Physics134 week7 Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Physics134 week7 - Coursework Example The functions of the NERC include working with the stakeholders to establish reliability standards for power systems, enforcing and monitors those standards, providing training and educational resources as part of an accreditation program, and assessing adequacy of the resources to ensure operators of the power system are proficient and efficient. NERC analyzes causes of power disturbances to help avoid future disruptions. Long distance power transmission is sent on high voltage wires because power is roughly the product of current and voltage. It means that when sending a lot of power, high voltage and high current must be used. High voltage wires are used because high current leads to the loss of power due to the wire resistance. With high voltage wires, the current is small and, therefore, much power reaches the destination. When using high voltage transmission line where one is twice the voltage of another, each of them has advantages and disadvantages. Very high voltage transmission lines are beneficial in that they can transmit power underground and above the ground from power companies to households and individual businesses. The high voltage lines can also run long distances and maintain the electric power. They are more advantageous to utility companies because they fetch more power. They are also more efficient due to minimal loss of energy. However, they have an increase danger because of high voltage. Low voltage transmission lines are lee dangerous but fetch minimal power due to energy loss. The Grid, DOE Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. http://www.oe.energy.gov/SmartGridIntroduction.htm http://www1.eere.energy.gov/tribalenergy/guide/electricity_grid_basics.html

Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare Essay Example for Free

Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare Essay When put together, it means sick of love. Once Montague and Lady Montague leave, Benvolio has to try and discover what is affecting him. Just in the first few lines of Benvolios and Romeos conversation, love, once again appears, not as sexual innuendos, but this time in a much more serious perspective. Benvolio asks, What sadness lengthens Romeos hours? and Romeo replies, Not having that which having makes them short, which is rather ironic as Romeo wants love and therefore his life is short. We previously identify this through the prologue. Elizabethans had an aristocratic view on love and so they thought it would always be bad as Benvolio indicates, so gentle in his view. As soon as Benvolio speaks of love, Romeo attempts to confuse the issue, but when he uncovers the essential truth, he emphasizes each word as if the facts were almost unbelievable and quite without justification. At line 169, Romeo honestly unveils the truth, heres much to do with hate, but more with love. This may not be extremely important in engaging the audience because they may already believe that his unrequited love is Juliet. But this is not the case, thus it will be a shock to the audience when they discover who it really is. His thoughts are of the clash between love and hate, which then places brutal and outrageous images in his head. This is also shown by the words he uses, Why then, O brawling love, O loving hate, O anything, of nothing first create! O heavy lightness, serious vanity, Misshapen chaos of well-seeming forms, Feather of lead, bright smoke, cold fire, sick health, Still waking sleep, that is not what it is! Which also represents the confusion of his feelings and the contrast between them. This is an example of an oxymoron and the contradictions in life. It is applied in order to express the perplexity of Romeos emotions. It is also apparent that Romeo recognizes that Rosaline is a Capulet, the enemy, which is why his words of love and hate are intertwined, O brawling love, O loving hate. Once more, Romeo attempts to leave but Benvolio follows him and brings up the subject of love yet again. The word love catches Romeos attention; only this time, he counters Benvolios question by mocking his seriousness. In this section, there is a distinction between Rosaline and Juliets attitude to love. Rosaline, hath forsworn to love, indicating her love will not open out for anyone at this moment, and as he continues, and in that vow, do I live dead, that live to tell it now, reinforces the idea of Romeo finding love and life, and when he does, it will result in death. Romeo is caught up in false or artificial love. When real love comes, it will come as Juliet and will be a great impact in his life. The way he feels about Rosaline is much different to his feelings towards Juliet. As I have previously mentioned, we start scene II with Capulet and Paris, and his wish to marry Juliet as soon as possible. The information that we are told at the end of scene I, and the beginning of scene II, is surprising to the reader as we were lead to believe that it is Romeo and Juliet getting together, but it is apparent they are not and create a sense of curiosity. Capulet is presented as a kind hearted man and has faith in his daughter, earth hath swallowed all my hopes but she; She is the hopeful day of my earth. But this quote too, has dramatic irony, because Juliet dies in the end and therefore will have nothing to live for. Capulet then leaves after his lecture, leaving Peter, his servant with a piece of paper. Romeo and Benvolio enter and meet Peter, who is at fault, as he cannot read the list of whom he is meant to invite for the party. Romeo is persistent and patient with Peter. As he reads the list aloud to Peter, a name mentioned caught his attention; Rosaline. By now, he is even more tolerant with Peter because he realises that this is his chance to discover more about Rosaline. To return the favour, Peter prayed, come and crush a cup of wine, and then left. Of course, Romeo would take advantage of this due to his adoration of Rosaline. Benvolio also encourages him, go thither, and with attained eye, compare her face with