Robert E. Lee Essay -- essays research papers

The battle of Gettysburg was fought on July 1 through July 3, 1863, considered by most military historians the turning point in the American Civil War (Johnson 84). The Battle of Gettysburg was a decisive engagement in that it arrested the Confederates’ second and last major invasion of the North, destroyed their offensive strategy, and forced them to fight a defensive war in which the slowness of their manufacturing capacity and transportation facilities doomed them to defeat (McPherson 25).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Army of the Potomac, under the Union general George Gordon Meade, numbered about 85,000; the Confederate army, under General Robert E. Lee, numbered about 75,000 (Johnson 90). After the Battle of Chancellorsville on May 2 to 4, an important victory for the Confederates, Lee divided his army into three corps, commanded by three lieutenant generals: James Longstreet, Richard Stoddert Ewell, and Ambrose Powell Hill (Johnson 91). Lee then formulated a plan for invading Pennsylvania, hoping to avert another federal offensive in Virginia and planning to fight if he could get the federal army into a vulnerable position; he also hoped that the invasion might increase Northern war-weariness and lead the North to recognize the independence of the Confederate States of America (Johnson 85). In pursuit of this plan, Lee crossed the Blue Ridge Mountains, proceeded up the Shenandoah Valley, and, crossing Maryland, entered Pennsylvania (Clark 86). Upon learning federal troops were north of the Potomac, Lee decided to concentrate his whole army at Gettysburg (Clark 86). On June 30, Confederate troops from General Hill’s corps, on their way to Gettysburg, saw federal troops that Meade had moved down to intercept the Confederate army (McPherson 102). The Battle began on July 1 outside of Gettysburg with an encounter between Hill’s advance brigades and the federal cavalry division commanded by Major General John Buford, supported by infantry under Major General John Fulton Reynolds (McPherson 103). Hill encountered stubborn resistance, and the fighting was undecided until Ewell arrived from the north in the afternoon. The Confederates pushed against General Oliver Howard’s corps and forced the federal troops to retreat from their forward positions to Culp’s Hill and Cemetery Ridge, southeast of Gettysb... ... captured or missing (Johnson 91).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Lee retreated west and southwest through Hagerstown, Maryland and into Virginia. Imboden’s wagon train, composing of wagons and ambulances, stretched for over 17 miles (Johnson 190). Meade considered pursuit, but determined that the defensive nature of the Appalachian passes prohibited full pursuit (Johnson 191). Meade did harass Lee’s retreat, which resulted in minor skirmishes and capture of various Confederate units, but did not materialize (Johnson 191). Meade’s decision not to pursue Lee angered Lincoln, who expected a decisive victory (Johnson 192). Also, the lack of vigorous pursuit showed Meade as being too cautious. Lee hurting from Gettysburg, was forced to return to Virginia. The war was far from over and lasted another 2 years (Johnson 192).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Gettysburg Address, a famous speech, was delivered later that year by United States president Abraham Lincoln on November 19, 1863, at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania (McPherson 192). He presented it in dedication of the Gettysburg National Cemetery honoring those who died in the Civil War Battle of Gettysburg.

Experiencing Salvation in as I Lay Dying

Experiencing Salvation in As I Lay Dying ENGLISH 215 October 31, 2011 William Faulkner’s As I Lay Dying centers on the absurd journey that the Bundren family takes to Jefferson to bury their dead mother, Addie. Faulkner frames this journey through the lens of various narrators with a specific focus on the characters’ innermost thoughts and deep interior monologues. Although the novel’s plot revolves around the Bundren family, characters outside of the family are essential to provide an objective view. Without these outside characters, much of Faulkner’s commentary would be lost.One of the most important characters outside of the Bundren family is Cora Tull. It is through her character that Faulkner makes his most potent commentary on the ideas of sin, salvation, and hypocrisy. With the strong irony that is employed throughout the novel, Faulkner twists Cora’s seemingly ideal moral character and uses her instead as an example of what not to be. Throu gh the juxtaposition of Addie and Cora, Faulkner seeks to highlight religious hypocrisy and show that Cora’s idea of religious salvation is faulty.Instead, Faulkner believes (as demonstrated through Addie) that true salvation consists of an enlightened state of self-awareness and concrete understanding of one’s own sin. Religion is echoed in every facet of Cora’s life. On the surface, she appears to be a warm-hearted Christian spirit, but it becomes quickly evident that Cora’s perception of religion is skewed. Cora is always seen serving her neighbors but Cora’s charity is not genuine. She serves not out of love, but to keep up a Christian appearance and receive a promised heavenly reward (23, 93).When Cora attempts to serve, even her husband (Vernon Tull) comments that she tries to â€Å"crowd the other folks away and get in closer than anybody else (71). †She is very concerned with the eternal state of others around her, but again, her con cern is not out of love. Cora states that only God can see into the heart (167), but in her piety Cora criticizes others and believes that they will only be saved if they adopt her works based religion.Cora’s life experiences have only increased her desire to serve more dutifully because she has earned the respect of others in the community. In this ironic way, Cora’s hypocrisy has served her well on this earth. In contrast, Addie’s life experiences have molded her into a defiant, unfulfilled and bitter woman. Through Cora’s eyes, Addie is a bad mother and is in desperate need of repentance. Cora believes that Addie is blind to her own sin and that it is sacrilegious to trust in Jewel instead of turning to God for salvation.However, it is Cora that cannot see and passes judgment