Ethnography and Analysis of a Musical Performance Essay

Ethnography and Analysis of a Musical Performance - Essay Example Like the typical vocal system of metal bands, the vocal harmony was existent and the final sound resembled to a feminine voice even though all the performers were male. The loudness of the voice was extreme to add excitement to the atmosphere of the concert. The performances were certainly high pitched. This paper puts the spotlight on the indispensible role of music as a way of promoting intercultural relationships between the citizens and nations of the world. Analyzing an event gathering musicians from two continents clarifies the function of music as a way of supporting Internationalism and solidarity between all the people of the world. This paper aims to defend music's role as a melting pot of different cultures rather than an enemy of the authenticity of different cultures. An ideology is known to be a group of ideas, values or conceptions to which agree a large amount of people. Different ideologies often come into conflict with each other. Globalization aims to help differen t cultures coexist by promoting cultural exchange between different civilizations. Music, being a cultural activity that is tightly connected to identity, plays a very important role in helping the world overcome civilization related conflicts by proving that the 'global' is more important than the 'national'. The event took place in order to celebrate Halloween. That occasion motivating the creation is a universal celebrating. Music, being attached to festive atmospheres, spread the feeling of unity between the elements of a given culture. However, in this multinational event music's role extends to cover assuring cooperation between various cultures. Like any event gathering artists from different areas of the world, one of the main purposes of this concert is to give the performing artists the chance to discover eachother's music techniques and to possibly experiment mixing with these genres. The Venue of the concert was in MAO Club. The general atmosphere that reigned in Beijing throughout of the performance was the typical atmosphere expected from a metal festival in any place in the world. The overall atmosphere was unconventional, wild and quite extreme, "The strong stimulating beats, the coarse, rough loud vocal delivery, the wild singing of nonsense syllables, and the music's direct, unrestrained and liberating quality" (Taylor,2007: 33). The concert being held in China means logically that the biggest part of its attendance was of Chinese natives. The Chinese audience however grasped that western form of music and fully interacted to it proving that music has no nationality. In the twentieth century, the revolution in means of communication introduced to the Chinese people the various musical techniques of Western music and the new ideas of the entertainment business. This led consequently to the creation of some sort of "star system" in China at least in big citie s. The public was then introduced to means such as "mass-circulation newspaper and glossy magazines, movies, radio and the phonograph" (Gunde, 2002: 96) helping to create a mass popular commercial culture. Nowadays, Chinese youth finds in that genre of music their individuality as they let down their hair and dance along to the music with their friends and enjoy this feeling of freedom. In addition to that, the three opening acts were Asian bands that felt that western

Struggling Readers Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words - 1

Struggling Readers - Essay Example se of reading difficulties, how to assess reading difficulties, remedy for struggling readers, and the extent to which struggling readers can be remediated. Struggling readers experience problems in multiple areas. It is important to compare students suspected to have reading difficulties with others in order to clearly identify a child who is struggling to read. Why all the efforts to help struggling readers? Experts in entirely all disciplines are continually searching for the most effective methods to master the necessary skills in order to succeed, reading skills are not an exception. Children are introduced to many things at a tender age to increase the chances of mastering skills early enough that boosts the chances of being successful. The stage a child should begin learning to read has been a prevalent question in most people especially parents. Reading difficulties may at any stage and this calls for early intervention measures. This paper seeks to explore on reading difficu lties, their causes and possible interventions. Identification of struggling readers is very important. Most struggling readers can only be helped if early interventions are made through the development of early reading skills. Delays in the identification of such readers results in a delay in the provision of appropriate and effective reading instruction. Assessment of learners can easily identify struggling learners. Such an assessment may involve text reading in combination with other aspects as student’s performance on measures like word reading and automatic word recognition. Assessment of a students knowledge on the alphabets, phonemic awareness, processing of phonologies, vocabulary reading and reading fluency are key in the identification of struggling readers. Early identification prevents persistence of reading problems making the problem more complex and lowering reading related attitudes and motivation. Word level processing skills form of identification emphasis on

Marriage and Family Structure Essay Example for Free

