| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "COLD WAR PRESIDENTIAL POLICIES": |
|
|
The Cold War: An Analysis of Presidential Policies, 2005.
A review of the Cold War, focusing on the presidential policies of the time.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 0 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, caused by the fundamental ideological differences between communism and capitalist democracy. The paper discusses how despite mistrust between Washington and Moscow ever since the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, the threat to the entire world posed by Adolph Hitler and the Nazis compelled them to become Allies in 1941, when the Soviet Union was attacked by Nazi Germany.
From the Paper
"Twentieth century American presidents recognized that the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union was due to the fundamental ideological differences between communism and capitalist democracy. Despite mistrust between Washington and Moscow ever since the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, the threat to the entire world posed by Adolph Hitler and the Nazis compelled them to become Allies in 1941, when the Soviet Union was attacked by Nazi Germany. The uneasy alliance between the Soviet Union and the United States lasted through the war but began to suffer serious problems by 1948 when Stalin ordered the supply corridors closed to Berlin in an attempt to force the Western powers; England, France, and the United States, to leave the city."
| |
|
Presidential Policy Formulation, 2004.
Political briefing and position paper intended to aid President George W. Bush in policy formulation.
5,393 words (approx. 21.6 pages), 18 sources, MLA, $ 132.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This is an all-inclusive paper dealing with a wide range of issues, such as the American economy, in general, and discussing issues, such as budget deficits, tax cuts, medical assistance and benefits for retired people, the weakening American dollar, allocations for the military, intelligence and homeland security, job growth, and the regime and policies of free trade. With regards to security, it features the recent American initiative on the war on terrorism. The issues of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and nuclear proliferation are also discussed, as well as the aspect of the ?future?, as it was viewed from the era of the Vietnam War. Furthermore, the relevance of the Cold War is outlined as a great American victory. Compelling issues, such as the role of oil, OPEC, the Middle East, and the socio-political and economic situation after the incidents of September 11 are also addressed. Additionally, the role of the United States government is outlined and made easy to understand.
From the Paper
"The appreciable factor in the entire issue is the surplus which is estimated at 5.6 trillion dollars spread over the next ten years. There is also a projection of a 500 billion dollar from Medicare surpluses. The democrats on the other hand intend to spend the entire Social security and Medicare surpluses towards paying off debt. This however cannot be a favourable idea since it leaves the government with no table funds. A better and agreeable solution would rather be paying up a whopping 80% of the debt, subtracting 2 trillion dollars from Social security surpluses and using the remaining 600 billion dollars as an investment into the promising avenues of the stock market. Thereafter, a reserve account can be created to haul in the funds that have come by way of medical surpluses which amount to 500 billion dollars added up with an extra 340 billion."
| |
|
The Iraq War and the Presidential Election, 2004.
An examination of how issues of safety affected the outcome of the 2004 presidential election in the United States.
1,450 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The months leading up to the 2004 presidential election between John Kerry and George W. Bush were filled with commentaries and speculations as to what issues most concerned voters. This paper shows that, from a vast array of topics such as health care, employment, social security, taxes, abortion and gay rights, voters at the polls on November 2 proved that what they were most concerned about was safety, thus homeland security and the Iraq war took center stage over all the other societal issues.
From the Paper
"In an October 30, 2004 article for Newsday, Ken Fireman said that during the last days of the campaign, Bush returned to the theme that has sustained him throughout the year: "that he will be more resolute and aggressive than Kerry in battling the terrorists who struck the country on September 11, 2001" and was aided in pressing this theme home by the sudden reappearance of Osama bin Laden on tape outlining his reasons for ordering the September 11th attacks (Fireman 2004). In contrast, Kerry talked about refocusing his campaign on domestic issues such as jobs and health care, yet never quite managed to do so, and has continually been drawn back into exchanges about Bush's handling of Iraq and the war on terror (Fireman 2004)."
| |
|
Presidential Foreign Policy, 2006.
An exploration of foreign policy towards the U.S.S.R. and then Russia under U.S. presidents.