blindly. Cora does not know the implications behind Addie’s favoritism to Jewel and that the man Cora has placed on such a holy pedestal (Minister Whitfield) is in fact a s ource of Addie’s sin. Cora does not know that it was Minister Whitfield that wanted to cover up the affair and that Addie’s consent to remain quiet were out of love for the brief satisfaction she had found in him – Addie has always remained genuine; she had no desire to be deceitful.Cora’s misinformed judgments are full of words that â€Å"go straight up in a thin line, quick and harmless (173). † In Addie’s section in the novel, she describes the scene where Cora wants Addie to pray with her to receive a salvation (168, 174). The reason Cora thought that Addie could receive salvation by saying a prayer is because Cora’s religion is empty, full of mindless words and â€Å"people to whom sin is just a matter of words, to them salvation is just words too (176). Cora’s word-oriented religious hypocrisy is a direct manifestation of Addie’s idea that words lack meaning and are just â€Å"shape(s) to fill a lack (172). † In distinguishing the differences between Addie and Cora, it is made clear who can ultimately experience salvation. Even though pious Cora may have experienced some worldly success, Faulkner is suggesting that she will never obtain salvation because she is blinded in her hypocrisy and is consumed with duty and a works-based religion. Cora knows sin as it can be expressed in words but not in practice.Addie knows the extent of sin because (unlike Cora) she has truly experienced it. Even though Addie expresses discontent, she is at least aware of her sin and its relationship to the nature of her being. Faulkner criticizes Cora’s judgmental, insincere, and pious character and instead presents Addie’s self-aware, authentic, and pragmatic understanding as the way to experience sanctification in this life. It is Addie, not Cora, who will receive the reward of true enlightenment and salvation.

“An Indian Story” by Roger Jack Essay

In â€Å"An Indian Story† by Roger Jack is an example of family solidarity and care giving within a minority family. When Jack was just a young boy, his mother died, then his father remarried and started a new family that made the boy uncomfortable with his living situation. After that, he decided to go living with his late mother’s sister, Aunt Greta. It is an evident that even before he decided to move with Greta, Jack was very close to her when he stated, â€Å"I walked to Aunt Greta’s house and asked if I could move in with her since I had already spend so much time with her anyway†(53). This is our first example of the strong ties to extended family in this story. As the story progresses we learn that Greta has sacrificed not only for her nephew but for her father as well. Greta had been married for a long time but her husband just died five years into their marriage. The reason why Greta and her husband never had any children and she never remarried was because she took care of her father after her mother died. The fact that Greta looked after her father demonstrates another tight family bond and support for one another but it was also evident that the two share a close relationship. The author states, â€Å"She [Greta] had so much love and knowledge to share, which she passed on to me naturally and freely† (53). Hence, tradition was very important to Greta’s family as well as their Indian culture and Greta shared it with Jack. During the years, Jack and his aunt form an even stronger bond and she became a mother to him as they shared many adventures together.

History of Biological Warfare Essay

Biological warfare, also called germ warfare is the use of bacteria, toxins, virus or harmful organism by the military as weapons of war against the enemy. This means that a small quantity of these microorganisms have the capability to kill millions of people if spread evenly and effectively. These biological weapons can also cause sickness to enemy soldiers and disrupt enemy’s logistics and supply lines. Although biological warfare as such has hitherto not taken place on a large scale, yet assuming and apprehending its probable occurrence, many nations have built their individual defensive strategies to be on the safe side. On the basis of this assumption and probability, much research for the purpose of defense against biological weapons has been conducted by the scientists, highly sensitive industries and the governments. But since carrying out germ-warfare against humanity or using harmful bacteria or organism against human beings was considered entirely inhumane, an international treaty banning biological weapons came into force in 1975. By virtue of this treaty, production, possession, and use of such weapons were completely prohibited. More than 150 nations signed this treaty. Deadly Forms of Warfare in History The origin of biological warfare is traced back in ancient times, when the Assyrians, in 6th century B. C poisoned enemy wells with poisonous herbs (eukaryotes or fungi) that cused the enemy lose sanity or consciousness. This was the starting point of biological warfare in human history. Thence onward this typical warfare was used by many in the past e. g. Solon of Athens poisoned the water supply of Phocaea with extremely poisonous herb Veratrum, during his city’s siege; the archers of Scythian, during 4th century B. C. poisoned the tips of arrows to cause infection into the wounds of enemy; the Spartans used sulfur during the Peloponnesian War in 400 B. C. In medieval times, soldiers used to throw dead bodies into the wells. During the Indian-French wars in1689 and 1763, blankets used by smallpox patients were given to Indians for carrying the disease to the latter. It was Germany, which, during World War I, used poisonous gas for the first time against Allied forces at Belgium and Ypres. The use of poisonous gas by Germany caused about 30 percent of casualties suffered by the US army. The use of poisonous gas proved so fatal and devastating in nature that many nations unanimously agreed to ban the use of gas and extremely harmful chemical substances in future wars. But again it was Iraq which breached the agreement and used chemical weapons against Iran in eight years long war (1980-1988). Iraq was also held responsible for using chemical weapons against the independence seeking Kurdish people. Relatively