that six million Jews, two out of every three living in Europe, and another 5 million people had been killed by 1945. The genocide of Cambodia was also another one. When the Khmer Rouge took control of the Cambodian government in 1975, they declared the beginning of a new age dedicated to a peasant-oriented society. Instead, after outlawing education, religion, healthcare and technology, the Khmer Rouge ordered the evacuation of Cambodia’s cities and forced these residents to labor without adequate food or rest. Those who were unable to keep up were often summarily executed. At the same time, the Khmer Rouge began to target suspected political dissidents. These citizens, including doctors, teachers and those suspected of being educated were singled out for torture at the notorious Tuol Sleng prison. In four years, between 1.7 and 2 million Cambodians died in the Khmer Rougeâ⠂¬â„¢s ‘Killing Fields. The genocide in Bosnia was very large and gory. Beginning in 1991, Yugoslavia began to break up along ethnic lines as political leaders such as Slobodan Milosevic began to use nationalist sentiment as a political tool. While Slovenian independence was relatively bloodless, Croatia’s declaration sparked a civil war between the province and the Yugoslav government. Troops from the mostly Serb Yugoslav army entered Croatian territory and committed widespread human rights abuses, including the siege of Vukovar and the shelling of Dubrovnik.In 1992, the republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bosnia) also declared independence and the region quickly became the central theater of fighting between Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims). During the wars in the former Yugoslavia, all belligerents committed abuses against the civilians. Soldiers and paramilitaries used rape, torture, forcible displacement, and summary executions to â€Å"ethnically cleanse† areas under their c ontrol. The actions of Serbian units, including the Bosnian Serb army and  paramilitaries, were particularly notorious for committing atrocities, including the massacres at Foca, Tuzla, Visegrad, and Srebrenica. At Srebrenica, Bosnian Serb forces under General Radko Mladic overran a U.N. safe-area and executed at least 7,500 Bosniak men and boys who were sheltering with Dutch peacekeeping troops.Due to the nature of the attacks on civilians during the Bosnian and Croatian wars, the United Nations created the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia in 1993. This tribunal is tasked with prosecuting offenders who contributed to the deaths of at least 96,000 people. The genocide in Rwanda started because of the civil war. Civil war broke out in Rwanda in 1990, further exacerbating tensions between the Tutsi minority and Hutu majority. Although a peace agreement was reached in 1992, political negotiations continued. In 1994, as he returned from the latest round of talks in neighboring Tanzania, Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana was killed when his plane was shot down outside of the country’s capital, Kigali. Habyarimana’s death provided the spark for an organized campaign of violence against Tutsi and moderate Hutu civilians across the country. Despite the efforts of United Nations peacekeepers, extremist Hutu groups killed between 800,000 and 1 million people across the country in only 100 days. In 1994, the United Nations created the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), dedicated to bringing those responsible for the genocide to justice. While slow-moving, the ICTR has determined that the widespread rapes committed during the Rwandan genocide may also be considered an act of torture and genocide on their own. Darfur is another genocide that has occurred. The conflict in Darfur began in the spring of 2003 when two Darfuri rebel movements — the Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM) and Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) — launched attacks against government military installations as part of a campaign to fight against the historic political and economic marg inalization of Darfur.The Sudanese government, engaged in tense negotiations with the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) to end a two decade long civil war between North and South Sudan, responded swiftly and viciously to extinguish the insurgency. Through coordinated military raids with government-armed militia (collectively known as the janjaweed), the Sudanese military specifically targeted ethnic groups from which the rebels received much of their support, systematically destroying  the livelihoods of Darfuris by bombing and burning villages, looting economic resources, and murdering, raping and torturing non-combatant civilians.In March 2009, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir for two counts of war crimes and five counts of crimes against humanity. The following summer, the ICC added genocide to the charges against al-Bashir. The ICC has also issued arrest warrants for Ali Kushayb and Ahmad Haroun for a combined 92 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed against civilians in Darfur. In March 2012, the ICC added Sudan’s current Minister of Defense Abdelrahim Mohamed Hussein to the list issuing an arrest warrant for crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur.The United Nations-African Union peacekeeping force (UNAMID) in Darfur replaced an underfunded and underequipped African Union peacekeeping mission in Darfur in January 2008. UNAMID to this day remains without the necessary resources to protect the 1.9 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) who live in large camps across Darfur. The government has increasingly obstructed UNAMID and humanitarian organizations by restricting access, often leaving the most vulnerable civilians cut off from outside aid. There are also an estimated 263,000 Darfuri refugees living across the Sudanese border in neighboring Chad. Overall, the UN estimates that more than 4.7 million people in Darfur (out of a total population of roughly 7.5 million) are still affected by the conflict.Women living in IDP camps risk rape or harassment if they leave the camp to access water, collect firewood, or plant crops; however, due to the limited access of aid, they often do not have a choice. Gender based violence (GBV) has been used as a tool to oppress women throughout the crisis and those who target women do so with impunity. Due to cultural and religious taboos, GBV often goes unreported and perpetrators are rarely held accountable for their crimes. The most famous well-known genocide is the holocaust. The holocaust had a huge effect on the US and many other places. The Holocaust was the systematic, bureaucratic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of approximately six million Jews by the Nazi regime and its c ollaborators. â€Å"Holocaust† is a word of Greek origin meaning â€Å"sacrifice by fire.