1,190 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares, contrasts and critiques U.S. foreign policy toward the U.S.S.R. (and today Russia) under U.S. presidents Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush. The paper studies each man's philosophies about foreign policy in general. Next, the paper looks to how the president shaped and implemented his policies in to achieve specific goals within the U.S.-U.S.S.R. relationship. The paper also more generally explores each president's ideals and agendas for the U.S., and attempts to understand how his foreign policy toward Russia played into the achievement of those ideals.
From the Paper
"Each president faced different conditions in the country and the world when they took office. Nixon took over the Vietnam War from Johnson, and this colored how he dealt with superpower the USSR during his administration. Since the Communists were funding the North Vietnamese, one of Nixon's policies was to cut off relations with the USSR until they withheld weapons from North Vietnam. Nixon and his National Security Advisor, Henry Kissinger, dubbed this policy "linkage." Author Ambrose notes, "The United States would withhold favors from the Russians until they behaved in Southeast Asia by cutting off the arms flow to Hanoi. Peace would follow" (Ambrose 313). Of course, that was not the case, and most of Nixon's policies revolved around ending the war in Indochina while developing all-encompassing agreements with the USSR to help ensure lasting peace around the world. The Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT), meant to limit weapons on both sides, were some of the most important foreign policy decisions Nixon made regarding the USSR during his administration. In addition, during the Nixon administration Congress passed the War Powers Act, which severely limited the president's power in foreign aggression. All of these occurrences were important in foreign policy, especially with the Soviets."
| |
|
Presidential War Decisions, 2004.
An analysis of U.S. President George W. Bush's war decisions based on Gary R. Hess' book about the Korean, Vietnam and Gulf wars, "Presidential Decisions for War".
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Using the experiences of Presidents Truman, Johnson, and George H.W. Bush in the Korean, Vietnam, and Gulf wars, this analysis examines some of the mistakes of these presidents and whether or not President George W. Bush has learned anything from those mistakes in his war against Iraq.
From the Paper
"If the ultimate use of historical knowledge is to avoid repeating mistakes of the past and using past ideas and techniques that have worked well, then President Bush is not ultimately using historical knowledge in the current war against Iraq. Based on the information provided by Gary R. Hess in "Presidential Decisions for War" regarding the Korean, Vietnam and Gulf Wars, President George W. Bush has not learned from the mistakes of predecessors Truman Johnson and George H. W. Bush. Hess maintains that the nature..."
| |
|
?Presidential War Power?, 2002.
This paper discusses the War Powers Act of 1917 based on Louis Fisher?s book ?Presidential War Power?.
3,015 words (approx. 12.1 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 88.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reports the history of the power of the presidents to declare a state of emergency and to wage war based on the book ?Presidential War Power? by Louis Fisher.This paper explains that the concept of presidential War Powers stands in contrast with the ideas of the framers of the Constitution, who believed that Congress and the President should make the decision to wage war jointly. The author reports that Fisher argues that the War Powers Resolution needs revisiting; that Congress is never conferred with when the United States is involved in military actions.
From the Paper
"International policy continued to be dictated by Congress: although the President was responsible for the army and navy. In some cases, the President would maintain an activist foreign policy, setting an agenda that would be succinctly approved by Congress. This was the case during the Mexican-American War, when President James K. Polk ?notified Congress that ?war exists.?? Calhoun, the most prominent Carolinian politician of the day, was one of the few dissenters. His response was: ?I distinguish between hostilities and war, and God forbid that, acting under the Constitution, we should ever confound one with the other.? (Fisher 32) That members of Congress might even remain this level of circumspection even when the continental United States was attacked by an invading foreign power gives one some impression of the keen grip Congress wished to maintain on war-making authority."
| |
|
The Cuban Missile Crisis and Presidential War Powers, 1995.
Two essays. The first analyzes Kennedy's decision to use a blockade during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The second examines the historical background and legal questions surrounding the Presidential use of war-making power.