some that I shall show. This is another example of dramatic irony as Romeo takes Benvolios advice and ironically, he does find another woman who happens to be Juliet. Presently however, Romeo questions, one fairer than my love? believing that there is no one else for him, but there is. Rosaline starts to fade out at the end of scene II. By introducing the nurse before Juliet in scene III, Shakespeare at one stroke made the drama domestic, bawdy, and affectionate in tone. As she speaks in turn to Lady Capulet and Juliet, the nurses speech is more dynamic and rhythmically varied than any so far in the play. Shakespeare was also able to introduce his heroin almost silently, so that in her first scene, Juliet speaks only seven lines. Attention is of course, focused on her, and her response is crucial for the development of the scene; yet she remains dutiful in speech and therefore mysterious and unknown. As lady Capulet did not ask any questions, the Nurse felt it was necessary to speak. Her long speech about the death of her daughter may indicate the events that could happen to Juliet. The bawdy lines 43-45: Thou wilt fall backward when thou hast more wit; Wilt thou not, Jule? And, by my holidam, The pretty wretch left crying and said, Ay Provide a climax for the speech, making the nurse helpless with laughter and provoking three repetitions, two against the express wish of Lady Capulet. Probably the nurse should make an attempt to be silent or serious and then give in to her own instincts. Juliets involvement is effective as she may either be embarrassed by her Nurses bawdiness or may know that more is likely to follow and offend her mother. It is in this scene where Juliet speaks her thoughts of marriage and believes it is, an honour I dream not of, for she is still young and has no plans to marry. This is considered as dramatic irony for she has no desire to marry Paris but when she meets Romeo, she falls in love and marries him almost straight away. Then Lady Capulet asks, can you like Paris love? and Juliet answers, Ill look to like, if looking liking move. But no more deep will I endart my eye Than your consent gives strength to make it fly, Reinforcing that she will meet him but Lady Capulet will have to wait before Juliet gives her verdict. The audience at this point will anticipate the judgment of young Juliet. Finally, there is one last major theme in the play, fate and tragedy. When mentioning the word tragedy, you automatically think death or a disaster outcome, which will make you want to know more about the event or situation. Shakespeare gives a hint of tragedy in the prologue, A pair of star-crossed lovers take their strife, and so connects with the thoughts of the audience. Star-crossed lovers are referred to as death. Their love brings both of them to an end and is thus, their destiny to die. The prologue gives a summary to what we expect to happen, but Shakespeare carefully made this to embody the divine intervention of Romeo and Juliet. In the Elizabethan times, the audience were lead to believe that fate always causes tragedy. As we know, we begin in a fight scene. Romeo is in fact not there, which may symbolise that Romeo is not part of the feud or that he is involved greatly. The quarrelling of fools is turned to civil mutiny as the prologue warned. Although Benvolio seeks to keep the peace, he is soon fighting as Tybalt threatens him with death. The Capulets and the Montagues are built on hate where as Romeo and Juliet is built on love and subsequently, inevitability is introduced. The prophetic words of Prince Escalus, your lives shall pay the forfeit of the peace, is ironic because we know that Romeo and Juliet, from each household, dies as a consequent to the feud that has been going on for many years. It is an insight for those who dont know, of what will tragically happen. Romeos unrequited love leads his life, but when another lady returns his love, his life comes to an end. The ironic in this is visible as we read Romeo and Benvolios conversation. Romeos fate as he believes, is to be with Juliet no matter what. So his determination to spend eternity with Juliet is his destiny to die. Romeo claims he is a victim of bad luck, in saying that he is Fortunes fool The mechanism of fate works in all of the events surrounding the lovers, including the feud between their families. This event is not mere coincidence, but manifestations of fate that help bring about the unavoidable outcome of the young lovers deaths. Fate in the play is influenced by the social situations and the personalities of each character. In scene II, Capulet recalls that he has nothing to live for but for his daughter, but because he is at war with whom Juliet loves, she dies as a consequence of this. It is bad luck to him and for both Romeo and Juliet. Peters obvious flaw of not being able to read is Romeos chance to meet Rosaline, but this is his fate to first meet Juliet. Meeting Peter was a fateful coincidence. Benvolio himself said to look for other women and this is what happened when he went to Capulets party. Benvolio urges Romeo to go to the party for the women, but Lady Capulet urges Juliet to go to meet Paris, giving the audience the benefit of the doubt. The audience at this point is now aware of how Juliet and Romeo meet. In scene III, the Nurse comments, An I might live to see thee married once, I have my wish, implies that she will see Juliets marriage with Paris, but not only does she miss it, but Juliets husband to be is a different man. The nurses speech is significant and refers to the death of her own child. The audience by now is much more interested as they now know more about the events. Overall, we can see that Shakespeare has created an atmosphere, which engages the audience right from the beginning. He uses imagery, emotive words, dramatic irony and various other techniques to do so. In the beginning, the prologue tells us what we are to expect, and as we near the end of scene III, our expectations are answered, but we are curious of how the events happen. Shakespeare has successfully completed his task to seize our mind.