† The Nazis, who came to power in Germany in January 1933, believed that Germans were â€Å"racially superior† and that the Jews, deemed â€Å"inferior,† were an alien threat to the so-called German racial community. During the  era of the Holocaust, German authorities also targeted other groups because of their perceived â€Å"racial inferiority†:Roma (Gypsies), the disabled, and some of the Slavic peoples (Poles, Russians, and others). Other groups were persecuted on political, ideological, and behavioral grounds, among them Communists, Socialists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and homosexuals. In 1933, the Jewish population stood at over nine million. Most European Jews lived in countries that Nazi Germany would occupy or influence during World War ll By 1945, the Germans and their collaborators killed nearly two out of every three European Jews as part of the â€Å"Final Solution,† the Nazi policy to murder the Jews of Europe. Although Jews, whom the Naz is deemed a priority danger to Germany, were the primary victims of Nazi racism, other victims included some 200,000 Roma (Gypsies). At least 200,000 mentally or physically disabled patients, mainly Germans, living in institutional settings, were murdered in the so-called Euthasium program. As Nazi tyranny spread across Europe, the Germans and their collaborators persecuted and murdered millions of other people. Between two and three million Soviet Prisoners of War were murdered or died of starvation, disease, neglect, or maltreatment. The Germans targeted the non-Jewish Polish intelligentsia for killing, and deported millions of Polish and Soviet civilians for forced labor in Germany or in occupied Poland, where these individuals worked and often died under deplorable conditions. From the earliest years of the Nazi regime, German authorities persecuted homosexuals and others whose behavior did not match prescribed social norms. German police officials targeted thousands of political opponents (including Communists, Socialists, and trade unionists) and religious dissidents (such as Jehovah’s Witnesses). Man y of these individuals died as a result of incarceration and maltreatment. In the early years of the Nazi regime, the National Socialist government established concentration camps to detain real and imagined political and ideological opponents. Increasingly in the years before the outbreak of war, SS and police officials incarcerated Jews, Roma, and other victims of ethnic and racial hatred in these camps. To concentrate and monitor the Jewish population as well as to facilitate later deportation of the Jews, the Germans and their collaborators created ghettos, transit camps, and forced-labor camps for Jews during the war years. The German authorities also established numerous forced-labor camps, both in the  so-called Greater German Reich and in German-occupied territory, for non-Jews whose labor the Germans sought to exploit. Following the invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941, Einsatzgruppen (mobile killing units) and, later, militarized battalions of Order Police officials, moved behind German lines to carry out mass-murder operations against Jews , Roma, and Soviet state and Communist Party officials. German SS and police units, supported by units of the Wehrmacht and the Waffen SS, murdered more than a million Jewish men, women, and children, and hundreds of thousands of others. Between 1941 and 1944, Nazi German authorities deported millions of Jews from Germany, from occupied territories, and from the countries of many of its Axis allies to ghettos and to killing centers, often called extermination camps, where they were murdered in specially developed gassing facilities. In the final months of the war, SS guards moved camp inmates by train or on forced marches, often called â€Å"death marches,† in an attempt to prevent the Allied liberation of large numbers of prisoners. As Allied forces moved across Europe in a series of offensives against Germany, they began to encounter and liberate concentration camp prisoners, as well as prisoners en route by forced march from one camp to another. The marches continued until May 7, 1945, the day the German armed forces surrendered unconditionally to the Allies. For the western Allies, World War II officially ended in Europe on the next day, May 8 (V-E Day), while Soviet forces announced their â€Å"Victory D ay† on May 9, 1945. In the aftermath of the Holocaust, many of the survivors found shelter in displaced persons (DP) camps administered by the Allied powers. Between 1948 and 1951, almost 700,000 Jews emigrated to Israel, including 136,000 Jewish displaced persons from Europe. Other Jewish DPs emigrated to the United States and other nations. The last DP camp closed in 1957. The crimes committed during the Holocaust devastated most European Jewish communities and eliminated hundreds of Jewish communities in occupied Eastern Europe entirely. I think the holocaust was a terrible thing and I feel extremely bad for all the Jews because for no reason at all they were killed and put in camps and basically tortured for a long time. Hitler deserved to die; I just wish he had died a lot earlier before 6 million Jews were killed because of him. They did not deserve to die. I wish someone would have shot Hitler right when the holocaust started. The bad part is the Jews didn’t even know what was  happening. When they were approached the Nazis lied to Jews about where they were going. They told them that the concentration camps were a lot nic er then they really were. They said they would receive food 3 times a day and that there was no mandatory labor, basically making the Jews want to come to the camps. And by the time the Jews realized they were lying it was too late. Another awful thing the Germans did to trick the Jews was they said that the Jews were going to get a shower when really they were going to die. The showers were really gas chambers. So what they did is they made the Jews get completely naked and then they would make them all go in the chamber and in the mean time the Jews were all excited because they were finally going to get to take a shower. The saddest part was that even tiny children were put in the gas chambers. I don’t understand how those Germans could sit there and watch kids as young as 8 die slowly. It disgusts me that they would do that. I just wish the US had known about these camps sooner because I’m sure many lives could have been saved. I still don’t see why it had to be the Jews. Why did it even have to happen? I don’t get why genocide has to happen at all, I see absolutely no point to it at all. Basically genocide is a mass murder of people based on race or religion. Why do people feel t he need to kill people based on that? There are other ways to deal with them. Killing shouldn’t even be a last resort. In my opinion people can do what they want and anyone who thinks a race should be eliminated just because deserves to be executed or be put in prison for the rest of his/her life. It is clear from empirical and historical research that democide, including genocide (however defined), are facets of totalitarian systems, and to a lesser extent of authoritarian ones. The degree to which people are not democratically free increases the likelihood of some kind of domestic genocide or democide, as in totalitarian Stalin’s Soviet Union, Hitler’s Germany, and Mao’s Communist China; or fascist Chiang Kai-shek’s China, Franco’s Spain, and Admiral Miklos Horthy’s Hungary; or dictator Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, Idi Amin’s Uganda, and Mustafa Kemal