New Forms of Warfare Some of the new forms of warfare that have lately engaged nations in the design, technique and art of modern warfare include: 1. Chemical Warfare 2. Biological Warfare 3. Radiological Warfare 4. Mine Warfare 5. Guerrilla Warfare 6. Amphibious Warfare 7. Psychological warfare 8. Siege Warfare 9. Nuclear Warfare From the above forms of warfare, the chemical, radiological, and biological warfare are singled out as ones in which CBR weapons are used for mass killing; disabling millions of people instantly, transmitting fatal diseases into enemy rank and file; incapacitating the enemy physically, and destroying their food supplies. How do they Work? Chemical Warfare Chemical Warfare involves all those chemical substances which affect the nervous as well as the respiratory systems, besides affecting skin, eyes, and nose. The chemicals, which include gases, liquids, and powders, can be sprayed from airplanes, dropped as bombs, fired in the form of artillery shells, or spread over the area through land mines. But there are some colorless and odorless nerve agents which, if inhaled, can cause immediate death while some chemical agents can cause temporary blindness or confusion. The mustard gas also called ‘Blister Agent’ caused many casualties during World War I. But it is quite relieving to see the chemical agents not widely used in warfare since the end of World War I (1918). Radiological Warfare Radiological Warfare involves those substances that give off radiation, and which may damage the internal organs of a person and even cause death. Radiological warfare is extremely dangerous because the released radioactivity in the process renders the entire area unfit for human life. Mine Warfare Mine Warfare is the use of explosive devices called mines to kill enemy troops and destroy their ships, tanks, and other equipment. Some mines explode when a person steps on them or run over by a tank or jeep, while the naval mines are detonated by the passing of a ship. The two major kinds of mines are: 1. The Land Mines 2. The Naval Mines The main types of land mines are:1) antipersonnel mines, 2) antitank mines, 3) chemical mines, 4) controlled mines, and 5) nuclear mines. There chief four kinds of naval mines include: 1) acoustic mines, 2) contact mines, 3) magnetic mines, and 4) pressure mines Guerrilla warfare Guerrilla warfare is conducted by the fighter bands that employ the tactics of sudden raids, ambushes, and other attacks on small-scale. The term â€Å"Guerrilla† which means â€Å"Little War† in Spanish, was first used by the Portuguese and Spanish armies during the Peninsular War (1808-1814). Amphibious warfare Amphibious warfare is the mode of army operations by land air and sea forces with the objective of capturing a coastal area or a beach. Generally the amphibious operations are considered the most intricate form of modern warfare. During World War II (1939-1945), after Japanese had attacked Pearl Harbor and destroyed US naval installations in the Pacific Ocean, a common objective of United States amphibious warfare was to seize islands in order to build their advance on. These air and naval bases were captured for their operations against Japan. Antidotes for Biological Weapons The antidote for biological agents is a complete kit which contains medicines and treatments for nerve gas. It also contains injectors to fight anthrax, and antibiotics and drugs to reduce the effects of radiation exposure. Normally the kits are kept locked in military vans by the army. It is worthwhile noting that according to the briefing documents prepared by the Army Medical Department for the senior medical command in Iraq â€Å"Millions of dollars’ worth of such kits are incinerated in Iraq each year†. Army spokesman, Foster, D. said that the service’s policy is â€Å"to issue the [kits] to each unit prior to deployment, and ensure all unused [kits are] turned in prior to the unit’s redeployment for destruction. † Also the vice president for strategic security programs at the Federation of American Scientists, Ivan Oelrich, said that sending the Antidote-kits is a rational policy just in case â€Å"some terrorist gets hold of 10 gallons of nerve as† (Bob, 2007) Gas Mask Among other protective coverings such as injections of antidotes, gas masks too are used as one of the defensive measures against chemical agents. Gas mask protects a person from breathing poisonous gases and vapors into the lungs. Only air is allowed to enter the mask through the filter pads, which purifies and filters the air. The charcoal which is padded within the cheeks of mask purifies the air by trapping harmful gases and particles. Particulate filters can remove particles of smoke, dust, and even some harmful biological agents. The purifying materials are in the cheeks of present-day masks, which are often part of an entire protective suit. In World War I (1914-1918), masks were used to protect troops against gas attacks. Gas was not used in World War II (1939-1945), but armies had masks in case gas warfare began. During the Persian Gulf War of 1991 and the Iraq War, which began in 2003, gas masks were issued to troops and civilians in areas where it was feared Iraq would attack. (Lussier and Frances M, 2007)

Mohammed Morsi Essay

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohammed Morsi has become Egypt’s first freely elected president after a delayed announcement of the results of last weekend’s runoff. He beat former Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq by more than almost 900,000 votes. Morsi secured 51.7% of the vote, compared to 48% for Shafiq. Mohammed Morsi heads the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), the Muslim Brotherhood’s political arm. Mubarak appointed Shafik as prime minister in response to the protests against his regime. Shafik resigned a little more than a month later amid protests decrying him as a holdover from a discredited, ousted regime. Supports the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF): â€Å"SCAF is serious about power handover and is seeking to achieve the goals of the revolution. SCAF stands at an equal distance from all political and religious powers.