Dissolution Versus Debauchery in Sonnet 96 Essay -- Sonnet essays

Dissolution Versus Debauchery in Sonnet 96      Ã‚  Ã‚   The sonnets of William Shakespeare chronicle the conflicts of love and lust between the blond young man and the dark-haired lady. In Sonnet 96, Shakespeare acts as an apologist on behalf of the blond young man as he concludes his discourse on the young man's character." Here the poet presents a picture of the young man as a misguided youth caught up in youthful indiscretion, rather than a rapacious beast prowling for prey. Shakespeare illustrates the inherent differences between dissolution and debauchery as he declares that upon first glance all is not as it appears; therefore, the young man's character must be examined in greater detail. Endeavoring to engender empathy for the blond young man, the poet elucidates the young man's strengths while emending his weaknesses. However, it is the rising meter of iambic pentameter throughout the entire sonnet that sets a steady rhythm suggesting all is well there is no cause for alarm.    The initial quatrain of Sonnet 96 opens the debate on dissolution and debauchery, implying youthful indiscretion is the young man's only serious flaw. The first two lines of the sonnet begin in the same way, with parallel sentence structure and alliteration "Some say," which is deceptive, as the remainder of both lines one and two are contradictory. In line 1, the poet chides the young man, telling him some people see his bad behavior as a result of youth and immaturity, though there are others who believe his bad behavior is indicative of his inherent moral corruption." However, in line 2, the poet dismisses the concerns found in line 1 by characterizing the young man's youthful dalliances as a special privilege of one ... ... greatness!"    The couplet, which should allow the poet to resolve any doubts regarding the young man's character, instead brings up more questions." The (b) rhyme of the first quatrain is found in the couplet with the words "sort" (13) and "report" (14)." Why would the poet return to the quatrain of contradiction when he is so close to restoring the young man's good name?" This exact couplet is found in "Sonnet 37," leaving one to wonder if this couplet belongs here at all." Does the poet truly believe his own supposition that the young man is only a dissolute youth, or does he question the true moral character of the friend he loves?"    Works Cited Shakespeare, William. "Sonnet 96." The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Eds. M. H. Abrams and Stephen Greenblatt. 7th ed. 2 vols. New York: Norton, 2000. 1: 1031-32.          Dissolution Versus Debauchery in Sonnet 96 Essay -- Sonnet essays Dissolution Versus Debauchery in Sonnet 96      Ã‚  Ã‚   The sonnets of William Shakespeare chronicle the conflicts of love and lust between the blond young man and the dark-haired lady. In Sonnet 96, Shakespeare acts as an apologist on behalf of the blond young man as he concludes his discourse on the young man's character." Here the poet presents a picture of the young man as a misguided youth caught up in youthful indiscretion, rather than a rapacious beast prowling for prey. Shakespeare illustrates the inherent differences between dissolution and debauchery as he declares that upon first glance all is not as it appears; therefore, the young man's character must be examined in greater detail. Endeavoring to engender empathy for the blond young man, the poet elucidates the young man's strengths while emending his weaknesses. However, it is the rising meter of iambic pentameter throughout the entire sonnet that sets a steady rhythm suggesting all is well there is no cause for alarm.    The initial quatrain of Sonnet 96 opens the debate on dissolution and debauchery, implying youthful indiscretion is the young man's only serious flaw. The first two lines of the sonnet begin in the same way, with parallel sentence structure and alliteration "Some say," which is deceptive, as the remainder of both lines one and two are contradictory. In line 1, the poet chides the young man, telling him some people see his bad behavior as a result of youth and immaturity, though there are others who believe his bad behavior is indicative of his inherent moral corruption." However, in line 2, the poet dismisses the concerns found in line 1 by characterizing the young man's youthful dalliances as a special privilege of one ... ... greatness!"    The couplet, which should allow the poet to resolve any doubts regarding the young man's character, instead brings up more questions." The (b) rhyme of the first quatrain is found in the couplet with the words "sort" (13) and "report" (14)." Why would the poet return to the quatrain of contradiction when he is so close to restoring the young man's good name?" This exact couplet is found in "Sonnet 37," leaving one to wonder if this couplet belongs here at all." Does the poet truly believe his own supposition that the young man is only a dissolute youth, or does he question the true moral character of the friend he loves?"    Works Cited Shakespeare, William. "Sonnet 96." The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Eds. M. H. Abrams and Stephen Greenblatt. 7th ed. 2 vols. New York: Norton, 2000. 1: 1031-32.         

Atlantis :: essays research papers

Atlantis Over 11,000 years ago there existed an island nation located in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean populated by a noble and powerful race. The people of this land possessed great wealth thanks to the natural resources found throughout their island. The island was a center for trade and commerce. The rulers of this land held sway over the people and land of their own island and well into Europe and Africa. This was the island of Atlantis. Atlantis was the domain of Poseidon, god of the sea. When Poseidon fell in love with a mortal woman, Cleito, he created a dwelling at the top of a hill near the middle of the island and surrounded the dwelling with rings of water and land to protect her. Cleito gave birth to five sets of twin boys who became the first rulers of Atlantis. The island was divided among the brothers with the eldest, Atlas, first King of Atlantis, being given control over the central hill and surrounding areas. At the top of the central hill, a temple was built to honor Poseidon that housed a giant gold statue of Poseidon riding a chariot pulled by winged horses. It was here that the rulers of Atlantis would come to discuss laws, pass judgments, and pay tribute to Poseidon. To facilitate travel and trade, a water canal was cut through of the rings of land and water running south for 5.5 miles (~9 km) to the sea. The city of Atlantis sat just outside the outer ring of water and spread across the plain covering a circle of 11 miles (1.7 km). This was a densely populated area where the majority of the population lived.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Beyond the city lay a fertile plain 330 miles (530 km) long and 110 miles (190 km) wide surrounded by another canal used to collect water from the rivers and streams of the mountains. The climate was such that two harvests were possible each year. One in the winter fed by the rains and one in the summer fed by irrigation from the canal.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Surrounding the plain to the north were mountains which soared to the skies. Villages, lakes, rivers, and meadows dotted the mountains. Besides the harvests, the island provided all kinds of herbs, fruits, and nuts. An abundance of animals, including elephants, roamed the island. For generations the Atlanteans lived simple, virtuous lives. But slowly they began to change. Greed and power began to corrupt them.