Marriage and Family Structure Essay â€Å"Marriage is not a ritual or an end. It is a long, intricate, intimate dance together and nothing matters more than your own sense of balance and your choice of partner. These were words of Army Bloom while commenting on the topic of marriage (Sardone 2010). Human race is a product of a family in one way or another. However, not all can be said to exist in the planet as result of marriage. They are those that were born out of wedlock and either live with one parent or have never known any of their parents. Nevertheless, marriages still take place and families continue to exist. With the development of society, both the marriage and family structure have undergone transformation and many have veered off from the traditional definitions of the same. This paper is aimed at showing that marriage and family are important parts of any culture despite there being different types of marriage and family structure. According to Goepfrich (2007, p 3) in his book â€Å"Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage, marriage can be defined as â€Å"the social institution under which man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments or religious ceremonies among others. † Goepfrich acknowledges that for people to be recognized as married, they must have witnesses and the ceremony conducted by either a civil servant or a religious minister. However such a statement by the author ignores the fact that there are so many people who claim to be happily married yet they have never been legally married. In some cultures especially in the places such as Africa, a marriage can be validated by traditional elders without the necessity of the couple being awarded a marriage certificate. However, one thing agreeable to all is that a marriage will lead into a family; since any couples get married to form a family. Types of Marriages Authors have classified marriage into different categories depending on the context. The Sociology Guide (2010) divides marriages in several types; polygyny (polygamy), polyandry, group marriage, monogamy; under monogamy there is serial monogamy and straight monogamy. Polygyny (Polygamy) In this type of marriage, a single man has more than one wife at a particular period (Sociology Guide 2010). There are different cultures that do not view this type of marriage as valid and therefore it is not encouraged. Civil laws in many countries do not recognize polygamous families and this leads the man to either live with the other wives secretly or without valid wedding certificate. Christianity as a religion teaches that a marriage should be â€Å"one-man one-wife† and thus one is required to declare that he has never married before and if he had done so, the wife had died. Some Christian denominations do not even join divorcees in the holy matrimony. However in Islamic cultures as well as in societies in South Africa, polygamous marriages are recognized. A good example is that of the incumbent president of South Africa, Jacob Zuma who has more than four wives. Sororal polygyny or sororate is a situation where one man has married blood sisters, while in non sororal polygyny, the wives are not blood sisters (Sociological Guide, 2010). Polyandry Though not as common as polygamous marriage, this type of marriage entails one woman having more than one husband. This is not recognized in many cultures and therefore those who involve themselves in such do not do it in open. However, some cultures allow blood brothers to share wives especially if the husband is impotent or he only sires children of one sex. This type of marriage is referred to as fraternal or alelphic polyandry and is very common among the Todas. In non fraternal polyandry, the husbands are not related in any way and the other men cannot claim the woman as their wife at that particular time when he is living with one of them (Sociological Guide, 2010). Monogamous Family This type is regarded as the ideal type of marriage in addition to being the most common and acceptable by nearly all cultures and religions, even those that accept the other types of marriage. It is a one-man one-husband marriage. Under this type of marriage, there is the serial marriage where a husband remarries after the demise of his wife. In such a situation, this is not regarded as polygamy. Of recent, it has become common for the spouse to get another wife/husband after divorce. However, some people chose to remain single after the departure of their spouses. In what is referred to as a straight marriage, the spouse may not be allowed to remarry under any circumstances (Sociology Guide, 2010). Forced Marriages In this type of marriage, the woman is abducted and the husband rapes her. In those cultures where forced marriages are practiced, there is a belief that once a man has intercourse with a woman, he automatically becomes her husband. This practice however is not very common in many societies of the world and is therefore detested in those cultures that do not practice it. In some African cultures, girls are married off to elderly men while they are still toddlers in exchange of livestock. The child continues to stay with her family until she reaches puberty and this is when she is taken to the husband by the parents, whether willingly or unwillingly (Sfetsu, 2009). Same sex Marriage The issue of same sex marriage has generated more heat than light in the contemporary society, with some supporting it while others demonizing it. However, same sex marriage has been legalized in different states of the world. Sexologists have used the term homosexuality to refer to people who have â€Å"a same sex gender sexual orientation† However, in the community, the term ‘gay’ has been used to refer to male homosexuals with the term ‘lesbian’ referring to female homosexuals; sometimes ‘gay’ refers to both women and men. There are some who are attracted to people of both genders and are referred to as heterosexuals (Cantor, 2006, p. xiii). Those who oppose the same sex marriage argue that they are unnatural and that they provide the nonconductive environment for the raising of children. They also argue that it threatens marriage as an institution in addition to going against religious principles among other reasons. However, proponents of homosexuality state that homosexuals are human beings and thus have their own rights (Bidstrup, 2000). Marriage in the