The Weaknesses And Weaknesses Of Phases Iv V And The...

The weaknesses with CDRUSCENTCOM’s OA involved the friction and the lack of the integration of the interagency in the planning of phases IV-V and the initial strategic assumptions that affected CDRUSCENTCOM’s OA. The first weakness was the failure of both CDRUSCENTCOM and interagency organizations to include the NSC, Departments of Defense/State, and the U.S. Agency of International Development to integrate and coordinate their strategic objectives into a comprehensive unified plan in support of OIF. This failure enabled the post regime change of Iraq to set the foundation for the insurgency that would start to grow in 2004. The second weakness was the strategic assumptions of OIF that were never validated before the commencement of†¦show more content†¦However, the strategic, operational, and tactical actions by CENTCOM and the U.S. government agencies did not occur because there was no unified plan for phases IV-V. This assessment included three major events . First, was CDRUSCENTCOM’s failure in his OA to plan for the occupation of Iraq post phase III and into phases IV-V. Second, there were two orders signed by Paul Bremer, the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority. These two orders included the de-Ba’athification plan of Iraq’s elite sectarian society and the disbanding of all Iraqi Government Departments and Iraqi Military Organizations. Finally, with Bremer creating the Iraqi Governing Council post the disbanding of Iraq’s Government, he set the political and military foundation for the insurgency that would continue for many years. These strategic and operational miscalculations did not support phases IV-V and CENTCOM to include MNF-I did not have enough forces to suppress the insurgency. The reframing and change of strategy for the OIF campaign should have occurred earlier in the campaign especially after phase III. Now the reframing was vital to the U.S. interests if the U.S. and MNF-I wanted to regain its strategic, operational, and tactical initiative in Iraq. Early in 2007, the change of strategy occurred with the surge forces that enabled strategic, operational, and tactical opportunities in Iraq. POTUS’ change in strategic direction in Iraq

The Truth in the Civil War Essays - 1671 Words

The Truth in the Civil War The Civil War started in 1861, and though it was more than a century ago, there is still controversy and many questions arising about the subject. What were they really fighting over? Should the South have been able to succeed? What were the South’s true reasons for succeeding? Was the North’s only reason to go to war to free the slaves? Were Slaves truly treated as cruelly as we are to believe they were? Did the Abolitionists have other motives hidden behind tightly shut doors, which were not made public? These are only a few questions people want to know the answers to regarding the American’s War against themselves. Some of these questions are hard to give a definite answer to, and say what is exactly is†¦show more content†¦Which is exactly what happened. Civilians started getting the impression that the slaves were being treated horribly, and they were ready to intervene. The big behind-the-scenes northern industrialists with their enormous financial resources were making political decisions, and these hardheaded people were not playing for sunflower seeds. They were out to win more enormous wealth and power. The fifteen states in the Southern block were Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia (including what is now West Virginia). These fifteen states comprised all the land in the country where Slave labor could be used profitably in large numbers and to better advantage than white labor. The South had reached its peak of expansion. There were eight million white people and four and a half million Negroes, and nowhere could the South look for additional political strength. In the North there were nineteen million white people and one-forth million Negroes and a vast area of undeveloped territory which was rapidly being settled wi th people whose economic interests would not be with the South. Against such odds, the South could not hope to hold its own against the Union. On every issue, the South was being and would continue toShow MoreRelatedThe Truth Of The Civil War809 Words   |  4 PagesAnsley Yates Dr. Abraham HIST 1301-41008 22 November 2014 The Truth The civil war was a war fought between the north and the south. The periods of the war went from 1861 to 1865. The ways in which slavery and Abraham Lincoln are portrayed very differently in Nast’s cartoon of Abraham Lincoln and Alexander H. Stephens’ â€Å"cornerstone speech†. The majority of the northern states had a different view than the southern states. Ultimately, the south along with Stephens went against the deceleration ofRead MoreCivil War: the Untold Truth1677 Words   |  7 PagesThe Civil War started in 1861, and though it was more than a century ago, there is still controversy and many questions arising about the