American Military history Essay

American Military history is filled with examples of complex operations executed with varying degrees of success. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) The most complicated of these missions typically involve multi-phase implementation. The success of multi-phased missions is typically contingent on the actions of multiple agencies, which as a matter of course must interact throughout the duration of the mission. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) Historically, the nature of the interaction between various agencies with vested interest in the success of given operations has been varied. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) The overall success of such operations is contingent upon many factors, not the least of which is a high level of cooperation between agencies. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) The reasons for operational failures in complex missions are many and varied, but the lack of cooperation between agencies is one reason that is inexcusable and preventable through proper training. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) Background: The Iran Hostage Rescue Mission of 1980 is one of numerous examples of American attempts to rescue hostages that ended in complete or partial failure. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) Up to that point, the record of American military and paramilitary forces in executing successful missions against relatively soft targets had been poor. A facile explanation of this trend would be a lack of proper training and poor execution by the soldiers, sailors and airmen on the ground, but the facts do not support this hypothesis. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) In all cases, the failures of hostage rescue missions lay in the planning and command-chain difficulties that compromised the discretion of the assets on the ground. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) Task Force Baum in 1945 was a POW rescue mission commanded by General George S. Patton. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) Their mission was to rescue 200-300 POW’s being held by the Germans behind enemy lines. As a result of poor intelligence, the Task force encountered no fewer than 1500 POWs, whom they rescued. The larger number of rescuees compromised Task Force Baum’s exit strategy. As a result, all the POWs and nearly 300 of the rescuers were killed. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) The failure in this case was not on the ground, but with faulty intelligence, a problem that would become thematic in accounts of mission failures as time went on. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) Another example of bad intelligence compromising a mission took place in 1970. A rescue team led by Col. Bull Simmons and consisting of fifty-six Special Forces units was dispatched into north Vietnam for the purpose of liberating a POW camp at Son Tay. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) The assault force ended up attacking a camp that had been emptied of prisoners for at least one month. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) In yet another example of intelligence failure, the U. S. Marines attempted to rescue the crew of a captured cargo ship in 1975. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) The opposing force in this case was the Cambodians, and the operation centered on Koh Tang Island, where the hostages were thought to be held. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) After a coordinated assault on the island cost nearly seventy casualties (eighteen dead or missing), it was discovered that the hostages had already been released and were, at the time of the assault, returning to their own ship on a Thai fishing boat. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) This poor track record of agency conduct of intelligence continued in 1980, when a joint multi-service force attempted to rescue fifty three Americans who were being held hostage in the embassy in the capital of Iran. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) A close examination of this mission yields insights into failures that resulted from inter-agency and inter-service communications breakdowns, intelligence problems, and command issues. From the planning stage on, this mission suffered from the lack of interagency cooperation. (McGeorge & Wegner, 1983) Analysis: In the planning stage of any operation, it is vital that a number of elements be present. (Schnaubelt, 2005) The plan must articulate the organizational objective, accurately describe the current strategic and tactical situation, set forth the intended flow of events, and a definition of the expected contribution of all individuals and groups involved. (Schnaubelt, 2005) In order to have the maximum odds of success, such a plan must contain a clear indication of chain of command, robust and accurate intelligence, and sufficient secrecy to ensure the integrity of the mission. (Schnaubelt, 2005) The Iran Hostage Rescue attempt failed on many of these criteria. Of particular issue was the chain of command. (Sick, 1987) During the execution of the task, pilots in the operation later told investigators that they had no clear understanding of who had authority to be issuing orders. (Sick, 1987) This determination is an element that should have been made abundantly clear to participating personnel well before the execution phase of the operation. (Sick, 1987) In another critical example of failure of the articulation of the chain of command, the Task Force commander and his inferior officers were unclear on who held the responsibility for mission training of the helicopter crews. This state of affairs was allowed to persist for months before the execution phase of the operation. (Sick, 1987) The result of this confusion was a situation that resulted in a collision of helicopters during the aborted mission, which cost several lives. (Sick, 1987) These failure pale in comparison with relation to scope compared to the issues of intelligence that were brought about by multi-agency participation in information control. The numerous intelligence liaisons were encumbered by a specific and inflexible OPSEC (operational security) protocol, which hampered attempts to make information known to the necessary portions of the task force. (Halloway, 1980) This resulted in an unnecessary delay in intelligence compilation and analysis. It is important to note that this deficiency does not point to a shortcoming in