Western Culture In this century, marriage in European and American culture is often legally defined as monogamous. This does not mean that there are no few societies that do still practice polygamy while others are in what is referred to as open marriages. In latter form of marriage, the spouse has the freedom to leave when he or she feels like. In the Western world, divorce has been made less complicated and thus has increased in rate. Marriage is seen as a legal covenant which recognizes the emotional union of the couples and can be terminated any time the partners feel like. In this world, it is the woman who is granted the custody of child and not the husband in case of a divorce or separation. In addition, all the partners have the duty of supporting their children (Sfetcu, 2009). When a child has been born out of wedlock, he or she is entitled to enjoy the same rights just like those that are legitimate. In the Western cultures, partners are protected by law from rape by their spouses and those who do so may find themselves in the court of law. Moreover, the law defends wives or even husbands from being physically abused or disciplined. In this culture, wealth that has been acquired since the couple married is often divided among the couple in case of divorce. What one gets however is determined by a court of law or community property law (Sfetcu, 2009). Marriage in the Eastern World In these cultures, marriage is regarded as being quite different from the way it is regarded in the Western world. For example in the former, polygamy is permitted; in fact men with many wives are generally considered as being wealthier than those with one wife. A large part of the population in the Eastern world is Islamic and though the religion advocates for the marriage of a man and woman, the Quran allows a man to have a maximum of four wives (Sfetcu, 2009). However in such societies, all the wives must be treated as being equal by the man. In states where the larger part of the population is Muslim, marriage is only permitted when both partners are Muslim; otherwise non Muslims must first denounce their religions and embrace Islam. In some societies in China, a man in the upper class would first be formally married and then later allowed to get concubines. However, the current communist regime does not permit polygamy but only monogamy (Sfetcu, 2009). Family Structure As years have come and gone, the society, including the family, has undergone great transformation. The term â€Å"family† has traditionally been used to describe the father mother and children as a unit. However, this structure has changed over time. The common types of family structure include childless, nuclear, extended as well single (Shelton, 2010). Nuclear Family Shelton (2010) defines a nuclear family as that family that â€Å"consists of a mother, father, and their biological or adoptive descendants, often called the traditional family† Many anthropologists usually regard this type of family structure highly than any other type of family and conducive one for the rearing of children. However, there must be emotional support, environment of love, economic support as well as enough time spent together. Single Parenthood Of the types of the family structures listed, this can be regarded as one the newest. This is because in the olden days, the society could not have imagined that a person could have lived without either a wife or a husband. In case of death or separation, remarriage would either take, place or the woman would be inherited by the brothers. However, with the economic independence of women, many usually decide to stay single after the separation, divorce or death. Some women are not interested in marriage and therefore choose to have children or one and raise them on their own. Research that has been done has shown that 25% of the children are born by women who are unmarried and mostly teenage mothers. Proponents of this type of family structure have stated that it has less pressure especially if it is formed after a divorce. However, some psychologists have claimed that this kind of marriage is disadvantageous especially to children as sometimes it is associated with juvenile delinquency (Shelton, 2010). Childless Family It is often the desire of many, if not all, couples to have a child or more after marriage; however, this is not always the case. A couple may also not be able to bear a child because of either social or biological problems. However, others may later get a child of their own in future or just decide to adopt one. Though many of such couples may opt to stick together, in some cultures however, lack of children after marriage is viewed negatively and the man if forced to remarry. The brothers of the husband may also be required to sire children for their brothers if it is realized that he is impotent. Others may however decide to rear a pet or two who acts as substitutes (Shelton, 2010). Extended Family An extended family can be described as a group of family members that is made up of adoptive or biological parents together with their children as well as other members of that family. In many global societies, an extended family has been described as â€Å"the basic family group. † In some cultures such as those with Asian origin, an entire extended family may live under the same roof. These may include; uncles, aunts, grandparents and even foster children. Sometimes children of parents who have died or separated may be raise by their grandparents (Mosby’s Medical Dictionary, 2009). Conclusion Despite the many types of marriage and family structure, one thing that is clear is that, marriage and family are important part of the human race. This is why all cultures in the world have both. Marriage is often viewed as a gateway into a family, though there are those that form families without marrying formally. It is however important for people to formalize their marriages as it will be easier to deal with some setbacks in the families such as divorces or death. .