† Parliamentary elections: the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice party seems set to emerge as the biggest winner, with some analysts estimating it will capture about 40% of seats in the new legislature. Al-Nour, a more conservative Salafist party, looks likely to secure second place. The Muslim Brotherhood (known in Arabic as al-Ikhwan al-Muslimeen) is Egypt’s oldest and largest Islamist organization. As the most organized opposition group following the ouster of former President Hosni Mubarak in 2011, the Brotherhood became the country’s dominant political force, winning a near majority of seats in the post-revolution parliament, and its candidate, Mohammed Morsi, winning the presidency. Some Egyptians are concerned over the group’s aim to establish a state ruled by sharia, or Islamic law, and ambiguity over its respect for human rights. Such concerns intensified after Morsi announced new sweeping powers for the presidency in late 2012 and a draft of theproposed constitution was published. The domestic political challenges also provide a difficult road for U.S.-Egypt relations, especially with regards to foreign aid. The Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), the political party of the Muslim Brotherhood, could not have come into being without the 25 January revolution. Up to that time, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), Egypt’s most powerful Islamist organization, was not only denied the right to form parties, but also barred – at least legally – from political life. As a result, the group had to pay a heavy price in detentions and repression to practice politics under the rule of former President Hosni Mubarak. The group had been trying to get a foothold in the country’s political arena for decades but was met with entrenched opposition by the Mubarak regime, which tended to accommodate the Brotherhood, but only within strict limits. Now, after the 25 January uprising, the group’s political ambitions have resurged on an unprecedented scale. Officially founded in May 2011, the FJP says that it is committed to a modern state, democracy, women’s rights, and national unity. The FJP’s initial membership of nearly nine thousand included one thousand women and one hundred Copts. New members are subject to a probationary period of six months after which, and based on their performance record, they become eligible for permanent membership. The FJP—along with the Salafist Al-Nour—is among a very few Egyptian political parties that issue probationary membership Formed alliance with name of Democratic Alliance (Freedom and Justice) Al-Nour Party Established in the wake of the 25 January uprising, Al-Nour (â€Å"The Light†) Party is the largest of Egypt’s three licensed Salafist parties (the other two being Al-Asala and Al-Fadila Parties). It was established by Al-Da‘wa Al-Salafiyya (â€Å"The Salafist Call†), Egypt’s largest Salafist group, commonly known as Al-Daawa Movement. Al-Daawa started in Alexandria where it now enjoys a considerable following. Al-Nour Party was officially licensed in June 2011. Official registration is of paramount importance in Egypt at the present time, as the current election law limits the right to contest two-thirds of the seats of the upcoming parliament to a limited number of officially registered parties, including Al-Nour. Under the rule of former President Hosni Mubarak, the state generally did not allow for the formation of Islamist parties, but after the revolution many Islamist groups managed  to obtain official political party license. The Islamist Bloc is an electoral coalition formed by three Islamist political parties with the aim to integrate their efforts in the upcoming parliamentary elections. The Islamist Bloc is comprised of the Salafist Al-Nour and Al-Asala Parties, as well as the Building and Development Party, the latter of which was founded by the Islamic Group (Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiya). Wafad party: Wafd Party is one of Egypt’s oldest liberal parties and is expected to play a significant role in the upcoming elections. With deposed President Hosni Mubarak’s ruling party officially disbanded, Wafd has emerged as an influential player in the political arena. The party commands the largest network that any political party in Egypt possesses today, covering major cities in twenty-four out of twenty-six Egyptian governorates. With a distinguished group of top Egyptian businessmen on its membership list, Al-Wafd stands out as one of the few established parties that do not face the same financial constraints that have historically challenged many of the country’s political parties. The party also enjoys a very strong presence in the media, thanks to its famous daily newspaper, its Internet portal, and a professional, well-equipped media department. Additionally, Wafd’s current leader Al-Sayed Al-Badawi is owner of Al-Hayat, one of Egypt’s top five television channels. Such are luxuries that very few Egyptian parties possess. Wafd’s history dates back to the beginning of party life under the monarchy, making it the oldest among existing Egyptian political parties. The name of the party is Arabic for â€Å"The Delegation,† and it references Saad Zaghloul’s attempt in 1919 to lead a popular delegation to the post-World War I Paris Peace Conference to demand independence for Egypt against the will of British occupation authorities. Threatened by the immense popular support that Zaghloul was able to garner for his mission, British authorities exiled the Egyptian nationalist leader along with members of the prospective delegation to Malta. This move instigated a mass uprising, which led to the 1919 Revolution. The Egyptian Bloc: The Egyptian Bloc consists of the Free Egyptians Party, the Egyptian Social Democratic Party and Al-Tagammu Party. The Bloc is often portrayed as a â€Å"secular-leaning† alliance that seeks to counterbalance the influence of the Muslim Brotherhoodin the upcoming elections, specifically the Brotherhood led Democratic Alliance’s electoral coalition. Members of the Bloc announced in early November that their partnership is not simply a short-term electoral coalition, but encompasses a long-term political alliance aimed at turning Egypt into a civil democratic state. Magdi Abdelhad:iMiddle East analyst The Islamists’ rise to power in Egypt will send shockwaves through the courts and palaces of conservative Arab kings and presidents who have tried for decades to put the lid on political Islam. But foremost among Egypt’s neighbours who watched the