Ataturk’s Turkey. Those governments that commit virtually no domestic genocide, or other government domest ic murder or extermination campaigns, are the modern democracies that recognize civil liberties and political rights. To predict where genocide is likely to occur, look first at the totalitarian governments, and next at the authoritarian ones. Whatever the political institutions of a government, the  possibility of genocide sharply increases when it is involved in international or domestic wars. The Holocaust is one clear example. There was the mass murder of Jews before 1939, but not as a government policy to murder all Jews wherever they were or came under German control. That policy did not come into existence until Germany was well into World War II. Similarly with the mass murder of Armenians by the Young Turk government. During World War I, the Turk’s alliance with Germany and the Russian invasion of Eastern Turkey provided the Young Turks with the excuse to purify Turkey of Armenians and Christians once and for all. Similarly with Stalin’s deportation of ethnic/national minorities, such as Germans, Greeks, Meskhetians, Tartars, Ukrainians, and others during World War II that caused the death of around 750,000 of them. Perhaps a million or more were thus murdered during the Mexican Revolution from 191 0-20. And other examples of genocide being executed during military incursions, civil wars, or the fight for independence are the genocides by Angola, Burma, Chile, both Congos, Colombia, El Salvador, Indonesia, Iran, Iran, Lebanon, Myanmar, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sudan, Syria, Yugoslavia (Serbia and Croatia), and so on for many others. War has always been an excuse, cover, or stimulus for genocide and mass murder. There has been considerable research on why a perpetrator should want to destroy a group or, if not destroy the group as such, murder people because of their group membership. Motives are often complex and intertwined, but one can usually pull out among the mix a major motive. One such motive is to destroy a group that is perceived as a threat to the ruling power. Such, for example, was the 1970 parliamentary elections in Pakistan that showed the political power of East Pakistan and threatened the control over it by West Pakistan, and the power of the military government. They thus militarily seized East Pakistan and murdered over a million Bengali leaders, intellectuals, professionals, and any Hindus that the military were able to capture. Such was also the case with the strong resistance of the Ukrainian farmer to Stalin’s program of collectivization in 1931-32 coupled with the threat of Ukrainian nationalism to communist control. So, when what would have been a mild famine hit the region in 1932, Stalin magnified the famine many fold by seizing food and its sources (livestock, pets, seed grain, shooting birds in the trees, etc.) and boycotting the import of food to Ukraine. Even visitors to Ukraine were  searched and food taken away from them before they entered the Soviet Republic. About 5 million Ukrainians were starved to death. In conclusion, I think genocide has no place in this world whatsoever. I think anyone who is a part of genocide is terrible people. I just feel like there are many other solutions to problems then mass murder. Innocent people do not deserve to die because of a leader’s religious view or any views at all. Do I think it’s possible that this century could be a century of death? My answer is possibly. I say this because I feel like people only think that because a lot of people have died. How can we really tell if this century is a century of death if we can only compare to past centuries? If we could look into future centuries and see how many people will die then we could figure it out. My prediction is more and more people will die in upcoming centuries only because the population will be so great. But I could easily be wrong. So like I said I hope genocide will come to an end one day or at least be stopped before people are killed. I would hope that someone will be brav e enough to stand up to a leader of genocide. My opinion on genocide will never change. Till the day I die I will think genocide has no place in this world or anywhere else. And that all those Jews that were killed and basically anyone who was killed in a genocide deserved to live. The leaders did not. I personally think genocide is wrong in every way you can think of. Why would anyone want to deliberately kill a group of people based on race or ethnicity? There have been much genocide to take place around the world, but some are better known than others. Some people have different theories on why genocide takes place. I think that genocide occurs for a couple reasons. The leaders of the genocide may feel that the group they are eliminating could be a potential threat somehow. Another reason may be to spread fear among real enemies, also to implement a belief or religious view. I don’t really see how the Jews were a threat to Hitler but by eliminating the Jews Hitler gained a lot of power. I think the leaders know that the groups of people are not threats I just think the biggest reason is to spread fear real enemies that will defiantly be a threat someday. They do it to make a point and show that they aren’t afraid to kill. I don’t agree with killing millions to prove that at all. Some genocide occurs because of economic wealth. And what I mean by this is that if one groups sees potential in something but another group is standing in the way of success they may just feel the need to eliminate the group so they can have economic wealth. I still don’t see what brings anyone happiness by killing millions of innocent people just because you want to prove that you’re the top country or something like that. Genocide is stupid in my opinion and I see no point for it whatsoever. The more I actually think about genocide the more I become in shock at the fact that there people in world who can kill and not think twice about. I’d feel bad if I killed a deer†¦I can’t even imagine killing a human. I noticed that there has not been genocide in the United States which I am very thankful for. I feel very bad for the people who are in foreign countries where genocide may not be frowned upon. I’m sure there are many people in those countries that wish they could live in the US. Whenever I think I have it bad I always just remember about the kids that were in Bosnia and Cambodia and the other places where genocides have occurred. I’m glad that the United States has helped countries who have been in genocide. Hopefully genocide will end one day and people in foreign countries won’t have to worry about it at all. I think they should really be strict about genocide in foreign countries and the US should be quick to help the country because usually the leader of the genocide is very powerful  and most of the time the country itself is not strong enough to defend itself so that’s where the united states could be a huge help because they are a very powerful country and would most likely defeat anyone. I’m just thankful I haven’t had to endure something like the holocaust or anything close to that because I don’t think I’d be able to. I have no clue how those people did