Macbeth - A Tragic Hero :: essays research papers

William Shakespeare’s play Macbeth, written in the 1600’s is a perfect example of Shakespeare’s ability to manipulate his audience through creating a tragic hero. A tragic hero who, because of a flaw, tumbles from a well-respected hero to a cowardless murderer. It is through Shakespeare’s manipulation of figurative language, dramatic conventions and social expectations of the seventeenth century, do the audience witness the demise of this mixed up man. Macbeth’s persona of the tragic hero is enhanced even more when the characters around him influence his decisions, creating mayhem inside his mind and disorder throughout Scotland. Shakespeare positions his audience to respond to the central theme: the struggle between good and evil, by illustrating to the audience his weaknesses, which through the guidance of the supernatural, leads to murder and mayhem and eventually madness. It is this influence of the supernatural that leads to Macbeth’s t ragic persona and in turn his physical and mental destruction. Shakespeare utilises these techniques to embody in Macbeth characteristics indicative of that of a seventeenth century tragic hero. Aristotle described the Greek image of the tragic hero as one who takes: part in a fictional account of a set of events that is serious, complete and of a certain magnitude.† (The Poetics) Macbeth conforms to the image of the tragic hero by possessing a flaw and dying because if it. His flaw of being led too easily is evident through the actions of characters who influence Macbeth. Macbeth is involved in a story intertwined with evil, disorder, conflict and failure; all resulting finally in his death. Part of being a tragic hero is possessing a flaw. A flaw which will inevitably lead to self-destruction; the fall of the tragic hero. In the play, the central protagonist Macbeth, is confronted with the supernatural and the prophesy of becoming king. He cannot help but want this position, as this flaw also includes his weakness through over ambition. It is generally said that those possessing a flaw will die. The first Thane of Cawdor was a traitor, Duncan was too trusting, Banquo did not act on the knowledge he had about Macbeth’s murders, Lady Macbeth helped plot the murder of Duncan, and Macbeth destroyed the natural order and harmony of the time. All of these d eaths are a result of Macbeth’s over ambition to become king, fuelled by the prophecies of the evil witches. Like Macbeth, a tragic hero has choices, a conscience of right from wrong and in the end must die, because to live would create mayhem and a feeling that his actions were justified.

Why Do People Talk About Others?

I have written my first essay. It took me hours and hours, and I just gave up. Please provide some constructive feedback. I know nothing beats practise, practise, practise, but some guide in the right direction would be muchly appreciated. Thanking in advise. Here goes: – We cannot control the evil tongues of others; but a good life enables us to disregard them. Cato the Elder (234 BC – 149 BC) There is so much good in the worst of us, And so much bad in the best of us, That it hardly behooves any of us To talk about the rest of us.Edward Wallis Hoch (1849 – 1925), Marion (Kansas) Record Never tell evil of a man, if you do not know it for certainty, and if you know it for a certainty, then ask yourself, ‘Why should I tell it? ‘ Johann K. Lavater A rumor without a leg to stand on will get around some other way. John Tudor Scandal is gossip made tedious by morality. Oscar Wilde (1854 – 1900), Lady Windermere's Fan, 1892, Act III Why do we talk ab out other people? Oscar Wilde's statement â€Å"Scandal is gossip made tedious by morality† shows something of the reason we talk about other people.Gossip relieves boredom. Gossiping carries such a negative connotation that few will proudly own to have done so, but few can say that they have not. Even John Tudor suggests that gossiping is a wide spread method of relieving boredom, when he said â€Å"A rumour without a leg to stand on will get around some other way. † For this reason, I somewhat agree with Cato the Elder's quote â€Å"We cannot control the evil tongues of others, but a good life enables us to disregard them. † For gossip is so common as to be navoidable. If gossip causes one discomfort, one will be living with discomfort all their life. Is it not a good life's phillosphy to accept this fact and not let other's ‘evil' tongue bother you? While accepting gossiping is a part of life, others attempt to advise us against gossiping. Edward Willis Hoch's quote† There is so much good in the worst of us, and so much bad in the best of us, that it hardly behooves any of us to talk about the rest of us. † suggests that there is not much point in gossiping.Also against gossiping is the the ‘think before you speak' phillosophy because as Tudor implies, rumour will spread and Lavater's â€Å"Why should I tell it? â€Å". These advice stem from the morality of giving respect for other's privacy, but they do not consider that the reason people gossip: the innate craving for learning, the comfort of having company and connection with other people. While some may say, there must be better things to learn about. Having company doesn't require talking about other people, there are other ways to connect. Yes, but why must we NOT talk about others?When talking about other people, we can: State facts: He has gone to London for a holiday. Give Opinion: They are married. What a bad match! Lie: She didn't do anything today! When we say facts, we are passing information. However, the same fact said can mean different things depending on the intent of the speaker. A child saying a by-passer is fat is simply stating an observation. Another person my say the same thing it to demean others. When we lie, it can be done with good intent. Thus it is the intent of the speaker that people are concerned about, not the gossip itself.It is through knowing one's action that one can learn from their mistakes, but one can only do so much! To learn from other's mistake is to not step in it yourself. If we do not talk about others, then one can only learn by doing things themshelves. Would this perhaps defeat the purpose of the education system? Does the benefit of learning not outweigh the intrusion into other's ‘privacy'? Not all gossip invades privacy. Gossip is a way people communicate, and learn. Gossip itself is not the immoral act, it is the intent of the gossiper that makes the act immoral or otherwise.