brotherhood’s success with increasing alarm is Israel. Cairo was the first Arab state to sign a peace treaty with Israel and the brotherhood has traditionally been vehemently opposed to that. But its opposition has softened over the years – at least publicly. It is widely believed that the Muslim Brotherhood have reassured Washington that an Islamist government in Egypt would respect the peace deal with Israel. Given also that the ruling military council will continue to have the final say on matters of war and peace, it is unlikely that the brotherhood can put that peace at risk. It is also more likely that Mr Mursi’s immediate priority will be to concentrate on Egypt’s many daunting domestic problems including rampant poverty and unemployment. Debating leaders: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/21/opinion/21iht-edzewail21.html?pagewanted=all From the time of Ramses II, the strong pharaoh who ruled Egypt thousands of years ago, until last year when Hosni Mubarak’s reign ended, Egyptians were never able to witness a debate over who should take over the democratic reins in the highest office of the land. Our new culture of debate, together with the election of the Parliament last December, are milestones in the history of the nation, paving a new, but rocky, path toward democracy. The open debate between the secular and religious orientations of politics was  unthinkable over the past 60 years. This new openness means the Egyptian body politic is maturing. In the end, Egyptians know that, for the first time, they can choose their future. It won’t be dictated or imposed by anyone. Army protected revo: Unlike in nearby Syria or earlier in Libya, the Egyptian Army has taken the high road and protected the revolution in its infancy. And it has been the guardian of these unprecedented transparent elections. Problems: Among the most serious problems are economic hardship, the uncertainty of the political climate and the deterioration of security — a feature that Egyptian society faces anew. These problems have been compounded over the past 15 months as each of the three main constituencies involved in the revolution — the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), which is in charge of the transition period; the politically liberal as well as Islamic-oriented parties; and the youth who triggered the uprising — have stumbled in one way or another. Little bloodshed: It is a hopeful sign indeed that we Egyptians are still marching forward toward democracy with relatively little bloodshed. All signs indicate that a counterrevolution is not in store for Egypt. We will not turn back to a totalitarian governing system. Perhaps the most encouraging of all is the confidence of Egyptians in their future. In Egypt, a Victory for Democracy but Fear for the Future: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-06-25/in-egypt-a-victory-for-democracy-but-fear-for-the-future â€Å"So many questions remain unanswered that what can best be said is that either SCAF and the Brotherhood have worked out a deal of some sort or the political jousting has only just begun,† wrote Issandr El Amrani, a popular blogger on Egyptian politics. â€Å"Both the Brothers and  SCAF have positioned themselves in a manner in which backing down from their respective positions on the question of parliament and the Supplemental Constitutional Declaration would be a loss of face.† Tensions ran high for two weeks, when the SCAF assumed legislative responsibilities after shutting down the Islamist-controlled Parliament, announced a Supplemental Constitutional Declaration that drastically reduced presidential powers, and gave themselves the ability to veto articles of drafts of Egypt’s new constitution. They also reintroduced martial law, allowing soldiers to arrest civilians. Critics called their actions a soft coup. The Muslim Brotherhood, the most powerful political player in Egypt, has on the surface refused to accept any of these decisions, staging a sit-in in Tahrir Square and issuing aggressive statements to the media, all the while vowing to pressure the military government to rescind their declarations. It was a rare move, as the pragmatic group is more generally known for cutting deals with the regime rather than going toe-to-toe. Last week, with the possibility of a victory by Ahmed Shafiq, the other candidate in the run-off election who is widely viewed as aligned with the military, the Brotherhood showed a willingness to work with the revolutionary groups it had mostly ignored since the uprising against Mubarak. Morsi pledged to form a national salvation government to include secular politicians, Christians, and women. â€Å"The big question is: Can they build a broader, more inclusive front that can effectively challenge SCAF’s grip on power?† asks Shadi Hamid, director of research at the Brookings Doha Center. â€Å"Now that fear [of Shafiq’s victory] has passed, is there still enough that binds [the opposition groups] together? I do think the Brotherhood has at least implicitly acknowledged the mistakes of recent months and they have tried to strike a more conciliatory tone, and the recognition that they can’t do this alone because they are fighting a very challenging adversary: SCAF and the old regime.† To add to the challenges of running a country with a crumbling economy, President Morsi won with a narrow margin, garnering 51.7 percent of the vote. He had promised to be the president of all Egyptians during his first address to the nation Sunday night . â€Å"The game was being played almost like a game of poker on both sides,† says Hani Shukrallah, managing editor of the English-language online version of the Al Ahramnewspaper. â€Å"If we have reached a compromise, that’s a bit helpful for healing the deep schisms  [within] society. We have a society that’s been split down the middle, with enormous polarization. Most of the people who voted for Morsi did so out of dread [of] Shafiq.