intelligence gathering mechanisms, but rather in the inter-agency handling of gathered intelligence. (Halloway, 1980) The resulting delays in formulating intelligence estimates could have been avoided with a centralized intelligence conduit within the task force to which all relevant agencies would be required to contribute. (Halloway, 1980) This failure was justified by the decision-makers in the name of operational security, yet the fragmented gathering of relevant data made the intelligence much more vulnerable to compromise than would have been the case with a centralized intelligence mechanism. (Halloway, 1980) In the preparation phase of the Iran Task Force Operation, failures again occurred predicated on multiple agencies withholding cooperation on the basis of OPSEC issues. (Halloway, 1980) The result was a lack of a full-scale rehearsal for the operation, an element vital to anticipating contingencies, training personnel and refining operational plans. Across the board, there seemed to be more of an interest in rapid execution than in sufficient preparation. (Halloway, 1980) It is clear that a number of involved agencies would have had an issue with lack of preparation, but their objections were not given sufficient attention as the organizational decisions were out of their hands. The Joint Chiefs of Staff commissioned an analysis of the Task force operation (called Operation Eagleclaw) that was completed and presented to the Department of Defense in 1980. The analysis indicated twenty-three issues that contributed to the mission failure, and in many cases, lack of inter-agency organization and coordination were at the heart of the issues. (Halloway, 1980) The first issue addressed in the analysis was that of OPSEC. Since this was acknowledged to be a mission-critical priority, it was this element that was stressed the most during planning and preparation. (Halloway, 1980) The lack of inter-agency communication was said to have negatively effected the planning of and preparation for the operation. It was concluded that the OPSEC plan ought to have had more flexibility at least within the Joint Task Force. (Halloway, 1980) A clear delineation of who was â€Å"in† and who was â€Å"out† that transcended agency affiliation would have been a far more effective method of OPSEC, but interagency mistrust of the integrity of various agencies compelled coordinators to adopt inflexible OPSEC protocols. (Halloway, 1980) Despite the conclusion that OPSEC of the mission was adequate, it is clear that other issues could have been resolved in the preparation phase with better cooperation with regard to OPSEC. A second issue addressed in this mission was the fact that the planning did not include all necessary agencies at all stages. (Halloway, 1980) The planning team began with a limited number, and was expanded as the contingency became more of a definite probability. The haphazard organization of the Joint Task Force created gaps in planning and contingency that might have (but did not, in this case) compromised the success of this mission. (Halloway, 1980) In the absence of a standing task force consisting of multi-agency input, the necessary agencies should have been determined in advanced and all agencies should have been privy to all elements of planning. Again, the justification for the â€Å"need-to-know† contribution to the plan was OPSEC. (Halloway, 1980) The report also noted that intelligence coordination for the mission was executed in the same ad hoc manner, and reporting mechanisms were inconsistent, as task force command got direct reports from some agencies while others reported to component commanders. (Halloway, 1980) As cohesive, accurate and timely intelligence is vital to mission success, this qualified as a major concern in the execution of Eagleclaw. (Halloway, 1980) The fact that intelligence failure did not play a role in the ultimate failure of Eagleclaw should not be construed as an endorsement of the interagency disorganization inherent in early intelligence coordination efforts. (Halloway, 1980) The fact that as planning progressed, the intelligence conduits gained efficiency is also ancillary to the critique of the earlier efforts. (Halloway, 1980) The next major issue identified in the operation was the lack of independent overview of the plan-in-chief. (Halloway, 1980) While reviewed at several phases by the Joint Chiefs, Eagleclaw was never subjected to the robust evaluation by an independent panel of qualified experts. Once again, the blame for this oversight could be laid at the feet of OPSEC. (Halloway, 1980) This deficiency may have been mission-critical, because had such an independent review board contained an expert on local climate conditions and their effect on operational equipment, he or she might have informed the Task Force leadership about the necessity of specialty equipment, repair and spare parts that could have prevented the reduction in force from eight to five helicopters, which fact resulted in the abortion of the mission. (Halloway, 1980) Perhaps the most important deficiency of the Joint Task Force efforts was the lack of comprehensive, multi-agency rehearsal of all elements of the plan. (Halloway, 1980) The execution of such rehearsal is of vital importance at all levels of the operation. At the personnel level, rehearsal gives the actors a sense of the mission circumstances in a safe manner that reflects real-time environment. (Halloway, 1980) The rehearsal is equally beneficial to planning personnel in that a run-through can highlight unforeseen practical or logistical problems in the plan, which can be corrected in subsequent planning. Again, the specter of OPSEC, along with the logistical difficulties of planning a rehearsal of a joint exercise prevented the execution of this vital step. (Halloway, 1980) An issue that also undermined the success of the mission was the constant change in the political circumstances of the hostage situation during the planning phase of the operation created a constant flow of changes in the composition and organization of the task force, which, in turn, created confusion within the command structure regarding chain of command. (Halloway, 1980) Ultimately, the operatives went into mission without a clear sense (in the case of the pilots) of the authority of those giving orders to be giving those orders. While this circumstance did not prove to be a vital flaw in this particular mission, it is a flaw that could easily resulted in a disastrous mission marred by conflicting orders, causing confusion, and, very likely, casualties