it or how anyone who’s been in genocide has done it. I have a tremendous amount of respect for those people, talk about perseverance. I also have respect for the soldiers who try to stop the genocide that is occurring at the time and the sad part is most of them end up not surviving, but they are sacrificing their lives for the people and I know the people are appreciative or at least they better be, I know I would be super appreciative of what they have done. There are a number of recorded accounts of genocide; the Holocaust, Darfur, Rwanda, former Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Cambodia and many more. The thought of systematically eradicating a group of people solely based on their religious belief, their racial background or political stance would seem superbly extreme to most people, how could genocide continue without notice or without being stopped? Time after time throughout history, there is either a lack of awareness about the genocide or the people that have the power to intercede have looked the other way or decided not to get involved. Whether or not the genocide directly affects us, it is a crime against humanity that should not be overlooked. The Armenian genocide, Beginning in 1915, ethnic Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire were rounded up, deported and executed on orders of the government. The combination of massacres, forced deportation marches and deaths due to disease in concentration camps is estimated to have killed more than 1 million ethnic Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks between 1915 and 1923. Another famous genocide was the holocaust. After coming to power in 1933, the Nazi Party implemented a highly organized strategy of persecution and murder. Their targets were the so-called â€Å"undesirables†: Jews, Slavs, Roma, the disabled, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and homosexuals, as well as political and religious dissidents.The Nazis began with stripping citizenship from German Jews on the basis of their religious identity. Shortly thereafter, in November 1938, the organized pogrom of Kristallnacht marked the beginning of mass deportations of German Jews to concentration camps. As the Nazis conquered large areas of Europe, Jews and others in Nazi-controlled areas  were also deported to camps. When the German Army invaded the Soviet Union, it soon gave rise to mobile killing squads operating throughout Eastern Europe and Russia, which killed more than one million Jews and tens of thousands of other civilians. The construction of extermination camps at Auschwitz-Birkan au, Treblinka, Belzec, Chelmno and Sobibor led to the Nazis’ killing of 2.7 million Jews and others through the use of cyanide gas, summary executions and medical experimentation. Poor living conditions in non-extermination camps led to the deaths of millions more. It is estimated that six million Jews, two out of every three living in Europe, and another 5 million people had been killed by 1945. The genocide of Cambodia was also another one. When the Khmer Rouge took control of the Cambodian government in 1975, they declared the beginning of a new age dedicated to a peasant-oriented society. Instead, after outlawing education, religion, healthcare and technology, the Khmer Rouge ordered the evacuation of Cambodia’s cities and forced these residents to labor without adequate food or rest. Those who were unable to keep up were often summarily executed. At the same time, the Khmer Rouge began to target suspected political dissidents. These citizens, including doctors, teachers and those suspected of being educated were singled out for torture at the notorious Tuol Sleng prison. In four years, between 1.7 and 2 million Cambodians died in the Khmer Rougeâ⠂¬â„¢s ‘Killing Fields. The genocide in Bosnia was very large and gory. Beginning in 1991, Yugoslavia began to break up along ethnic lines as political leaders such as Slobodan Milosevic began to use nationalist sentiment as a political tool. While Slovenian independence was relatively bloodless, Croatia’s declaration sparked a civil war between the province and the Yugoslav government. Troops from the mostly Serb Yugoslav army entered Croatian territory and committed widespread human rights abuses, including the siege of Vukovar and the shelling of Dubrovnik.In 1992, the republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bosnia) also declared independence and the region quickly became the central theater of fighting between Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims). During the wars in the former Yugoslavia, all belligerents committed abuses against the civilians. Soldiers and paramilitaries used rape, torture, forcible displacement, and summary executions to â€Å"ethnically cleanse† areas under their control. The actions of Serbian units, including the Bosnian Serb army and  paramilitaries, were particularly notorious for committing atrocities, including the massacres at Foca, Tuzla, Visegrad, and Srebrenica. At Srebrenica, Bosnian Serb forces under General Radko Mladic overran a U.N. safe-area and executed at least 7,500 Bosniak men and boys who were sheltering with Dutch peacekeeping troops.Due to the nature of the attacks on civilians during the Bosnian and Croatian wars, the United Nations created the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia in 1993. This tribunal is tasked with prosecuting offenders who contributed to the deaths of at least 96,000 people. The genocide in Rwanda started because of the civil war. Civil war broke out in Rwanda in 1990, further exacerbating tensions between the Tutsi minority and Hutu majority. Although a peace agreement was reached in 1992, political negotiations continued. In 1994, as he returned from the latest round of talks in neighboring Tanzania, Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana was killed when his plane was shot down outside of the country’s capital, Kigali. Habyarimana’s death provided the spark for an organized campaign of violence against Tutsi and moderate Hutu civilians across the country. Despite the efforts of United Nations peacekeepers, extremist Hutu groups killed between 800,000 and 1 million people across the country in only 100 days. In 1994, the United Nations created the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), dedicated to bringing those responsible for the genocide to justice. While slow-moving, the ICTR has determined that the widespread rapes committed during the Rwandan genocide may also be considered an act of torture and genocide on their own. Darfur is another genocide that has occurred. The conflict in Darfur began in the spring of 2003 when two Darfuri rebel movements — the Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM) and Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) — launched attacks against government military installations as part of a campaign to fight against the historic political and economic marginalization of Darfur.The Sudanese government, engaged in tense negotiations with the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) to e nd a two decade long civil war between North and South Sudan, responded swiftly and viciously to extinguish the insurgency. Through coordinated military raids with