subject. What were they really fighting over? Should the South have been able to succeed? What were the Souths true reasons for succeeding? Was the Norths only reason to go to war to free the slaves? Were Slaves truly treated as cruelly as we are to believe they were? Did the Abolitionists have other motives hidden behind tightly shut doors, which wereRead More`` Ain t I A Woman ``865 Words   |  4 PagesExploration of Realism Although the United States of America in the 1800s was a fairly new country, it was very hectic due to the Civil War. For a while, people wanted to get away or hide from their realities when they wrote or read literature. During the Civil War, mindsets changed and people were tired of the fantasies. People craved realistic stories with real, life-like endings. Realist writers answered the cry of Americans who wanted to explore realistic literature; Sojourner Truth’s â€Å"Ain’tRead MoreConfederates in the Attic Essay1133 Words   |  5 PagesConfederates in the Attic As Tony Horwitz illustrates in Confederates in the Attic, the Civil War is far from over. Horwitz, determined to find the answers to this conflict, treks through the South, seeking to explain mans longtime obsession with a war that divided the nation. Talking to historians and Civil War reenactors of all kinds, he finds that people are still divided today when it comes to the war and present issues in society. He collects a vast amount of data, which proves to makeRead MoreEssay on Confederates In The Attic1240 Words   |  5 PagesConfederates in the Attic As Tony Horwitz illustrates in Confederates in the Attic, the Civil War is far from over. Horwitz, determined to find the answers to this conflict, treks through the South, seeking to explain mans longtime obsession with a war that divided the nation. Talking to historians and Civil War reenactors of all kinds, he finds that people are still divided today when it comes to the war and present issues in society. He collects a vast amount of data, which proves to makeRead MoreMonumento a la Memoria y la Verdad, San Salvador874 Words   |  4 Pagescommemorate the civilians lives lost during the Salvadoran Civil War. The monument was made to resemble the Vietnam Memorial; it is made of black granite and has in scripted the names of the war victims. However, the monument only has in scripted the names of 30,000 of the 75,000 war victims. The names are organized in alphabetical order. It is 85 feet long and 15 feet tall. The monument also has the name of the massacres that took p lace during the war such as La Masacre del Izote in which an entire townRead MoreCauses of the American Civil War Essay1118 Words   |  5 Pagesversion of the civil war and even now I am just coming to a full understanding of the truth. The civil war was a terrible rift in our nation, fought between the northern states (known as the union) and the southern states (the Confederate States of America). The people’s opinions were so divided over the issues of the civil war that, in some families, brother was pit against brother. Eventually, the south succumbed to the north and surrendered on April 9th, 1865 but not before the war had caused 618Read MoreEssay on A Brief Biography on Stephen Crane1345 Words   |  6 Pagesbrothers were journalists so it was destined for Stephen Crane to become a writer. His passion came from his parents and the insights from his family life. He attended preparatory school at Claverack College, where he developed a better concept of the Civil W ar. He attended at Lafayette College and Syracuse University for less than two years. He quit college to become a full-time writer. His first work was Maggie: A Girl of the Streets. In his novel, he used firsthand experiences of poverty. The realismRead MoreThe Civil War and American Art Exhibit at the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art: A Review614 Words   |  3 PagesSaturday, June 15 I attended the Civil War and American Art exhibit at the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art. There were a number of different people who were present on this occasion. I believe there were so many people there because this is one of the better known art galleries throughout New York. Additionally, the fact that today was part of the weekend probably contributed to the massive crowds of people present. Not everyone was there to attend the Civil War and American Art exhibit, however;Read MoreEssay on The Civil War: A Women’s Time to Shine1334 Words   |  6 PagesThe Civil War was a definin g point for the United States. The people of America were forced to step back and reevaluate what defined the American Citizen: a person with the rights and privilege to cast a vote for what or who he believes in. The key word here is â€Å"he†. The Civil War brought freedom and rights to African Americans, yet it had no directly positive effect on women’s rights. While African Americans were seeing their lives and futures change, to many observers the women’s rights movement

Essay about Comparing Cyrano de Bergerac and the Movie,...