American Christians Essay

On August 6 and August 9, 1945, the world saw the first and only usage of atomic weaponry in the history of the world. President Truman said that his decision to use the bomb was for the chief purpose of ending WWII, the deadliest war in human history, as quickly as possible. Multiple warnings were given to Japan about this new weapon in the hope that they would surrender. Japan did not heed these warnings before or even after the dropping of the first bomb on the city of Hiroshima. An invasion of Japan, which was planned for the spring of 1946, would cost an estimated 500,000 American lives and in the event of such an invasion, it was learned that plans dated August 1944, for the murder of more than 100,000 Allied POWs would be carried out. (Goodwin, 2003 pg. 338) However, the major scientists of the day who worked on the project as well as the chief Allied commanders in the field, believed that the use of the bomb was unnecessary as Japan was planning to surrender in the immediate future without the influence of the bomb and that further usage of atomic bombs, was not only unnecessary but immoral and constituted a war crime as it was a crime against humanity. The atomic bomb started with the Manhattan Project. This was the name given to the highly classified, top secret project in order to beat the Germans to have the first atomic bomb in the history of the world. The project was initially started by refugee European scientists, most notably, Albert Einstein, who in a letter to President Roosevelt in the spring of 1939, warned that the Germans were aggressively seeking out the use of such a bomb and that the atomic age, whether the world liked it or not, was upon us and it would behoove the United States if they were the first ones with this technology and not the Axis powers. This letter sparked what would become the largest and most costly development research project of its time. During World War II, the number of American deaths would exceed 400,000. This was nothing in comparison to the more than the seventeen million deaths that were suffered by the Soviet Union; America’s contentious ally. This resulted in the aggressive pursuit of the war in which any means necessary would be used in order to end the war as quickly as possible and decrease the number of American deaths. It was also necessary that the Manhattan Project be kept top secret. The project was so top secret that Vice President Harry Truman did not know of its plans until he secured the White House at the death of President Roosevelt in April of 1945. Only then did President Truman learn and then approve the further testing and continuation of the plan. The atomic bomb was World War II version of chemical warfare, except that it was on a much larger scale. Therefore, a greater degree of responsibility must be attached to its possible use in war. As a result, President Truman commissioned a group of prominent citizens and respected scientists to advise the President on the possible use of the atomic bomb. U. S. Secretary of War, Henry Stimson, concluded the report by saying: â€Å"Our great task is to bring this war to a prompt and successful conclusion. †(Lamplier 2006) However, there were other thoughts on the subject. Robert Oppenheimer said that the bomb could kill 20,000 people and that the target should be a military and not a civilian target. Furthermore, Dr. Arthur Compton, a scientist, argued that the bomb should be dropped in a remote area of Japan where there was known to be a sparse population so that minimal life would be lost but that Japan could see first hand, the destruction of the bomb and be prompted to surrender. This suggestion was soon dismissed as it would be disadvantageous if Japan was prompted of the attack before it happened and the plane would be shot down or if the bomb was dropped and did not detonate, this would be a major problem as future attempts to warn the Japanese would fall on unbelieving ears. Also, there was a real possibility that the bomb would not work as this was a new invention with only one test explosion under its belt. â€Å"In July of 1945, President Truman reexamined the use of the bomb and in the end, agreed that the best thing to do, in order to bring a prompt end to the war, would be to utilize the bomb’s destructive force and appeal for intimidation in order to bring the war to an end. † (McCullough, 2005 pg. 188) The stage was set for the world’s only use of this new and terrible weapon. On July 26, 1945 President Truman and other Allied leaders outlined their conditions for surrender in what would be called the Potsdam Declaration. It said: â€Å"The full application of our military power, backed by our resolve, will mean the inevitable and complete destruction of the Japanese armed forced and just as inevitably, the utter devastation of the Japanese homeland†¦ We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forced, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction. † (Rhodes, 1985 pg. 129) This message would be rebroadcast over Japanese radio as well as printed on thousands of leaflets that were dropped over Japan. This did not yield the response that the Allied Forces had hoped for and it was ignored. Emperor Hirohito was yet to receive word that the Soviet Union had declared war on Japan, or were ever going to and therefore, did not feel the necessity to accept the possibility of surrender. The bombings would have to continue as planned. Upon waiting for ideal weather temperatures, a B-29 named the Enola Gay after one of the pilot’s mother, set off for their target of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945. Six hours after the flight began, the B-29 and its captain, Paul Tibbits, came upon their target and the bomb, nicknamed ‘Little Boy† for the shape of the bomb was dropped on the unsuspecting city. The bomb contained over 130 pounds of the highly explosive uranium-235 and even though only 1% of that would be efficiently used in the drop, the bomb performed as expected. (Meyers, 2001 pg. 77) The bomb detonated 600 meters above the ground and had a blast equal to 13 kilotons in which 90,000 people were instantly killed. It is also likely that hundreds of Allied Prisoners of War and 2,000 Japanese Americans present before the war in which they were attending school overseas and were unable to leave once the war broke out, died in the blast as well. Also, the number of deaths needs to be grouped into two main categories: those that died at the initial blast and those that lingered in agony for days or even weeks before the succumbed to the high levels of radiation that they had been exposed to as a result of the blast. 