government-armed militia (collectively known as the janjaweed), the Sudanese military specifically targeted ethnic groups from which the rebels received much of their support, systematically destroying  the livelihoods of Darfuris by bombing and burning villages, looting economic resources, and murdering, raping and torturing non-combatant civilians.In March 2009, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir for two counts of war crimes and five counts of crimes against humanity. The following summer, the ICC added genocide to the charges against al-Bashir. The ICC has also issued arrest warrants for Ali Kushayb and Ahmad Haroun for a combined 92 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed against civilians in Darfur. In March 2012, the ICC added Sudan’s current Minister of Defense Abdelrahim Mohamed Hussein to the list issuing an arrest warrant for crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur.The United Nations-African Union peacekeeping force (UNAMID) in Darfur replaced an underfunded and underequipped African Union peacekeeping mission in Darfur in January 2008. UNAMID to this day remains without the necessary resources to protect the 1.9 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) who live in large camps across Darfur. The government has increasingly obstructed UNAMID and humanitarian organizations by restricting access, often leaving the most vulnerable civilians cut off from outside aid. There are also an estimated 263,000 Darfuri refugees living across the Sudanese border in neighboring Chad. Overall, the UN estimates that more than 4.7 million people in Darfur (out of a total population of roughly 7.5 million) are still affected by the conflict.Women living in IDP camps risk rap e or harassment if they leave the camp to access water, collect firewood, or plant crops; however, due to the limited access of aid, they often do not have a choice. Gender based violence (GBV) has been used as a tool to oppress women throughout the crisis and those who target women do so with impunity. Due to cultural and religious taboos, GBV often goes unreported and perpetrators are rarely held accountable for their crimes. The most famous well-known genocide is the holocaust. The holocaust had a huge effect on the US and many other places. The Holocaust was the systematic, bureaucratic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of approximately six million Jews by the Nazi regime and its collaborators. â€Å"Holocaust† is a word of Greek origin meaning â€Å"sacrifice by fire.† The Nazis, who came to power in Germany in January 1933, believed that Germans were â€Å"racially superior† and that the Jews, deemed â€Å"inferior,† were an alien threat to the so-called German racial community. During the  era of the Holocaust, German authorities also targeted other groups because of their perceived â€Å"racial inferiority†:Roma (Gypsies), the disabled, and some of the Slavic peoples (Poles, Russians, and others). Other groups were persecuted on pol itical, ideological, and behavioral grounds, among them Communists, Socialists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and homosexuals. In 1933, the Jewish population stood at over nine million. Most European Jews lived in countries that Nazi Germany would occupy or influence during World War ll By 1945, the Germans and their collaborators killed nearly two out of every three European Jews as part of the â€Å"Final Solution,† the Nazi policy to murder the Jews of Europe. Although Jews, whom the Nazis deemed a priority danger to Germany, were the primary victims of Nazi racism, other victims included some 200,000 Roma (Gypsies). At least 200,000 mentally or physically disabled patients, mainly Germans, living in institutional settings, were murdered in the so-called Euthasium program. As Nazi tyranny spread across Europe, the Germans and their collaborators persecuted and murdered millions of other people. Between two and three million Soviet Prisoners of War were murdered or died of starvation, disease, neglect, or maltreatment. The Germans targeted the non-Jewish Polish intelligentsia for killing, and deported millions of Polish and Soviet civilians for forced labor in Germany or in occupied Poland, where these individuals worked and often died under deplorable conditions. From the earliest years of the Nazi regime, German authorities persecuted homosexuals and others whose behavior did not match prescribed social norms. German police officials targeted thousands of political opponents (including Communists, Socialists, and trade unionists) and religious dissidents (such as Jehovah’s Witnesses). Many of these individuals died as a result of incarceration and maltreatment. In the early years of the Nazi regime, the National Socialist government established concentration camps to detain real and imagined political and ideological opponents. Increasingly in the years before the outbreak of war, SS and police officials incarcerated Jews, Roma, and other victims of ethnic and racial hatred in these camps. To concentrate and monitor the Jewish population as well as to facilitate later deportation of the Jews, the Germans and their collaborators created ghettos, transit camps, and forced-labor camps for Jews during the war years. The German authorities also established numerous forced-labor camps, both in the  so-called Greater German Reich and in German-occupied territory, for non-Jews whose labor the Germans sought to exploit. Following the invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941, Einsatzgruppen (mobile killing units) and, later, militarized battalions of Order Police officials, moved behind German lines to carry out mass-murder operations against Jews, Roma, and Soviet state and Communist Party officials. German SS and police units, supported by units of the Wehrmacht and the Waffen SS, murdered more than a million Jewish men, women, and children, and hundreds of thousands of others. Between 1941 and 1944, Nazi German authorities deported millions of Jews from Germany, from occupied territories, and from the countries of many of its Axis allies to ghettos and to killing centers, often called extermination camps, where they were murdered in specially developed gassing facilities. In the final months of the war, SS guards moved camp inmates by train or on forced marches, often called â€Å"death marches,† in an attempt to prevent the Allied liberation of large numbers of prisoners. As Allied forces moved across Europe in a series of offensives against Germany, they began to encounter and liberate concentration camp prisoners, as well as prisoners en route by forced march from one camp to another. The marches continued until May 7, 1945, the day the German armed forces surrendered unconditionally to the Allies. For the western Allies, World War II officially ended in Europe on the next day, May 8 (V-E Day), while Soviet forces announced their â€Å"Victory Day† on May 9, 1945. In the aftermath of the Holocaust, many of the survivors found shelter in displaced persons (DP) camps administered by the Allied powers. Between 1948 and 1951, almost 700,000 Jews emigrated to Israel, including 136,000 Jewish displaced persons from Europe. Other Jewish DPs emigrated to the United States and other nations. The