† On a side street leading to Tahrir Square on Sunday night, Ehab El Shawi led his three children to the epicenter of the celebration in the birthplace of Egypt’s uprising. Like many, he was caught between rejoicing at the idea of a new president and the reality of the office’s lack of power. â€Å"This is the first time all Egyptian people made a choice in 7,000 years to elect a normal Egyptian citizen. This is the first time we have freedom in more than 60 years,† El Shawi said happily of the first non-military president in Egypt’s history. â€Å"But we have to change all the decisions taken during the presidential elections and force the powers to ensure Dr.Morsi will have all the power to make Egypt a modern country,† he added. â€Å"We still need to take Egypt back from the old regime. †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. Timeline: Anti-Mubarak protests 2010 February – Former UN nuclear chief Mohammed ElBaradei returns to Egypt and, together with opposition figures and activists, forms a coalition for political change. ElBaradei says he might run in presidential election scheduled for 2011. 2010 March – President Mubarak undergoes gall-bladder surgery in Germany, returning to Egypt three weeks later. 2010 June – Muslim Brotherhood fails to win any seats in elections to the Shura consultative upper house of parliament; alleges vote was rigged. 2010 November – Coptic Christians clash with police in Giza over construction of church. Parliamentary polls, followed by protests against alleged vote rigging. Muslim Brotherhood fails to win a single seat, though it held a fifth of the places in the last parliament. 2011 January – 21 killed in bomb at church in Alexandria where Christians had gathered to mark the New Year. Anti-government demonstrations, apparently encouraged by Tunisian street protests whic h prompted sudden departure of President Ben Ali. President Mubarak reshuffles his cabinet but fails to placate demonstrators, whose calls for his resignation grow louder. Days later he promises to step down in September. 2011 February – President Mubarak steps down and hands power  to the army council. 2011 March – Egyptians approve package of constitutional reforms aimed at paving the way for new elections. 2011 April – Former President Mubarak and his sons, Ala and Gamal, are arrested on suspicion of corruption. 2011 April-August – Protests continue in Cairo’s Tahrir Square over slow pace of political change. Islamist groups come to the fore. Army finally disperses protestors in August. 2011 August – Former President Mubarak goes on trial in Cairo, charged with ordering the killing of demonstrators earlier in the year. 2011 October – Clashes between Coptic Christians and security forces kill 24 people. Egypt and Israel swap 25 Egyptians in Israeli custody for a US-Israeli citizen accused of spying. 2011 November – Violence in Cairo’s Tahrir square as security forces clash with protesters accusing the military of trying to keep their grip on power. Prime Minister EssamSharaf resigns in response to the unrest. Start of parliamentary elections. 2011 December – National unity government headed by new Prime Minister Kamal al-Ganzouri takes office. 2012 January – Islamist parties emerge as victors of drawn-out parliamentary elections. 2012 March – Pope Shenouda III, the veteran head of the Coptic Church, dies. 2012 April – Crisis in relations with Saudi Arabia over the Saudi detention of an Egyptian lawyer briefly threatens the substantial aid that the Saudis provide Egypt. First free presidential poll 2012 May – Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohammed Mursi tops the first round of voting in first free presidential elections, narrowly ahead of Mubarak-era prime minister Ahmed Shafiq. Official media put turnout at a low 43%. Military leaders announce the end of the state of emergency in place since Anwar al-Sadat’s assassination in 1981, as its last renewal expires. 2012 June – Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohammed Mursi narrowly wins presidential election.Armyvs civilian rule Court sentences ex-President Mubarak to life in prison for complicity in the killing of protesters during the 2011 uprising. 2012 July – President Mursi submits to a Supreme Court ruling that the parliamentary elections were invalid, after initially ordering parliament to meet in defiance of a military decree dissolving it in June. 2012 August – New prime ministerHishamQandil appoints a cabinet dominated by figures from the outgoing government, technocrats and Islamists, to the exclusion of secular parties. Islamist fighters attack an  army outpost in Sinai, killing 16 soldiers, and mount a brief incursion into Israel, highlighting the tenuousness of government control over the largely-lawless area. President Mursi dismisses Defence Minister Tantawi and Chief of Staff Sami Annan and strips military of say in legislation and drafting the new constitution. 2012 September – Egypt kills 32 militants and destroys 31 smuggling tunnels to Gaza in an offensive against militants who attacked troops in Sinai in August. 2012 November – Bishop Tawadros is chosen as the new pope of Egypt’s Coptic Christians. President Mursi issues a decree giving himself extensive new powers. The decree sparks angry demonstrations and is condemned by Egypt’s top judges, who accuse him of undermining the independence of the judiciary. The Islamist-dominated constituent assembly tasked with writing a new constitution approves all 234 articles of the draft constitution, which boosts the role of Islam in Egypt’s system of government. The assembly session is boycotted by liberal, left-wing and Christian members. The vote is held earlier than originally scheduled, after Egypt’s constitutional court threatened to dissolve the constituent assembly. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13315719 †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2012/01/23-egypt-indyk Prospects for Democracy in Egypt: There’s a conventional wisdom in the United States that Arabs are incapable of sustaining a true Western-style, liberal democracy. It will take them hundreds of years to acquire a â€Å"democratic culture,† the argument goes. And in the meantime new authoritarian regimes — either Islamist or military — will replace the ones that have been overthrown in the past year and give us all a lesson in â€Å"Arab democracy.