Comparing Cyrano de Bergerac and the Movie, Roxanne Isnt it easier to accept the idea that a main character would be engaged in a fist fight, rather than a sword fight? Arent fire fighters, as characters, more believable than a bunch of olden day French cadets? I certainly think so. To me it is just more real to have the setting of a story in modern times and in the United States. Rostands Cyrano De Bergerac is written about a time that no one alive now has experienced. There is the same plot idea that an ugly man wants the pretty girl, but she is too busy being infatuated with the pretty boy to notice the intellect of the man she truly comes to love. Steve Martins Roxanne and Rostands Cyrano De Bergerac are similar in the†¦show more content†¦The cadets are steadfast men who are ready to fight, but the firemen are a bunch of goofy adults that really have no clue to what they are doing. Roxanne?s astronomer hobby and job gives her the air of being intelligent and intellectual just like Rostand?s Roxanne has. Le Bret and Raganeau morphed into the more modern character, Dixie. She takes on the role of being Charlie Bales? confident and most trusted friend. In this story, Dixie plays a key role to the plot by giving Roxanne the letter Charlie wrote. She slyly put Charlie?s name on the back so that Roxanne would finally figure out it was Charlie, not Chris, who is an intellectual mastermind. Giving the characters and setting a modern angle helps the present society relate to the masterpiece by Rostand. Is the tragedy lost, or is it just more believable? One of the most profound changes is the difference in what happens after Chris, or Christian, joyfully rushes to Roxanne?s room after the balcony scene. In the original, Cyrano keeps his word to help Christian and distracts De Guiche from interrupting what is going on in the house. In the modern version, though, Charlie sends the old ladies to walk in on Roxanne and Chris. Most people would probably have done the same thing. A person who is in love with another person won?t just sit back and watch while someone else steals the love away. They would seize the opportunity to stop anything going on between them. The second change is the fact that

Unanimity Necessary for a Democratic Decision †Free Samples

Question: Is Unanimity Necessary for a Democratic Decision to Be Fully Justified? Answer: Introducation The term democracy refers to a method of making group decisions that are characterized by equality among the members, especially at the initial stages of the decision making. From this definition, it should be noted that democracy concerns collective decision making and the decision are for the group and bind on all of them. Additionally, there are several ways of making a democratic decision. However, the definition carries no normative weight to it. The equality principle under democracy may refer to a mere formality of one-person-one-vote principle in an election or more robust options that put emphasis on unanimity and focus on deliberations. A democratic decision can also involve direct participation of members of a community in making laws that govern them.[1] This paper presents an analysis of this concept with the view of making it clear that unanimity has serious defects and cannot be the only way to justify a democratic decision fully. The definition of democracy and the kn own defects of unanimity rule make it clear that unanimity is not necessary for a democratic decision to be justified. The objective of democracy is to give members of a community the right to make a decision concerning things that affect them. While some critics have argued it is impossible to justify a democratic decision if there is no unanimity fully, it should be noted that unanimity is not always possible to achieve. For that reason, leaders should appreciate that there is no perfect way to lead and choose approaches that are practical.[2] To find out whether unanimity rule must be a component of all democratic decisions, an experts holds that one needs to evaluate whether it always distribute decision-making power equally.[3] At first glance, one notices that unanimity rule gives each member of the community an absolute veto power. Critics do say by doing this, it privileges no particular voter, and every of them can decide the destiny of their community. Additionally, if a positive outcome results from a decision that was made based on actual unanimity, every voter will feel part of the success. That could be true if the person voted d differently as well. To this extent, unanimity appears to guarantee to the best way to upholding democratic principles in the community. If this were the case, unanimity rule would be a way to lead. However, Corley says the decision-making costs of implementing this rule are high and difficult to realize. A great illustration is a situation when a vast majority of the members of an executive committee vote for a project and, at the extreme, only one person votes against it. If that organization wants to observe the humanity rule, that agenda has failed.