| Papers [1-15] of 41 :: [Page 1 of 3] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 —> | Search results on "PELOPONNESIAN FALKLANDS WARS": |
|
|
The Peloponnesian and the Falklands Wars, 2005.
This paper compares and contrasts the Peloponnesian War and the Falklands War.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 5 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper notes that the primary similarity between the Peloponnesian War and the Falklands War is that both wars pitted a maritime power against a land power. The author points out that the primary difference is that the ancient land power Sparta defeated the ancient maritime power Athens; whereas, the modern land power Argentina was defeated by the modern maritime power Great Britain. The paper relates that the Peloponnesian War was the first conflict in human history in which the fighting was witnessed and written about by a true historian.
From the Paper
"Examining the respective causes, strategies, and outcomes of the Peloponnesian War and the Falklands War reveals interesting similarities and differences between these two conflicts. The primary similarity is that both wars pitted a maritime power against a land power, while the primary difference is that the ancient land power, Sparta, defeated the ancient maritime power Athens; while the modern land power, Argentina, was defeated by the modern maritime power, Great Britain. The Peloponnesian War was the first conflict in human history in which the fighting was witnessed and written about by a true historian."
| |
|
The Falklands War: Justification and Misperception, 2002.
Examines both the Argeninian position and the British position on the Falklands War.
1,900 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 12 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The author believes that the war should have never been fought, since it was filled with misperceptions on both sides. Argentina was wrong to think that the British would not respond. The British, meanwhile, were naive in assuming that Argentina would not try to grab the Falklands. At the same time this escalating situation was filled with justification. The Argentines were justified in believing that the British would never go to war over the Falklands. The British, meanwhile, were justified in fighting for the territory. This paper examines these two positions.
| |
|
The Falkland War, 2006.
A historical look at the 1982 Falkland War between Britain and Argentina.
2,126 words (approx. 8.5 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 66.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper attempts to shed light on the events that led up to the 1982 Falkland War between Britain and Argentina by presenting a history of the Falkland Islands. The paper looks at why both Argentina and Britain could each justly claim to be rightful rulers of that territory, as well as why Argentina was prepared to go to war over the Islands and the diplomatic efforts that were undertaken in an effort to avoid the war. The paper also suggests that Britain's defeat of Argentina helped put an end to the tyranny of Argentina's military leader and bring democracy to that country.
From the Paper
"When Argentina splintered off of Spain, it claimed the Falkland Islands as its own: "Following independence from Spain in 1816, the future state of Argentina lays claim to the previous colonial territories, and in 1820 sends a frigate to take possession of the Falklands" (Battle). The British were forced to yield, and the Falkland Islands were technically a part of Argentina for a full decade before the tides of change once more put them up for grabs after Argentina foolishly angered the U.S. "In 1831, after arresting American sealers accused of poaching, Louis Vernet sails . . . for Buenos Aires where the captain is to stand trial. In reprisal, the US warship "Lexington" arrives off Puerto Soledad, destroys the fortifications, arrests some of the people and declares the islands free of government before sailing away" (Battle). The Islands would not remain ungoverned for long."
| |
|
The Royal Navy after Falklands, 2002.
A look at the strengths and weaknesses of the Royal Navy as revealed in the Falklands War [1982].
2,400 words (approx. 9.6 pages), 18 sources, $ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This is a 10-page paper on the strengths and weaknesses of the Royal Navy as revealed in the Falkland War in 1982 with Argentina.
| |
|
Media and Propaganda in Times of War, 2005.
A paper describing the propaganda role the media has played in the past during times of war and the likelihood of it continuing to play that role during times of war in the present era.
3,025 words (approx. 12.1 pages), 378 sources, MLA, $ 88.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper attempts to investigate if the Western media would willingly co-operate as an instrument of propaganda in time of war by examining the attitude of the media in the recent conflicts such as those of Iraq, Yugoslavia and the Falklands. Various views presented in literature are considered along with the prominent opinions that have been presented in order to attempt to reach a conclusion.
Introduction
The Military and the Media in Times of War
Media Bias in Recent History of Wars
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The military denied permission to the media to accompany the Special Forces into Afghanistan and only 29 reporters were permitted to cover the Falkland conflict [Brown 2004]. The reporters covering the Falkland conflict became very friendly with the troops as a result of living together and sharing the facilities as well as the dangers and very favourable reports were presented to the audience even when things went wrong because they were 'our boys' fighting 'our enemies' and this is quite natural in any war [Seppala 2003]. Hence, the presence of 'neutral reports' in a war can do much to enhance the standard of reporting, but even these neutral reporters can be subjected to censorship, information manipulation and denial of cooperation. Even the neutral reporters will not be liked and believed by all. Enlightened generals do understand the requirements to have the media on their side because reporting on the conduct of war can influence key decisions about the war that are made by politicians [Boje 2002]."
| |
|
War on Television, 2003.