2,700 words (approx. 10.8 pages), 3 sources, $ 95.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Kennedy's Decision to Use a Blockade in the Cuban Missile Crisis
During fifty years of the Cold War between the United States and Cuba, the single incident which brought the world closest to nuclear conflict was the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. In the decades since that missile confrontation, historians and political scientists have debated whether the tactics employed by President Kennedy to resolve this dangerous crisis were the most beneficial for the United States in the long run. One of the most controversial tactics used by Kennedy was an air and naval blockade in the waters surrounding the Cuban island. In the short term, it is difficult to argue that this tactic was not the most effective means of resolving the crisis. After all, Soviet cargo ships carrying missiles and components turned back before challenging the US Navy's quarantine line, thus opening the door ..."
| |
|
The Presidential View on the War on Terrorism, 2004.
A discussion of the 2004 Presidential candidates and their views on the war on terrorism.
2,521 words (approx. 10.1 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 76.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The 2004 presidential campaign illustrated the disparity in opinions on exactly what the war on terrorism should include. The major political candidates, Ralph Nader, John Kerry and George W. Bush, all had strong opinions on what they felt should be done, in order to keep America safe. It is these three positions that this paper analyzes. The paper includes a detailed explanation of each candidate's position on the war on terrorism. In addition, the reasoning behind their positioning is discussed. The strengths and weaknesses of their views on terror are evaluated. The paper finally looks at the impact their position had on the outcome of the 2004 election.
From the Paper
"Since September 11th, 2001, the war on terrorism has been an important part of American security and American candidate's political strategy. Although most Americans would agree that they do not wish America to fall victim to another terror attack, whether at home or abroad, there is a wide chasm of how this war should be conducted and what it should entail. From pacifists to war mongers and the majority of mainstream Americans somewhere in between, the war on terrorism is still a topic, even three years after the attacks on September 11th, and will continue to be for the foreseen future."
| |
|
Presidential War Powers, 2005.
This paper discusses the doctrinal development of presidential powers in times of war.
5,750 words (approx. 23.0 pages), 32 sources, $ 135.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reviews the doctrinal development of war powers held by the President as Chief Executive. The author examines legislative war powers enactments, executive war powers initiatives and judiciary war powers-related decisions. The paper focuses on Supreme Court decisions.
From the Paper
"The Constitution of the United States makes the president Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces but does not give to this chief executive unlimited authority to declare war."
| |
|
Change in the Tax Policy of Presidential Candidates, 1992.
An examination of the history of investment tax credit, origins in the Kennedy administration, modifications in the 1992 campaign, and various economists' perceptions of the viability of the tax.
2,025 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 12 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The recent presidential election hinged very much on economic issues, and both candidates focused on economic matters in differing degrees. This discussion involved several themes, notably rebuilding the weak economy and addressing the issue of the deficit at the same time. Whether this is even possible or not is uncertain. A theme in the Democratic candidates' campaigning was a change in tax policy, and here again there were several specific strands to this theme. The candidate called for increased taxes on the wealthy and reduced taxes on the middle class. He called for the use of the investment tax credit as part of an overall tax reform package. The tax policies promoted by Bill Clinton are reminiscent of the tax policies of John F. Kennedy in 1960, and the consequences for Kennedy were business mistrust and uncertainty such as is already being seen by Clinton..."
| |
|
U.S. Cold War Policy, 2002.
Examines the U.S. foreign policy in the 1960s.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 6 sources, $ 63.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Examines U.S. foreign policy in the 1960s. Contends that policy was based on Cold War ideology & policy of containment, especially of Communism. & the Soviet Union. American failure in Cuba & Vietnam. Actions of Presidents Kennedy & Johnson. Cuban Missle Crisis, Bay of Pigs, escalation of war in Vietnam.
From the Paper
"The American failures in Cuba and Vietnam in the 1960s were due in large part to the fear, arrogance and ignorance of Cold War policies that developed in the aftermath of World War II. By the 1960s, the foreign policy of the United States was based on Cold War ideology and the policy of containment of communism, especially Soviet Communism. This policy held sway in Cuba and Vietnam in the 1960s, from Eisenhower to Kennedy to Johnson to Nixon. Containment as a policy became so increasingly entrenched through the succeeding administrations that it carried the strength of an addiction for the leadership of the country. The basis of U.S. foreign policy was the conviction that the world was controlled by two forces---the U.S., representing goodness, and its evil enemy the Soviet Union.