90% of the buildings in Hiroshima were leveled to the ground and fires which stretched for 11 square miles were also seen as a result of the bombing. (Nichols, 1985. 229) A new and most lethal weapon had been unleashed for the first time upon a city. The destruction was complete but was still not enough to compel Japan to surrender. Plans for a second atomic bomb had been already planned for, in the event that it would be needed. Plans were now made for the usage of this second bomb and its dropping over Nagasaki. Despite the total destruction of the bomb, a second one was needed as the first did not compel Japan to surrender. President Truman declared: â€Å"If they do not now accept our terms, they may expect a rain of ruin from the air the likes of which has never been seen on this earth. † (McCullough, 2005 pg. 219) On August 8th, 1945, thousands of additional leaflets were dropped and warnings were given to Japan. As a result of Japan’s refusal to surrender, a second bomb was dropped over the city of Nagasaki on August 9, 1945. This bombing included more than 14 lbs of plutonium 239 and which exploded more than 430 meters above the ground. This cased winds of more than 600 mph and had the power of 21 kilotons of TNT. The estimated heat that the bomb caused was more than 7000 F and an estimated 80,000 people were killed with another 60,000 injured; many of whom would die from their injuries in the coming weeks and months. (Lamplier, 2006) There still was no sign of Japan’s surrender and the United States planned for more bombings. The debate over America’s use of the atomic bomb has increased as the years continued. There is a great deal of evidence, both for and against the use of the atomic bomb. It was later learned by the public, that a mass invasion of Japan was scheduled in March of 1946 in a final attempt to end the war. There is no way of being able to accurately calculate the number of casualties but one estimate from Secretary of State James Byrnes, believed that 500,000 American lives would be lost as well as hundred of thousands Japanese lives as well if an invasion were to occur. (Lamplier, 2006) An initial wave of American forces, it was estimated, would yield close to 100,000 deaths and with future waves of invasion forces, three to four times that number would be seen it was generally believed. Also, there has been a political stalemate within Japan between the military and the civilian forces over the possibility of surrender. The civilian forces had been seeking a way in which to obtain a favorable and honorable surrender but this was seen as out of the question among the military generals. Also, after the war, it was learned that plans by Japanese forces to murder more than 100,000 Allied POWs, if an invasion were to occur, helped the cause of justifying the use of the atomic bomb in order to avoid an invasion and end the war as quickly as possible, thus saving hundreds of thousands of American lives as well as Japanese lives in the process. However, there has been in the decades after the war, an increasing number of detractors who have said that the usage of the atomic bomb was unnecessary and that more peaceful measures could have been used in order to bring the war to a close. One of the scientists, Leo Szilard, wrote to President Roosevelt in 1939, about the morality of the bomb. It seemed as a paradox that many of the scientists, who worked on the Manhattan project, did not advocate the usage of the bomb. In the letter, it was believed that had Germany used the bomb of the United States, the US would almost certainly decry this action as being representative of war crimes. Therefore, the same would have to be believed had America dropped such a bomb on their enemies. The letter reads as such: â€Å"Suppose Germany had dropped one bomb, say, on Rochester and the other on Buffalo, and then having run out of bombs she would have lost the war. Can anyone doubt that we would then have defined the dropping of the atomic bombs on cities as war crimes, and that we would have sentenced the Germans who were guilty of this crime to death at Nuremberg and hanged them? † (Goodwin, 2003 pg. 225) However such beliefs have now come under intense scrutiny as to date, the droppings of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki still stand as the world’s only use of atomic weaponry upon the world. There were further scientific detractors from the use of the bomb. In March 1945, scientist Dr. James Franck questioned the use of the bomb in relation to public opinion towards the United States on a world wide basis. â€Å"If the United States were to be the first to release this new means of indiscriminate destruction upon mankind, she would sacrifice public support throughout the world, precipitate the race for armaments, and prejudice the possibility of reaching an international agreement on the future control of such weapons. † (Meyers 2001 pg. 227) Further backlash against the use of the bomb was seen by the Federal Council of Churches in March 1946 in which a joint statement read: â€Å"As American Christians, we are deeply penitent