last DP camp closed in 1957. The crimes committed during the Holocaust devastated most European Jewish communities and eliminated hundreds of Jewish communities in occupied Eastern Europe entirely. I think the holocaust was a terrible thing and I feel extremely bad for all the Jews because for no reason at all they were killed and put in camps and basically tortured for a long time. Hitler deserved to die; I just wish he had died a lot earlier before 6 million Jews were killed because of him. They did not deserve to die. I wish someone would have shot Hitler right when the holocaust started. The bad part is the Jews didn’t even know what was  happening . When they were approached the Nazis lied to Jews about where they were going. They told them that the concentration camps were a lot nicer then they really were. They said they would receive food 3 times a day and that there was no mandatory labor, basically making the Jews want to come to the camps. And by the time the Jews realized they were lying it was too late. Another awful thing the Germans did to trick the Jews was they said that the Jews were going to get a shower when really they were going to die. The showers were really gas chambers. So what they did is they made the Jews get completely naked and then they would make them all go in the chamber and in the mean time the Jews were all excited because they were finally going to get to take a shower. The saddest part was that even tiny children were put in the gas chambers. I don’t understand how those Germans could sit there and watch kids as young as 8 die slowly. It disgusts me that they would do that. I just wish the US had known about these camps sooner because I’m sure many lives cou ld have been saved. I still don’t see why it had to be the Jews. Why did it even have to happen? I don’t get why genocide has to happen at all, I see absolutely no point to it at all. Basically genocide is a mass murder of people based on race or religion. Why do people feel the need to kill people based on that? There are other ways to deal with them. Killing shouldn’t even be a last resort. In my opinion people can do what they want and anyone who thinks a race should be eliminated just because deserves to be executed or be put in prison for the rest of his/her life. It is clear from empirical and historical research that democide, including genocide (however defined), are facets of totalitarian systems, and to a lesser extent of authoritarian ones. The degree to which people are not democratically free increases the likelihood of some kind of domestic genocide or democide, as in totalitarian Stalin’s Soviet Union, Hitler’s Germany, and Mao’s Communist China; or fascist Chiang Kai-shek’s China, Franco’s Spain, and Admiral Miklos Horthy’s Hungary; or dictator Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, Idi Amin’s Uganda, and Mustafa Kemal Ataturk’s Turkey. Those governments that commit virtually no domestic genocide, or other government domestic murder or extermination campaigns, ar e the modern democracies that recognize civil liberties and political rights. To predict where genocide is likely to occur, look first at the totalitarian governments, and next at the authoritarian ones. Whatever the political institutions of a government, the  possibility of genocide sharply increases when it is involved in international or domestic wars. The Holocaust is one clear example. There was the mass murder of Jews before 1939, but not as a government policy to murder all Jews wherever they were or came under German control. That policy did not come into existence until Germany was well into World War II. Similarly with the mass murder of Armenians by the Young Turk government. During World War I, the Turk’s alliance with Germany and the Russian invasion of Eastern Turkey provided the Young Turks with the excuse to purify Turkey of Armenians and Christians once and for all. Similarly with Stalin’s deportation of ethnic/national minorities, such as Germans, Greeks, Meskhetians, Tartars, Ukrainians, and others during World War II that caused the death of around 750,000 of them. Perhaps a million or more were thus murdered during the Mexican Revolution from 1910-20. And other examples of genocide being executed during military incursions, civil wars, or the fight for independence are the genocides by Angola, Burma, Chile, both Congos, Colombia, El Sa lvador, Indonesia, Iran, Iran, Lebanon, Myanmar, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sudan, Syria, Yugoslavia (Serbia and Croatia), and so on for many others. War has always been an excuse, cover, or stimulus for genocide and mass murder. There has been considerable research on why a perpetrator should want to destroy a group or, if not destroy the group as such, murder people because of their group membership. Motives are often complex and intertwined, but one can usually pull out among the mix a major motive. One such motive is to destroy a group that is perceived as a threat to the ruling power. Such, for example, was the 1970 parliamentary elections in Pakistan that showed the political power of East Pakistan and threatened the control over it by West Pakistan, and the power of the military government. They thus militarily seized East Pakistan and murdered over a million Bengali leaders, intellectuals, professionals, and any Hindus that the military were able to capture. Such was also the case with the strong resistance of the Ukrainian farmer to Stalin’s program of collectivization in 1931-32 coupled with the threat of Ukrainian nationalism to communist control. So, when what would have been a mild famine hit the region in 1932, Stalin magnified the famine many fold by seizing food and its sources (livestock, pets, seed grain, shooting birds in the trees, etc.) and boycotting the import of food to Ukraine. Even visitors to Ukraine were  searched and food taken away from them before they entered the Soviet Republic. About 5 million Ukrainians were starved to death. In conclusion, I think genocide has no place in this world whatsoever. I think anyone who is a part of genocide is terrible people. I just feel like there are many other solutions to problems then mass murder. Innocent people do not deserve to die because of a leader’s religious view or any views at all. Do I think it’s possible that this century could be a century of death? My answer is possibly. I say this because I feel like people only think that because a lot of people have died. How can we really tell if this century is a century of death if we can only compare to past centuries? If we could look into future centuries and see how many people will die then we could figure it out. My prediction is more and more people will die in upcoming centuries only because the population will be so great. But I could easily be wrong. So like I said I hope genocide will come to an end one day or at least be stopped before people are killed. I would hope that someone will be brav e enough to stand up to a leader of genocide. My opinion on genocide will never change. Till the day I die I will think genocide has no place in this world or anywhere else. And that all those Jews that were killed and basically anyone who was killed in a genocide deserved to live. The leaders did not.