and mission failure. (Halloway, 1980) The implementation of Signal Integrity contingencies was another area of major failure within the Joint Task Force. While all the agencies involved has a robust understanding and solid implementation of signal protocol during the mission, the agencies did not coordinate these protocols. (Halloway, 1980) As a result, assets entered the area without a uniform protocol with respect to signals integrity. In the case of the helicopter pilots, the maintenance of strict radio silence prevented them from getting vital updates on the weather conditions in the area, leading to some of the mechanical issues that contributed significantly to mission failure. (Halloway, 1980) It is likely that the agencies with the best understanding of the importance of the weather would have implemented an signal integrity protocol that allowed for frequent conditions updates without the need for requests from the pilots, but such a plan was not implemented because it would have combined signal integrity protocols from multiple agencies. (Halloway, 1980) The origin of the circumstances that led to the abortion of the mission was the lack of helicopters necessary to complete the task in the face of mechanical failure of three of the helicopter units. (Halloway, 1980) An independent review of the equipment parameters would likely have called for at least ten helicopters to account for the possibility of mechanical failures. Such a provision would have prevented the abortion of the mission, which was precipitated by the disabling of three of the available helicopters. (Halloway, 1980) Again, proper review and oversight of the mission by independent auditors would likely have recommended ten helicopters be mission-ready at the time of the launch of the operation. These assets were readily available and could easily been incorporated into the Joint Task Force’s equipment requirements without compromising other endeavors. (Halloway, 1980) The mission training protocol for the helicopter pilots also presented problems that were in part caused by the interagency coordination of efforts. (Halloway, 1980) The Navy pilots tasked to drive the helicopters lacked operational experience in the conditions for which the mission called. The Joint Task Force Command addressed this deficiency by supplementing the number of pilots with those from the Marine Corps who had more experience flying in the expected conditions. (Halloway, 1980) Problems developed as pilots were rotated in and out of the training protocols on the basis of ability. In addition, the need to be mission-ready on short notice necessitated several two-three week sessions for training, rather than a preferred five-month long continuous program. (Halloway, 1980) The end result was a group of flying personnel who were not optimally trained, and did not have the necessary experience to deal with conditions in which they found themselves. (Halloway, 1980) The deficiency here mainly lies in the exclusion of Air Force pilots from the docket of potential pilots. It had been established after the fact that the Air Force had several pilots with operational experience in rescue missions, mid-air refueling, and other elements of the flight portion of the mission. (Halloway, 1980) It stands to reason that these pilots would have been likely to accomplish the mission training in a faster, more efficient manner than pilots without this background. When the mission commanders elected to use RH-53D helicopters for this mission, they were institutionally bound to use the pilots checked out on these machines, even though their flight experience did not match the particular mission parameters. (Halloway, 1980) Obviously, the primary factor in the operational failure of the mission was the unexpected dust storms encountered by the pilots en route to the mission. As previously noted, communication liaisons with local weather reporting services may have compromised the security of the operation, however, in retrospect, it seems that such a risk was worth the potential problem given two factors. First, this communication would necessarily be short-term, as any other weather information would be unreliable. (Halloway, 1980) This would relieve security concerns because even if the mission parameters were compromised at that point (and there is no particular reason to assume it would have been) the opposing force would not have sufficient time between the breach of security and the execution of the mission to mount sufficient contingency plans. Second, the ability to successfully navigate to the target area was a critical element in the mission, and a â€Å"sine que non† requisite of success. (Halloway, 1980) Again, in retrospect, it would appear that marginal security concerns outweighed common sense in making the determination to fly without up-to-the minute weather condition updates. Another related option rejected by the Joint Task Force was the use of C-130s in a pathfinder role. (Halloway, 1980) The employment of such equipment in such a manner would have gone further to guarantee rendezvous times and protocols despite adverse weather conditions. Crew of the mission copters lacked confidence in the navigation equipment and their own ability to use it. (Halloway, 1980) This sort of arrangement is the type of non-typical application that would raise alarms between agencies, some of whom would deem off-book applications of material as an unnecessary risk for their own assets. (Halloway, 1980) The decision of the pilot of helicopter #5 to abort mission given the particular damage to his vehicle reflected a lack of knowledge of the capabilities of the vehicle in question. Given the nature of the damage as indicated by on-board diagnostic equipment, the craft would have been able to continue at minimal risk for several hours given the speed and other operation conditions. (Halloway, 1980) The pilot’s decision to abort mission on the basis of this particular damage reflected both a lack of understanding of the nature of the damage, and a gross underestimation of the criticality of the vehicle’s participation. (Halloway, 1980) It was Helicopter #5’s decision to abort that triggered a mission-wide abort, as the number of operable craft had dropped below that which was determined to be mission-critical. (Halloway, 1980) The pilot’s possibly mistaken decision to abort was a function of his lack of training on the vehicle, and understanding of the criticality of his component of the mission. (Halloway, 1980) The fault for these deficiencies lay not with the