† Advocates of this view were the first to announce, with all-knowing smiles, that the Arab Spring had become an Arab Winter. When Islamist parties won free and mostly fair elections in Tunisia, Egypt and Morocco in recent months, the proponents of this view had an â€Å"I told you so† moment and they were quick to denounce anybody who said otherwise as hopelessly naive. After a prolonged hibernation, politics has broken out in Cairo, the capital of the Arab Awakenings. For the first time in six decades people are acquiring a taste for freedom and, yes, Western-style democratic politics. The issues they debate so vigorously are critical to the shape of Egypt’s democratic future: What will be the residual powers of the Egyptian military? What’s the best model for dividing powers between the Presidency and the Parliament? What revisions should be made to the Constitution to ensure democratic rule? At the same time, the newly-elected parties are busy engaging in the horse-trading necessary to coalition politics, since no one party gained a majority (the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party won around 47 percent of the vote; the Salafi Al-Nour Party won 25 percent, and a variety of liberal parties won the rest.). We were treated to an amazing sight: Salafi religious purists attempting to negotiate an alliance with liberal secularists. How did they justify such a pragmatic deal? The enemy of my enemy is my friend, one of them explained to us. They can both agree on a short-term political agenda: countering the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood and getting the army out of politics. And what about the imposition of Sharia law? The leader of the Salafi Al-Nour Party noted that his party is comfortable with the conservative nature of Egyptian society so a campaign to impose sharia law is unnecessary. They can be satisfied (at least for the time being) with the existing language of Article 2 of the Constitution which states that the â€Å"principles† of Islamic shariah will guide the state. This kind of pragmatic politics is deeply disturbing to the â€Å"Costa Salafis† — a young generation of Salafis whose makeshift headquarters is in a Costa cafe. They denounce their elders not so much for being willing to compromise, which they readily accept as part of the new politics, but of failing to articulate through â€Å"fatwas† the religious basis for those compromises. It’s as if the Salafi leadership, propelled onto the political stage for the first time, has become unplugged and feels able to do whatever is necessary in the political realm to protect its community of social  conservatives. They reminded me of the religious parties in Israel! Meanwhile, the Muslim Brotherhood is busy making its own compromises with the military and with other liberal parties that would enable its Freedom and Justice Party to build a governing and empowered coalition (at the moment, they can control the parliament but until its powers are defined in the constitution and the military hands over power, they cannot control the government). Whereas the Salafis are looking to constrain the Muslim Brotherhood, the MB is focused on how to ease fears of its intentions. After operating for eighty years in the political wilderness, the MB has learned just how fragile this moment could turn out to be. That’s why its leadership is more willing to compromise with the military than the other parties to its left and right. Consequently, the other parties fear that the MB will sell them out to the military in some sweetheart deal that compromises the revolution and their abilities to use democratic rules of the game to constrain the MB and hold the military accountable. This tension will likely manifest itself in the massive demonstrations that are expected on January 25 in Tahrir Square to commemorate the first anniversary of the Revolution. The military and the MB have called for a celebration, complete with party balloons and patriotic songs. Youth activists and some liberal parties, particularly exercised by the eighty some demonstrators who were killed by the police and the army in crackdowns in November and December last year, are calling for a demonstration against military rule. Some of the far-left revolutionary youth are calling for a campaign of violence. The way the January 25 demonstrations play out will be only one of the ways in which â€Å"square politics† and â€Å"party politics† interact in Egypt’s newly dynamic democracy. All the parties feel that they can claim legitimacy from the people’s mandates that they have received in the elections. This empowers them to stand up to the military in demanding that it leave the political arena promptly and allow Egyptian democracy to have its day. If the military focuses only on protecting its narrow interests (e.g., retaining its business interests, claiming immunity from prosecution for  past actions, demanding only responsibility for protecting the state’s borders), then a reasonable compromise can be fashioned. However, if the military insists on specifying reserve powers in the constitution and protecting its budget from civilian oversight, then the people know the way back to Tahrir Square. As one newly-elected parliamentarian put it: â€Å"We are legitimate now; the army is not.† And what about the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty? We didn’t raise the issue — they did. It came up in most conversations in the following way: â€Å"We have been elected by the people. We’re responsible to them. The people want stability, above all. They want the police back in the streets and calm and predictability restored to their daily lives. We don’t like the way Israel treats the Palestinians. We don’t like the price that Israel pays for Egyptian gas. But we’re not going to mess with the peace treaty.† That sentiment is so widely shared that one of the heads of the Muslim Brotherhood could declare to the New York Times last week that the peace treaty is a â€Å"commitment of the state,† and therefore will be respected. The sense of responsibility that rests on the shoulders of those who would govern 87 million people is palpable. They know the severe economic straits that they will have to confront. They know that neither tourists nor foreign investment will return to Egypt unless there is a clear commitment to stability. And they know the people will not forgive them if they fail to address their basic needs for order, jobs and housing. In short, newly-elected Egyptian politicians — the Muslim Brotherhood first and foremost — understand that they have to make a choice between feeding the people and fighting Israel, and for the time being they have made a conscious choice of bread over bombs. The fact that Palestine is not a priority for the Egyptian