Wayexplain How the Relationship Between an Organisation’s Structure and Culture Can Impact on the Performance of the Business

Character Analysis As we all known that the characters leading peoples’ behaviors and thought. In terms of characters influenced by environment and nurture, on the one hand, people do not believe that characters will affect when their make decision, one the other hand, characters will also determine peoples’ job position or the levels of life in the future. Now, let us talk about why characters are important in our life. Regardless of you believe that or not, characters are your label and when you fall in trouble or something happened that characters will make you predict your act.Even you are meeting new people, through the details when you are taking about that will help you making the levels about the person quickly. In fact, all of the details are reflect of peoples’ characters so that we are making character analysis everyday. In this essay I would like talk about my own characters and analysis it. Initially, I will talk about my own positive characters. By the way, my name is Mouzhi-young and my name was given to me by my grandfather. He want to me become an intelligence and ambition person. Of course, young is my family name.I am an easy-going man and I pleasure help others. When my friends get in trouble I always the first man is selected to. On the other hand I think my good quality consist by will power. The thing that I am decided I never give up. That means I will try my best to do. Sometimes my friends think I am a paranoia. Contrary, I also have some negative characters. Partly because of my name, my parents want to me become a useful and successful man so that they have too much wish for me. When I was a child, they ask for me attend a lot of course in the free time.I do don’t know why am I have to spend so much time to study. Then, I guess I hate study and I absolutely acknowledge that the real things are do what you want to do. So I guess I am an idealist. The reason is I do don’t care about others mind and I just care about myself. I won’t put myself in trouble. I think it is not selfish and it is the prefect way to protect myself. Similarly, I pleasure help my friends and I always do that. It is sometimes I just don’t know how to deal with the relationship with other people so that I make the opposite way to do that is try to diminish communication with others.There is important example about myself that I don’t feel like make other people clearly know about me. By my side, I afraid that other known about me too much on account of I am not good at explain and I also hate explain. I never ever try to know about others secrets, so I am wish other people would give me a free. After that, I guess I am too emotional and sensitive. I will profile every thing in my life. It is means I crazy about figure everything it out. g

Free Essays on Case Analysis Perdue Farms

Perdue Farms The external threats are as follows: ? Most of the competition sells frozen products for less money. ? Perdue?s cost to raise chickens is above the national average. ? Growth rate in chicken sales is only 5% due to lack of frozen line. ? Over capacity of chickens has reduced wholesale prices, which reduces profit margins. ? Competition is strong in broiler industry with 53 competitors. ? Untapped markets in the Upper Mid- west need to be explored 1. The Perdue Farms, Co. has internal strengths and weaknesses that need to be addressed and evaluated; The strengths are as follows; ? Perdue is vertically integrated which means that they produce the chickens, they breed, hatch the eggs, they select the growers, build Perdue chicken houses, formulate and manufacture their feed, oversee care and feeding, operate their own processing plants, distribute via truck and marketing. They now also sell what used to be waste, such as the chicken feet that is sold to the Orient as a delicacy. ? Privately held firm ? Technologically advanced, ex.,20% more breast meat than the competition ? Birds are fed organically and not feed additives. ? Sell both raw and pre-cooked chickens and turkeys. ? Good compensation package to the workers. ? Non-union company. ? MIS efficient and essential to operating the business. ? Good variety from fresh oven stuffer roasters, cooked prepared foods, cutlets, tenders, Fit n easy and much more. ? Good TQM with mission and vision ? Excellent R&D for better meat to bone ratios. ? Keep overhead low, quality up ? Great diverse product line that has changed with consumer changes. ? Horizontal diversification when they bought Showell Farms, which made them the third largest producer in the broiler industry. ? Great social responsibility, code of ethics ? Environmentally concerned... Free Essays on Case Analysis Perdue Farms Free Essays on Case Analysis Perdue Farms Perdue Farms The external threats are as follows: ? Most of the competition sells frozen products for less money. ? Perdue?s cost to raise chickens is above the national average. ? Growth rate in chicken sales is only 5% due to lack of frozen line. ? Over capacity of chickens has reduced wholesale prices, which reduces profit margins. ? Competition is strong in broiler industry with 53 competitors. ? Untapped markets in the Upper Mid- west need to be explored 1. The Perdue Farms, Co. has internal strengths and weaknesses that need to be addressed and evaluated; The strengths are as follows; ? Perdue is vertically integrated which means that they produce the chickens, they breed, hatch the eggs, they select the growers, build Perdue chicken houses, formulate and manufacture their feed, oversee care and feeding, operate their own processing plants, distribute via truck and marketing. They now also sell what used to be waste, such as the chicken feet that is sold to the Orient as a delicacy. ? Privately held firm ? Technologically advanced, ex.,20% more breast meat than the competition ? Birds are fed organically and not feed additives. ? Sell both raw and pre-cooked chickens and turkeys. ? Good compensation package to the workers. ? Non-union company. ? MIS efficient and essential to operating the business. ? Good variety from fresh oven stuffer roasters, cooked prepared foods, cutlets, tenders, Fit n easy and much more. ? Good TQM with mission and vision ? Excellent R&D for better meat to bone ratios. ? Keep overhead low, quality up ? Great diverse product line that has changed with consumer changes. ? Horizontal diversification when they bought Showell Farms, which made them the third largest producer in the broiler industry. ? Great social responsibility, code of ethics ? Environmentally concerned...

Strategic Management Process Essays

Strategic Management Process Essays Strategic Management Process Paper Strategic Management Process Paper Running head: STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT PROCESS Strategic Management Process MGT 498 In the following paper the strategic management process will be discussed. First to be described will be the primary components of a strategic management process. I will also indicate why a strategic management process is needed for a company. Finally I will research Apple and describe their strategic management process. The first step to strategic management is 1. Developing a strategic vision. The management or leader must come up with a vision for the company. This vision should focus on where management wants the company to be in five years. â€Å"A big first step in developing the strategic vision is to create a mission statement. The mission statement should define what an organizations purpose is and what it hopes to accomplish in the future. The corporate identity begins to take shape when the mission statement captures the strategic vision of leadership† (Akbar, 2008). The second step is setting objectives. This step puts the mission statement into action. It gives employees something to work toward. The third step is crafting strategy to achieve objectives. Management needs to develop a strategy for all employees to follow to reach the companies goals. The management needs to take into consideration all aspects of the goal including competitors. The fourth step is implementing ; executing strategy. This step is when the plan will hit the streets. Management has to make sure the plan fits with the company. The final step is evaluating and correcting. A good team is always looking for ways to improve the company. The plan must constantly be looked at for improvements. One company that has a good strategic management process is apple. Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak founded Apple in 1976. Apples mission statement is as follows: â€Å" Apple is committed to bringing the best personal computing experience to students, educators, creative professionals and consumers globally through innovative hardware, software and Internet offerings† (Apple, 2011). By following this mission statement apple has the most dedicated and loyal customer base. With profit growing every day and consumers waiting in line for hours for the hottest apple product is incredible. There are only a few items that people will wait in an outrageous line for: 1. Black Friday Sales 2. Apple products. It is extremely hard to keep inventing new products to keep customers happy but apple seems to know the trick. Apple has a great strategic process that is monitored closely. If there is new technology to be invented apple is going to invent it. Any company that wants to succeed has to implement a strategic management process. If a company hires a good management team that follows thru with objectives and is a great leader the company will succeed. Any company has to monitor competition closely and always be one step ahead. If a company can be successful they have a good chance of following in apples footsteps. One does have to remember that apple just recently has been reinvented, everyone should have look on the bright side. Reference Akbar, M. (2008). Elements of the strategic management process. Retrieved from helium. com/items/844145-elements-of-the-strategic-management-process? page=2 Apple. (2011). Apple Infor. Retrieved from apple. com/about/