[4] The same case can apply a country with millions of voters, and if only a single voter rejects a particular leader, a new election must be called. In these two cases, the votes of the clear majority are effective. In this way, this rule denies the rest of the power the authority to make any decision, which means under unanimity rule; each voter has no equal power. The failure of unanimity rule to give all members of the community in practice makes it less favorable. It can hold the community back since people always has divergent views. This failure leads the world to majority rule. This for this democratic voting aggregation method lies in its ability to guarantee prospective equality of power and at the same time maximizes retrospective equality of power.[5] The formula of one vote, one person, is guaranteed by prospective equality of power. This is so given that before the moment of vote aggregation, all people have equal chances on determining the outcome of the democratic decision-making process.[6] This type of equality is, of course, compatible with a variety of mechanism for choosing the outcome from the numerous possible conflicting preferences that people show by means of voting. A procedure such as a coin-flip that randomly selected an individuals manifested preference, for example, can still satisfy it. In such a case, options can be placed on the agenda and then adequately discussed in the same way as in the course of ordinary collective decisions. After the agenda has been narrowed down to a few options, when the time to make a decision comes, every individual choose the option that they favor. Each person indicates his or her choice by one singly-weighed vote and dropping the option on a ballot. One ballot material is randomly selected, and that can still constitute the democratic decision of the group. This method is consistent with prospective equality at the initial stage. Given that a major basis of dismissing unanimity is that is not practical, it is worthwhile to consider if there is a better way of justifying democracy. According to the above analysis, it is difficult to implement majority rule and meets all the requirements of democracy. It is, therefore, not logical to insist that public decision must be determined by the will of the majority. Some experts consider majority rule as an improvement on retrospective equality. Albert[7] explains that this is a major setback. He indicates that the problem with this type of equality is that procedures that give people the initial equal rights to determine outcomes of decisions may differ in the way in which they choose manifested preferences as determinants of outcomes. According to the analysis, the high possibility of many incompatible alternatives gaining some sort of support makes it mandatory for the chances of the decision-making procedures to incorporate a mechanism for later stage selection of given preferences to determine the outcome Albert argues that this mechanism can only be formulated as a numerical quota. Additionally, the later stage numerical quota rule of simple majority complies with peoples intuitions concerning the essence of democracy as it maximizes retrospective equality in a unique way. Albert groups later-stage numerical quota criteria into four mutually exclusive and logically exhaustive groups. These categories a simple majority, stipulated majority criteria, simple minority criteria, and stipulated minority criteria. Of these four contenders, only the two types of majority criteria are widely used. The minority systems are implausible contenders as they are considered to be intuitively undemocratic. Besides, they can approximate the majority systems. In practice, they cannot work. If voters were to know that the winning proposal will be the option with the least number of votes, all they would is try to push their preference over the minority limit simply. This system would make the minority to be mirror image the majority system. In effect, for that reason, the two minority criteria would collapse into majority criteria.