for the irresponsible use already made of the atomic bomb. † However, at that time, there were no implications against President Truman concerning possible political motivations until after he had left office in 1953. Peter Kuznick, director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University, believed that the President was politically motivated in his use of the bombs. â€Å"He knew he was beginning the process of annihilation of the species. It was not just a war crime; it was a crime against humanity† The usage of the atomic bombs, resulted in many believing that the world, as the result of American usage of the bombs, had pushed the world to the point of no return in the usage of atomic weaponry. â€Å" (Goodwin, 2005 pg. 255) It was then implied that the United States was motivated by the desire to scare the Soviet Union with their new invention. Ever since the meting at Yalta in which President Roosevelt, Joseph Stain and Winston Churchill met in order to carve out a post war Europe and what the future of the world would represent, there had been a tremendous amount of suspicion towards the Soviet Union and their communist ideas. At the Yalta Conference, President Roosevelt erroneously believed that he and the United States could keep the Soviet Union in check. This was an assumption which proved to be incorrect to an alarming degree, the closer the Allies got to realizing victory in World War II. By the summer of 1945, it was obvious to all, that the end of WWII would only signal the beginning of a new war between the Soviet Union and the United States. At that time, nobody knew how that war would end as the Soviet Union, despite their heavy losses in WWII, was an even match with the United States. The only thing which the United States had was the atomic bomb and it could not have been seen than in only four short years after the end of the war, The Soviet Union would have an atomic bomb of their own. This further increased the number of detractors of the use of the atomic bomb and its suspected use towards intimidating the Soviet Union with its use on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Also, two of the most famous and powerful American generals during the war, Dwight Eisenhower and Douglas MacArthur, both disagreed with the use of the bomb. Eisenhower, in his memoir The White House Years, commented on the use of the bomb. â€Å"During the recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him (Secretary of War Stinson) my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that our dropping of the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking the world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. † (Eisenhower, 2003 pg 77) Eisenhower was not alone. Other generals also believed that the dropping of the bomb was unnecessary. Douglas MacArthur, who publicly hated Truman said that he thought that such an event was unnecessary and later said: â€Å"Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bomb had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated. † (Tarver, 2004) Also, by President Truman not dropping the bomb when he had the chance to, upon the American public learning of this, would have sealed Truman’s political future as well as the political future of the Democratic Party for years to come, regardless of an Allied victory soon after August 1945. The American public had endured three and a half years of a deadly war, not seen in measure since the Civil War and the American public had been largely in favor of the bombings of Dresden and Tokyo which yielded comparable numbers of deaths as it was believed that such bombings would end the war quicker. When President Truman said that his motivation for use of the bomb was to end the war as quickly as possible, he echoed the prevailing opinion of the American public. In the decades since the end of the war, there has been new information which has both led to a further belief in the correctness and the immorality of the usage of the bomb. The suggestion to drop the bomb in a desolate area of Japan would have been a proper compromise between the two prevailing schools of thought. The bomb would have been dropped and a successful display of this new invention and its destructive power would be achieved with minimal loss of life. This did not occur and only President Truman, as it was he who had the final power to drop the bomb, knew what his real motivations were in what still is, the world’s only usage of the atomic bomb upon its citizens. WORKS CITED Goodwin, D. (2003). No Ordinary Time. New York: Simon & Schuster Eisenhower, D. (1998). The White House Years. New York: Scribners Lamplier: J. (2006) FDR. Boston: PBS Productions. Manchester, W. (1987) The Last Lion: Alone . New York: Simon & Schuster. McCullough. D. (2005). Truman. New York: Scribners. Meyers, J. (2001). Fat Man & Little Boy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Murrow, E. (1991). Revisiting Los Alamos See It Now. New York: CBS Productions Nichols. H. (1985) The Manhattan Project Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1985 Rhodes, R. (1985) Dark Sun: The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb. New York: Simon and Schuster Tarver, M. (2004) Douglas MacArthur Boston: American Experience PBS Productions

The Iran-Iraq War of 1980-1988