Once this Cold War policy was in effect, it had a life of ..."
| |
|
Presidential Powers In Foreign Policy, 1987.
Discusses the changing role & power of chief executive since WWII & Cold War in Vietnam, Latin America, Bay of Pigs, Iran-Contra affair and War Powers Act.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 7 sources, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"This study will examine the powers of the President in the realm of foreign policy.
As Mc Cracken writes in The President?s Powers, ?Many observers trace the recent trend toward presidential prominence in foreign affairs to President Franklin Roosevelt and World War II? (34).
Although, as Mc Cracken goes on to point out, the President has exercised considerable power in foreign affairs since George Washington?s reign, it was indeed not until World War II and the Cold War that the President has been granted or has simply taken the kind of control in foreign affairs which has resulted in catastrophes which have scarred every President since that time.
As Mc Cracken adds, it was the Vietnam War era which brought into the forefront the struggle between Congress and the(...)"
| |
|
Presidential Power and Nuclear War, 2005.
This paper studies President Eisenhower's secret appointment of CBS head Frank Stanton in 1957.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines President Eisenhower's secret appointment of CBS head Frank Stanton to administer federal communications authority in event of nuclear war. The paper considers the perceived threat of attack that existed in 1957, the actual Soviet capabilities and also looks at the ethical and legal issues raised by Eisenhower's request.
From the Paper
"The Case of Eisenhower's Secret Appointments: Introduction: The American public and its political leaders were badly shaken when in October, the Soviet Union launched Sputnik I, the first artificial Earth satellite. The Soviet achievement undermined Americans'confidence in their technological and industrial superiority. Even more to the point, any rocket booster that could loft a satellite into orbit could deliver a nuclear warhead over intercontinental distances. No defense existed against such an attack, then or now."
| |
|
War in Iraq War on Terror, 2007.
A discussion of how the war in Iraq and war on terror became linked as election issues.
2,646 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 13 sources, MLA, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper the author argues that the war in Iraq was utilized as a persuasive tool to win an election, in which the war was linked to the more global and less definable "war on terrorism." The author further contends that in the 2004 presidential elections the voters were seeking security, and therefore they linked the two issues. This paper demonstrates that the war on terror and the war in Iraq are not connected and in fact contraindicated for the long term safety of the US, specifically with regard to future acts of terrorism. Salient quotes from primary and secondary sources are used to support the author's thesis.
From the Paper
"The importance and reality of this link are now being questioned at every level. People, in both high and low places are questioning the validity of the connection and asking if this aggressive move, on the part of the US, even in the face of much international opposition was in fact appropriate to improve security in the US and her interests all over the world. The political positioning that has become increasingly obvious has undermined the faith of individuals in the nature and necessity of the War in Iraq, as people feel they were sold a bill of goods, rather than leveled with in regards to the strategic importance of the Iraq in the global war on terrorism in both the short and log term. In fact this work argues that the only connection between the war on terrorism and the War on Iraq is that the later has and will continue to serve to increase terrorist activities and actions against the US, no matter how the government spins it."
| |
|
United Nations Policy Formulation and Policy Implementation, 2004.
Provides an overview of United Nations policy formulation and policy implementation in the context of international public administration organizations.
1,478 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines, through a literature review, instances of policies that were developed and not effectively carried out, as well as recent requirements for the formulation of policies put into place at the UN. It looks at how a sustained public information campaign is extremely important for the success of the UN?s attempt to reinvent its system of policy formulation and policy implementation due to all the ?bad news?, including terrorism and war and AIDS, etc., dominating the TV and print news agencies.
From the Paper
"There are myriad examples of the UN?s good work ? in many and diverse areas where there are desperate human needs throughout the world ? and also, on the other hand, there is no shortage of evidence that some policies, although they were drawn up with the best of intentions, failed in their mission, or were thwarted either through no direct fault of the UN, or because the UN?s policy implementation could not match the promises in the policy formulation. One example of the apparent failure of a policy which was to be implemented was recently reported by the British Medical Journal (Tayal, 2003). The journal claimed that a UN policy designed to tackle the health and human rights needs of ?indigenous people? ? a policy which was formulated in 1995 ? has not been very effective in its implementation."
|
|
|