[8] If unanimity is not necessary for a democratic decision to be fully justified, it would be great to know which of these majority systems is democratic. A moments reflection makes it clear that none of them is perfect as far as democracy is concerned. However, a simple majority is better as it scores on retrospective equality than the other contenders. The defect of unanimity rules applies. Whenever the community requires complete consensus so as to pass any proposal, one person will be able to stand in the way of the entire process. In this case, retrospective, only the views of the nay-sayer is heard. Unanimity rule is clearly troubling, and this is so because it departs from retrospective equality to such a possibly high degree. Stipulated majority criterion is also difficult to implement for the same reason.[9] If the stipulated majority is high, the majority required to pass a proposal is also high. At the same time, if a larger majority is needed, the minority that can derail the process becomes smaller, which makes it depart from retrospective equality. This analysis illustrates how a simple majority criterion is the easiest way of getting to retrospective equality. Irrespective of how one looks at it, the majority rule has its own defects. Majority role cannot perfectly attain retrospective equality. [10]While this rule enables the maximum number of people possible to get away with what they want, this kind of democratic decision cannot achieve complete retrospective equality of power as the minority has almost no say on the leadership. At this point, it is clear that unanimity promises some benefits. The level of retrospective equality that can be achieved under unanimity on some particular options is so high that majority rule cannot provide. Unfortunately, in most cases, the lack of effective procedural rules makes it impossible to create this kind of consensus.[11] Any procedural rule that requires unanimity cannot create consensus, but as already indicated in this paper, they cream room for minorities to decide the fate of an entire community. While majority rule prevents this kind of happening, it does this at the expense of the determination of outcomes by a majority. To this end, it is clear that majority rule constitutes a departure from a critical principle of democracy that requires all people to be guaranteed equal power over outcomes.[12] On the weaknesses of majority rule, as a way of solving allocation problems that increase satisfaction, a similar problem arises. One may say it is easier to criticize it than provide a better alternative. The society needs options that can solve these problems without sacrificing the protection that the majority provides over the tyrannous minority that exercises their power under unanimity. [13],[14] The alternative should not take away the values of popular interest and involvement in the policy making process. It appears that the best way out is to use different decision-making rules for different situations. The type of question to solved and the nature of the prevailing circumstances can determine the choice of the rule to adopt. Unanimity can be used in the community at particular moments, but not always. Given that there are scenarios that all these criteria can be used in a democratic society, it is useful to know that when unanimity is not used, it does not necessarily mean the decision is less democratic.[15] It is possible, for example, to make decisions unanimously in small groups whose members view each other with respect and also consider each other as equals, particularly when they are dealing with critical matters. Whenever unanimity is impractical, they can approach unanimity as closely as possible. On the other hand, small groups whose ability to reach consensus is low can also insist on unanimity based on mutual distrust rather than mutual respect. When the latter happens, one cannot say they have achieved democracy through unanimity; rather it is duress and fear to stand for what one believes in. This is a special tenet of democracy, and if it is possible to comprise through this kind of consensus, then it is not a cornerstone of democracy. In addition, in large groups, unanimity is often impracticable because of diversity. A group cannot ignore the diverse opinion of people by requiring them to follow a particular path as that also is against democracy. However, for large groups whose ability to agree on issues is high, a simple majority can work. For heterogeneous democratic communities and societies where divisions are extremely high, concurrence by more than a simple majority can work. [16] At this final point, it is clear that this paper successfully has demonstrated that there are different factors that a community must put into consideration before deciding on their preferred criteria