Black Studies The Black Experience In Southern California Essay

Black Studies The Black Experience In Southern California - Essay Example His book traces the development of society in Los Angeles following the war. The city was vibrant with economic activity and cultural diversity. Avila narrates the city’s cultural history from the end of the war till the seventies when immigrants from the rest of America and indeed the world flooded into LA to share in the potential economic boom of the time. This immigrant population brought with them their cultural baggage of various ethnic and racial identities. They included whites who formed the dominant part of the mix and it was they who defined the whiteness of the city. Better educated with a history of previous employment, the white population were able to secure well-paid jobs with benefits and incentives. They soon formed the dominant race and established its ‘whiteness’ interspersed with a mix of various ethnic and racial cultures. Avila explores the subsequent interactions between popular culture, suburbanization of whites and the exodus of cultures from middle and Eastern America to the West. He explains the social and spatial consequences of this cultural shift alongside other notable events that occurred during the period. He attributes some key events such as the Brooklyn Dodgers move to Los Angeles, the setting up of Disneyland and the building of the Californian freeways, to the drastic reorganization of urban spatial zones and the redistribution of ethnic and racial minorities in the city. Many of the minority groups, amid political turmoil and much opposition were forced to shift to other areas to make way for construction of the new stadium and the freeways. Marginal neighbourhoods faced the threat of destruction and those that were bypassed ran into neglect. Although residents attempted to halt the construction of the Californian freeways and the stadium they efforts were ultimately futile. Political policies during the period attempted to zero in on the white hot spots interspersed in non-white neighbourhoods, ignoring the significance of the racial population. Over several decades as outer towns and towns within the immediate vicinity of LA, became encapsulated with the larger city, the city leaders tended to segregate the city, demarcate it according to the racial mix existing in those areas. Locales that were more developed or affluent gained more attention and investment than the areas that seemed to show less potential. Due to the political neglect, the underdeveloped neighbourhoods became infested with all kinds of crime and misdemeanour. Less job opportunities and lack of focus on education in schools, poorly paid teachers, shifting of professionals to more affluent parts, all contributed to the rise in crime. The consequence of this was that the underprivileged in ethnic and racial communities, fell prey to lawlessness. The blacks resorted to criminal violence , robbery and murder as a means to maintain their livelihoods. A culture of violence spread through the city and grew rise to gangs. Involvement with drugs and other illegal activities also became a means to an end. This brought about the image of crime to be associated with blacks. Further reinforcement came about through the depiction of crime in television and film and many of the instigators of violence were shown to be black. Avila makes the point of how television and fi

Apple Inc. s Returns Management Practices Case Study

Apple Inc. s Returns Management Practices - Case Study Example Notably, operations are intrinsically associated with supply chain and definition of operations management is incomplete without highlighting supply chain (Stevenson and Hojati, 2007; Heizer, Render and Weiss, 2004). Supply chain consists of a sequence of several events and organisations that are essential for completing the process of operations management. Supply chain and operations management coexists and comprises activities such as forecasting, inventory purchasing and management, quality checking, scheduling, information management, production, packaging, distribution, delivery and customer service. An important aspect of operations management is production system where input is added in the transforming processes and output is generated. The production system can be classified as mass production, continuous production, batch production and job shop production depending upon the nature and quality of produced goods (Stevenson and Hojati, 2007; Heizer, Render and Weiss, 2004). The initial production system of Apple Inc was mass production system comprising excessive material handling, poor layout and high degree of functional operations. The system was heavily mismanaged with high overhead cost, excessive inventory, lack of material planning and ineffective inventory system. The mismanagement increased product cost and eventually affected firm’s finances. Since Job’s return, the production system was changed towards betterment by integrating lean production system. Jobs considered outsourcing as one of the important production decisions. Chinese firm Foxconn became its production and assembling partner where simplicity was maintained in layout due to unskilled labours. Apple is focused on efficiency, flexibility, cost and quality and it is reflected in Foxconn’s flexible line production strategy. Short production cycle, repetitive jobs and simple conveyor system at foxconn

Analysis of an allocated management practitioner article using Essay

Analysis of an allocated management practitioner article using relevant organisational behaviour theory - Essay Example These findings, according to the writer are evidence of how critical it is for management to ensure they improve communication strategy by making it a vital part of their HR practice and strategy. To facilitate this, the writer makes several recommendations towards what they think should be done, this include; having a shared purpose, convincing the leaders, engaging the staff, taking the existing channels of communication to account, maintain a personal touch, working in collaboration with the stakeholders and finally measuring and evaluating the results. In summary, the writer can be seen as trying to assert the importance of communication for its own sake and also the importance of letting the staff and other stakeholders appreciate and understand the benefits of communication. For a long time, managers and researchers have agreed that organizational success is not separable from smoothness in the communication process, in every organization; the most effective employees are those that have open communication with their manager and leaders (Snyder and Morris, 1984). This is because communication helps them build health working relationship which serve, among other things to improve their organizational identification and thus boost their performance making it more effective (Gray & Laidlaw, 2004). In addition, when there are major organizational changes involving mergers or layoffs, in a firm where employees have open communication to management, it will be relatively easy to deal with such (Gopinath & Becker, 2000; Schweiger & DeNisi, 1991). When there is a culture of communication whether vertical or horizontal, managers and employees are better able to deal with job stressors, which would otherwise negatively affect performance. The Organizational suppo rt theory proposes that with time, employees come to form global beliefs, which are founded on the manner in which they