The Iran-Iraq War of 1980-1988 The Iran-Iraq War of 1980 to 1988 was a grinding, bloody, and in the end, completely pointless conflict. It was sparked by the Iranian Revolution, led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, which overthrew Shah Pahlavi in 1978-79. Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, who despised the Shah, welcomed this change, but his joy turned to alarm when the Ayatollah began calling for a Shia revolution in Iraq to overthrow Saddams secular/Sunni regime. The Ayatollahs provocations inflamed Saddam Husseins paranoia, and he soon began calling for a new Battle of Qadisiyyah, a reference to the 7th-century battle in which the newly-Muslim Arabs defeated the Persians. Khomeini retaliated by calling the Baathist regime a puppet of Satan. In April  1980, Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz survived an assassination attempt, which Saddam blamed on the Iranians. As Iraqi Shias began to respond to the Ayatollah Khomeinis call for revolt, Saddam cracked down hard, even hanging Iraqs top Shia Ayatollah, Mohammad Baqir al-Sadr, in April of 1980. Rhetoric and skirmishes continued from both sides throughout the summer, though Iran was not at all militarily prepared for war. Iraq Invades Iran On September 22, 1980, Iraq launched an all-out invasion of Iran. It began with airstrikes against the Iranian Air Force, followed by a three-pronged ground invasion by six Iraqi Army divisions along a 400-mile-long front in the Iranian province of Khuzestan. Saddam Hussein expected ethnic Arabs in Khuzestan to rise up in support of the invasion, but they did not, perhaps because they were predominantly Shiite. The unprepared Iranian army was joined by the Revolutionary Guards in their efforts to fight off the Iraqi invaders. By November, a corps of some 200,000 Islamic volunteers (untrained Iranian civilians) were also throwing themselves against the invading forces. The war settled into a stalemate throughout much of 1981. By 1982, Iran had gathered its forces and successfully launched a counter-offensive, using human waves of Basij volunteers to drive the Iraqis back from Khorramshahr. In April, Saddam Hussein withdrew his forces from Iranian territory. However, Iranian calls for the end to monarchy in the Middle East convinced reluctant Kuwait and Saudi Arabia to begin sending billions of dollars in aid to Iraq; none of the Sunni powers wished to see Iranian-style Shia revolution spreading southward. On June 20, 1982, Saddam Hussein called for a ceasefire that would return everything to the pre-war status quo. However, Ayatollah Khomeini rejected the proffered peace, calling for Saddam Husseins removal from power. The Iranian clerical government began to prepare for an invasion of Iraq, over the objections of its surviving military officers. Iran Invades Iraq On July 13, 1982, Iranian forces crossed into Iraq, heading for the city of Basra. The Iraqis, however, were prepared; they had an elaborate series of trenches and bunkers dug into the earth, and Iran soon ran short on ammunition. In addition, Saddams forces deployed chemical weapons against their opponents. The ayatollahs army was quickly reduced to complete dependence on suicide attacks by human waves. Children were sent to run across mine-fields, clearing the mines before the adult Iranian soldiers could hit them, and instantly become martyrs in the process. Alarmed by the prospect of further Islamic revolutions, President Ronald Reagan announced that the U.S. would do whatever was necessary to prevent Iraq from losing the war with Iran. Interestingly enough, the Soviet Union and France also came to Saddam Husseins aid, while China, North Korea, and Libya were supplying the Iranians. Throughout 1983, the Iranians launched five major attacks against the Iraqi lines, but their under-armed human waves could not break through the Iraqi entrenchments. In retaliation, Saddam Hussein sent missile attacks against eleven Iranian cities. An Iranian push through the marshes ended with them gaining a position just 40 miles from Basra, but the Iraqis held them there. The Tanker War In the spring of 1984, the Iran-Iraq War entered a new, maritime phase when Iraq attacked Iranian oil tankers in the Persian Gulf. Iran responded by attacking the oil tankers of both Iraq and its Arab allies. Alarmed, the U.S. threatened to join the war if the oil supply was cut off. Saudi F-15s retaliated for attacks against the kingdoms shipping by shooting down an Iranian plane in June  1984. The tanker war continued through 1987. In that year, U.S. and Soviet naval ships offered escorts to oil tankers to prevent them being targeted by the belligerents. A total of 546 civilian ships were attacked and 430 merchant seamen killed in the tanker war. Bloody Stalemate On land, the years 1985 to 1987 saw Iran and Iraq trading offensives and counter-offensives, without either side gaining much territory. The fighting was incredibly bloody, often with tens of thousands killed on each side in a matter of days. In February of 1988, Saddam unleashed the fifth and deadliest missile attack on Irans cities. Simultaneously, Iraq began to prepare a major offensive to push the Iranians out of Iraqi territory. Worn down by eight years of fighting and the incredibly high toll in lives, Irans revolutionary government began to consider accepting a peace deal. On July 20, 1988, the Iranian government announced that it would accept a UN-brokered ceasefire, although Ayatollah Khomeini likened it to drinking from a poisoned chalice. Saddam Hussein demanded that the Ayatollah revoke his call for Saddams removal before he would sign the deal. However, the Gulf States leaned on Saddam, who finally accepted the ceasefire as it stood. In the end, Iran accepted the same peace terms the Ayatollah had rejected in 1982. After eight years of fighting, Iran and Iraq returned to the antebellum status quo - nothing had changed, geopolitically. What had changed was that an estimated 500,000 to 1,000,000 Iranians were dead, along with more than 300,000 Iraqis. Also, Iraq had seen the devastating effects of chemical weapons, which it later deployed against its own Kurdish population as well as the Marsh Arabs. The Iran-Iraq War of 1980-88 was one of the longest in modern times, and it ended in a draw. Perhaps the most important point to be drawn from it is the danger of allowing religious fanaticism on one side to clash with a leaders megalomania on the other.