pilot, but with the afore-mentioned training deficiencies, and a lack of mission-brief emphasis on the lack of discretionary aircraft available to the mission. Lack of information control in the area of intelligence resulted in the pilots acting upon inaccurate intelligence with respect to the capability of the opposing forces’ radar. After the fact, it became apparent that a number of pilots relied on inaccurate intelligence regarding this factor in making tactical determinations regarding flight altitude. The use of the bad information resulted in high-risk, unnecessary flight protocols. (Halloway, 1980) Despite the lack of immediate functional consequence resulting from this breach, it bears mentioning that intelligence need always be reported to the appropriate agencies for confirmation or denial before being acted upon. (Halloway, 1980) The culture within the Joint Task Force regarding intelligence flow encouraged the informal passing of vital intelligence. A lack of an interagency focal point of intelligence analysis made the confirmation and even identification of raw data difficult. It remains a possibility that the pilots placed an inordinate amount of trust in intelligence, believing it to have been confirmed by the responsibly agents, when in fact it had not. (Halloway, 1980) Such considerations are beyond the scope of responsibly of assets in action or support of action. These assets have to be able to assume that any intelligence that makes it way to them is either accurate, or that they have been informed of the probability of inaccuracy, and counseled as to the weight the information should receive in the operations. (Halloway, 1980) When the helicopters began to stray from mission parameters in location and timetable, the radio silence protocol prevented each unit from having vital information about the conditions and locations of other units in the operation. (Halloway, 1980) The USS Nimitz had the capability of conveying such information with minimal risk to OPSEC. Again, the rigidity of OPSEC protocols, brought about by inflexibly inter-agency protocols led to a critical information gap at a vital time in the mission. (Halloway, 1980) Thus, the lead helicopter had no way of knowing that #8 had recovered the crew of #6 and that #6 had been abandoned in the desert. (Halloway, 1980) Lead also could not determine whether the other elements followed him when he turned back in the dust storm, and where and when the unit had fallen apart. Most significantly, if Helicopter #5 had known that his termination would cause an entire mission abort, he might have more carefully weighed the risks of continuing. Essentially, between the weather and the radio silence, the pilots were flying blind and deaf in enemy territory. (Halloway, 1980) Yet another factor at issue was the decision to limit landing options to a single site near a road in the desert near the Iranian capital. The abandonment of the mission after the landing at Desert One guaranteed OPSEC compromise. (Halloway, 1980) The addition of a secondary landing place for refueling and the on loading of combat personnel would have opened many alternatives for the flyers and other mission decision-makers in determining whether to abort, or accounting to course and destination changes prompted by weather contingencies. (Halloway, 1980) The culmination of these factors was the abortion of the rescue mission, which in turn led to a fatal accident as the pilots attempted to withdraw back to base. The operation was a strategic, tactical and political failure. Counterargument: The conclusion that the deficiencies noted above can solely be laid at the feet of the interagency coordination (or lack thereof) is facile and inaccurate. Indeed, even given the modern day organization of counter-terrorism mission task-forces, this mission was fraught with potential for failure. (Houghton, 2001) Operational security became the end-all consideration for the mission’s success, which determination caused many other factors creating risk to be finessed or ignored. Contingencies such as poor weather and mechanical failure cannot be laid at the feet of poor planning. (Houghton, 2001) The clarity of hindsight makes the deficiencies in operation EagleClaw obvious, but it takes a rather torturous analysis to reach the conclusion that the deficiencies can all be blamed on lack of inter-agency coordination. There are several factors that contributed to the failure of EagleClaw that had little to do with the planning and execution difficulties endemic of multi-agency involvement. (Houghton, 2001) First the fluidity of the political situation called for necessary plan adjustments throughout the preparation phase. Second, the unpredictability of weather played a significant role in the mission failure. Such a factor cannot reasonably be blamed on the planning or practice phases of the operation. Decisions that were based on OPSEC considerations were not necessarily a product of interagency confusion. (Houghton, 2001) While it is true that multiple OPSEC protocols were combined to create a stifling procedure on information, the need for secrecy in this mission was considered of paramount importance to its success. (Houghton, 2001) Conclusion: While several unrelated factors contributed to the failure of Operation EagleClaw, it is indisputable that the compartamentalization of information and the ineffective standardization of protocols contributed to the failure of the mission. (Taillion, 2001) Owing to a faulty intelligence analysis protocol, actors proceeded on faulty intelligence. Operation Security concerns ended up compromising reasonable safely contingencies as well. (Taillion, 2001) A determination of Operation Security parameters would have been much more easily concluded by an inter-agency organization that specializes in anti-terrorist operations and is willing to subordinate specific agency protocols for the sake of mission-specific parameters. (Taillion, 2001) The organization of assets in anti-terrorism operations have since been consolidated in agencies such as Homeland Security, yet operations continue to be hampered by reluctance to share assets, particularly intelligence, between agencies. It is recommended that the culture of competition between agencies be undermined by institutional policies that encourage cross-agency cooperation efforts. (Taillion, 2001) It is further recommended that operation planners for future endeavors be encourgaged to ignore inter-agency discrepancies in favor of protocols most able to facilitate the duccess of the missions.