for making democratic decisions. Unanimity is not always necessary for a decision to be considered entirely democratic. A group decision that is characterized by equality among the members is fully democrat. References Bickmore, Kathy. Learning Inclusion: Inclusion in Learning: Citizenship Education for a Plural Society. Washington, D.C.: Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse, 1993. Corley, Pamela C. "Monolithic Solidarity." The Puzzle of Unanimity, 2013, 114-40. doi:10.11126/stanford/9780804784726.003.0005. Cruz, Julio Baquero, and Carlos Closa Montero. European integration from Rome to Berlin, 1957-2007: history, law and politics. Brussels: PIE - P. Lang, 2009. Doel, Hans Van den., and Ben Van. Velthoven. Democracy and welfare economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Goodman, Paul. Drawing the line. New York: Random House, 1962. Hindriks, Jean, and Gareth D. Myles. Intermediate public economics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013. Lang, G. H., and James Wright. Unanimity: the divine method of church government. Hayesville, NC: Schoettle Pub. Co., 1990. Lundin, Rolf A. "Organizational Economy - The Politics of Unanimity and Suppressed Competition." Organizing Industrial Development. Accessed May 12, 2017. doi:10.1515/9783110860887.29. Pathi, R. L. Indian democracy: a minority rule? Hanamkonda: Vision and Mission Publications in association with School of Inspiring Research and Innovation, 2000. Piris, Jean-Claude. The Lisbon Treaty: a legal and political analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. "Unanimity of Action." Radiology 6, no. 4 (1926): 344-45. Accessed May 12, 2017. doi:10.1148/6.4.344b. Weale, Albert. "Unanimity, Consensus and Majority Rule." Democracy, 1999, 124-47. doi:10.1007/978-1-349-27291-4_7. Weale, Albert. "Aggregation, Unanimity and Majority Rule." Democracy, 2007, 155-80. Accessed May 12, 2017. doi:10.1007/978-0-230-37378-5_7. Wilhelm, Jochen E. M. "On Stakeholders Unanimity." Agency Theory, Information, and Incentives, 1987, 179-204. Accessed May 12, 2017. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-75060-1_11. Woolf, Alex, and John Michael. Rawcliffe. Democracy. London: Evans, 2009. Works, John D. One year of Democratic rule: speech of Hon. John D. Works of California in the Senate of the United States: March 6, 1914. Washington, 1911 [1] . John, Works. One year of Democratic rule: speech of Hon. John D. Works of California in the Senate of the United States: March 6, 1914. Washington, 1911. [2] . Albert, Weale,. "Unanimity, Consensus and Majority Rule." Democracy, 1999, 124-47. oi:10.1007/978-1-349-27291-4_7. [3] . Jean, Hindriks, and Gareth D. Myles. Intermediate public economics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013. [4] . Pamela, Corley. "Monolithic Solidarity." The Puzzle of Unanimity, 2013, 114-40. doi:10.11126/stanford/9780804784726.003.0005. [5] . Kathy, Bickmore. Learning Inclusion: Inclusion in Learning: Citizenship Education for a Plural Society. Washington, D.C.: Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse, 1993. [6] . Alex, Woolf and John Michael. Rawcliffe. Democracy. London: Evans, 2009. [7] . Albert, Weale."Aggregation, Unanimity and Majority Rule." Democracy, 2007, 155-80. Accessed May 12, 2017. doi:10.1007/978-0-230-37378-5_7. [8] . Pathi, R. L. Indian democracy: a minority rule? Hanamkonda: Vision and Mission Publications in association with School of Inspiring Research and Innovation, 2000. [9] Rolf, Lundin. "Organizational Economy - The Politics of Unanimity and Suppressed Competition." Organizing Industrial Development. Accessed May 12, 2017. doi:10.1515/9783110860887.29. [10] . Jochen, Wilhelm . "On Stakeholders Unanimity." Agency Theory, Information, and Incentives, 1987, 179-204. Accessed May 12, 2017. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-75060-1_11. [11] . Cruz, Julio Baquero, and Carlos Closa Montero. European integration from Rome to Berlin, 1957-2007: history, law and politics. Brussels: PIE - P. Lang, 2009. [12] . "Unanimity of Action." Radiology 6, no. 4 (1926): 344-45. Accessed May 12, 2017. doi:10.1148/6.4.344b. [13] . Jean-Claude, Piris . The Lisbon Treaty: a legal and political analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010 [14] . Paul, Goodman. Drawing the line. New York: Random House, 1962. [15] . Hindriks, Jean, and Gareth D. Myles. Intermediate public economics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013. [16] . Rolf, Lundin. "Organizational Economy - The Politics of Unanimity and Suppressed Competition." Organizing Industrial Development. Accessed May 12, 2017. doi:10.1515/9783110860887.29.