people has been manifest since the early days of the revolution. It was underscored for me during a lecture I gave at the American University in Cairo, just off Tahrir Square. A Palestinian student, draped in a Palestinian flag, stood with a makeshift banner in silent protest at the front of the hall. Despite this prominent reminder, during the ensuing ninety-minute Q&A session with  students and journalists no-one asked a question about Palestine. To be sure, there’s always the risk that populist politicians will outbid each other in their demagoguery on the Palestinian issue, especially if Israeli-Palestinian violence flares. But Israel is particularly sensitive to this possibility and the Muslim Brotherhood is apparently signaling its Hamas branch to keep things quiet too. (With 350 trucks a day passing from Israel into Gaza, and smuggling of weapons through the tunnels continuing apace, Hamas has its own reasons for maintaining the current de facto ceasefire with Israel.) What was perhaps most striking to me, however, was the attitude of the new political class to the United States. I had expected to encounter hostility — after all the United States had been Mubarak’s staunch ally through the three decades of his Pharaohnic rule. I had assumed that the Islamist politicians in particular would be antagonistic towards American influence in post-revolutionary Egypt, just as the Iranian clerics have manifested intense antagonism towards the United States since their revolution. Yet Egypt’s Islamists all seemed keen to engage with the United States government. The Muslim Brotherhood was trying to understand President Obama’s intentions in demanding that the military hand over power to civilian (i.e. Muslim Brotherhood) rule, â€Å"expeditiously.† They weren’t sure how to deal with the fact that Bill Burns, the Deputy Secretary of State, had just met with their leadership. But one thing they were very certain about — they need U.S. economic assistance and U.S. help in mobilizing international assistance. They were therefore quite anxious to know how Congress would treat them. Because of this new U.S. Government engagement with their arch-rivals, the Salafis too are seeking American recognition. Their leaders are keen to come to Washington to explain their intentions. They even appear willing to engage with Israel to establish their bona fides — one of their leaders recently gave an interview to Israeli Army Radio.

The Impact of Shifting Cultural Trends on Public Education Assignment

The Impact of Shifting Cultural Trends on Public Education - Assignment Example Although much has been done to ensure all Americans acquire education, there is notable education levels disparity among different ethnic groups and races. English is the commonly used language in all schools. This has made life difficult for children whose first language is not English (CPE 2). Schools have tried to ease things for all children by employing bilingual teachers and English learners’ teachers. This has helped to accommodate children from various cultures and language groups. Preschools have also introduced high-quality programs to help children whose first language is not English (CPE 3). These children experience massive difficulties in there subsequent levels if they fail to be proficient in English. Some schools have introduced prekindergarten programs to prepare children for preschool and subsequent levels of education. Also, children from poor families could not make it to better schools and therefore ended up failing due to poor English base (CPE 3). Before special programs of helping children were put in place, there existed wide gaps in different areas which defined differences in test scores, dropout rate s, high school completion rates and rates of college entrance. Policy makers in public education sector have tried to bridge these gaps for future well-being of the United States (CPE 2). Demographic trends have been challenging to public education in United States. Clear examination of situations has helped authorities to improve situation through introducing new programs and making new policies. This has helped ease the pressure in public schools although much remains to be done to achieve parity among all races and

Integration - Causal Chains and Strategy Case Study

Integration - Causal Chains and Strategy - Case Study Example For Sony Technologies, these measures include revenues, customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, capital return, cash flow, product quality, and timeliness, rate of improvement, employee morale, turnover and use of best practices. Every organization is unique and this paper will analyze how to develop a balanced score card system in line with the strategy of Sony Technologies. The logic behind the making of a score card system starts with understanding these challenges in terms of the customers and stakeholders of the organization, and their needs. The management should then come up with the strategic components of the system and validate them. These include vision, mission, strategic perspectives, core values, desired strategic results, objectives, strategic themes, strategy map, strategic initiatives, performance indicators and targets (Rohm & Malinosky, 2010). Having a good strategy helps the organization to communicate its approach and gain a competitive advantage. In a strategy score card, there are four performance indicators for analyzing strategy; financial, business processes, stakeholder/customer, and organization capacity perspectives. The key step in developing strategy is creating other high level strategies and objectives for each theme. For example, customer focused operational excellence and growth through innovation. The creation of strategic objectives is important in developing the plan. Objectives are the continuous actions for improvement that can be measured, actionable, and documented. These objectives are then developed to form a strategy map. This is a graphical demonstration of how an organization creates value for its customers, employees and stakeholders. It is an effective communication tool that Sony Technologies can use to build alignment, transparency and focus on positive results (Kaplan & Norton, Strategy maps: Converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes, 2004). Strategic objectives are important in creating value in