The 13th Warrior essays

The 13th Warrior essays Ahmed Ibn Fadlan is an Arab courtier who is sent to the barbaric north because he was seduced by a merchant's wife and was sent on an errand by the Caliph as a punishment. Soon, the Arab leaves the City of Peace and starts his travels to the city of Yiltawar. Soon, though, Ibn Fadlan, the pages and guides encounter trouble with the Oguz Turks, but escape death and continue their travels. When Ibn Fadlan is traveling along the Volga River, he comes into contact with the Norsemen, or the Vikings. He describes them as gigantic people carrying broad swords, axes, and daggers. The Northmen's leader, Wyglif had died, and a young noble named Buliwyf was chosen to be the new leader. Then, one of Buliwyf's kin, Wulfgar entered the camp and informed Buliwyf of a dread and unnamed terror that was terrorizing his father, King Rothgar, and his kingdom. Then the Angel of Death came in, and stated that Buliwyf and 12 other men had to go help, but the 13th warrior had to be foreign. It was stated that Ibn Fadlan was to go with the Vikings on their quest to save King Rothgar's kingdom. The 12 other warriors Ibn Fadlan were traveling with were, of course, Buliwyf the leader, Ecthgow, Higlak, Herger, Skeld, Weath, Rethel, Roneth, Halga, Helfdane, Edgtho, and Haltaf. Ibn Fadlan struggled at first to understand his comrades' Norse tongue but eventually after the long journey he learned to recognize and speak a little of it. The Northmen often made fun of Ibn Fadlan and his "clean ways" and his one god, Allah. The Vikings believed that there were many gods, including the all-powerful Odin who helped them in battle. During the long voyage, Ibn Fadlan befriends Herger, who can translate for him. After resting at the encampment at Trelburg, they depart. Upon arriving to their destination of the kingdom of Rothgar in the land of the Venden, they first enter a large hut filled with rotting, decapitated bodies of men, women, and child ...

Family Development in Three Generations essay

Family Development in Three Generations essay Family Development in Three Generations essay Family Development in Three Generations essayThe sociology of the family is based on some theoretical traditions: the structural-functional analysis of the family as a social institutional and the social-conflict perspective on the family. Actually, these theoretical traditions have very much in common, but at the same time, there are certain differences between them. Both of these approaches are focused on the study of the key family issues. However, each of these approaches views families in different ways, providing different definitions to the term â€Å"family†. In general, both the structural-functional analysis of the family and the social-conflict perspective on the family are based on the study of the family, but from different perspectives.   The major goal of this paper is to compare and contrast the structural-functional analysis of the family as a social institutional to the social-conflict perspective on the family.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   T he structural-functional analysis of the family refers to the concept of the family as a social institutional. According to researchers, â€Å"a structural-functional approach defines family in terms of the functions it serves for society†(Kain, 2007, p. 110).   In other words, the family can be viewed as a social institution that bears responsibility for a wide range of social problems, activities and actions including â€Å"procreating, socialization of the next generation, regulation of sexual behavior, protection of members, personality development, and placement of members within the society’s stratification system† (Kain, 2007, p. 110).   Structural-functional theorists place emphasis on the role of family socialization, regulation of sexuality within a family context (the taboos of incest, or sexual relations or marriage between blood relatives) (Hill, 2010). In general, structural-functional analysis gives explanation to the fact that human society d epends on families. This approach has some limitations regarding the diversity of the family life in the U.S., as well as the inability of other social institutions to meet the same human needs. Besides, structural-functionalist approach overlooks some obvious negative aspects of the family life, e.g. patriarchy and family abuse.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   By contrast to the structural-functional analysis of the family, the social-conflict perspective on the family views the family as â€Å"an oppressive institution, which maintains the status quo of unequal power relations – between men and women and between different age groups† (Kain, 2007, p. 110).   This approach explores the connection between inequality and the family, focusing on the ways that the family can benefit society. In other words, conflict theorists explore the ways how the family may perpetuate social inequality. The following issues are discussed by conflict theorists: â€Å"prop erty and inheritance†, the role of patriarchy and race and ethnicity issues (Hill, 2010).   Social-conflict analysis is based on demonstration of the other side of the family life, placing emphasis on the role of the family in social stratification. In general, the family may be closely connected with social inequality, as the family performs some societal functions that cannot be executed by other means.Conclusion   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Thus, it is necessary to conclude that the structural-functional analysis of the family as a social institutional and the social-conflict perspective on the family view the family in different ways, and solve various family problems differently. Nevertheless, there are some common goals of the structural-functional analysis of the family and the social-conflict perspective on the family. These common goals are concluded in the study of family problems to improve the life of men and women, as well as the development of t heir children. Both approaches help to solve various social problems connected with family issues.