An exploration of the coverage of war on television from Vietnam to Gulf 1, in Britain and America.
5,816 words (approx. 23.3 pages), 16 sources, MLA, $ 139.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines television representation of war including topics such as the compiling of news, bias and policy, political perceptions and restrictions. In particular it covers the wars, Vietnam, The Falklands, Panama and the first Gulf War. It also looks at various issues concerning the coverage of war such as the problems broadcasters face, who is responsible for the portrayal of truth and whether the press should or can remain neutral in wartime.
From the Paper
"Television coverage of the Vietnam War appeared like a morality play, presenting the good represented by the American peace offensive and the evil, represented by Hanoi. The newspapers concentrated on covering Vietnam Policy, including increasing American commitment from the administration and the Congress debate over the prospect of escalation. Television news, however concentrated on one theme ? the peace offensive. Television journalists were not always restricted to reporting just the official proceeding of the peace offensive, objective journalism was a forgotten rule in reporting from Vietnam, they shifted from ?straight? reporting to commentary that was fuelled with moral and ideological significance."
| |
|
Thucydides' Peloponnesian War, 2006.
This paper analyzes Greek history in 'The History of the Peloponnesian War' by Thucydides.
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 7 sources, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper, the writer discusses that the historical non-bias of the Greek historian Thucydides is represented in his classical work: 'The History of the Peloponnesian War'. The writer points out that by defining the nature of the Athenian Constitution and the democratic principles that are within state policy, Thucydides often presents the failure of this form of government under Pericles. The writer further notes that the reality of the history presented in this form of early history provides a foundation for non-bias, which helps one to realize how both sides of the war are depicted during the Peloponnesian War.
From the Paper
"The aim of this historical study is to analyze the non-biased account of Greek history within 'The History of the Peloponnesian War' by Thucydides. By realizing the immoral and often unnecessary sense of violence that one Greek would impart another during this conflict, Thucydides attempts to bring to light his disagreement with the war through a Constitutional premise. However, Thucydides does not choose a single side to agree or disagree with through his non-biased account of the war between the Peloponnesian League and The Delian League during this conflict."
| |
|
Thucydides and the Peloponnesian War, 2006.
An analysis of Thucydides account of the Peloponnesian War, focusing primarily on whether the account is historically accurate.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 3 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Thucydides and his account of the Peloponnesian War. The paper considers the historical accuracy of this account and examines the behavior of the Athenians at that time. Secondary sources are used to verify the accuracy of Thucydides' account.
From the Paper
"Thucydides provides probably the most reliable account of the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides was born around 460 B.C. in the city state known as Athens. He participated in the Peloponnesian War and ultimately provided the best historical account of the War and the eventual defeat of Athens. Why is Thucydides' account considered so reliable? The answer is because Thucydides was well known for his historical accuracy and his strong aversion to myth. This means that Thucydides provided a factual account of the political, economic, social and military factors and events in the Peloponnesian War."
| |
|
The Peloponnesian War (431-404 BC), 2008.
This paper looks at the war between Athens and Sparta in 431-404 BC, known as the Peloponnesian War.
1,462 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses the the work of Thucydides in writing the history of the Peloponnesian War (431-404 BC), a struggle between Athens and Sparta and their respective allies. The paper looks at the various stages of the war and their results. The paper also examines the type of society in Sparta and Athens and their different cultures.
From the Paper
"Thucydides lived c.460 c.400 BC and was an Athenian. He is considered by many to be the greatest of the ancient Greek historians, and his work had a profound influence on the development of historical writing. Although he was a relative of the great soldier and statesman Cimon, Thucydides was also an admirer of Cimon's political opponent, Pericles. He served as a general in 424 but was banished from Athens in that same year for his failure to protect Amphipolis from the Spartans. He returned from exile after the war ended in 404. Thucydides began writing his History of the Peloponnesian War in 431 when the great war broke out. In some ways, he was as much a journalist as a historian."
| |
|
Prisoners and the Peloponnesian War, 2006.
An analysis of the treatment of prisoners during the Peloponnesian War and the morality of the ancient Greeks.
3,034 words (approx. 12.1 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how the treatment of prisoners of war and civilians during the Peloponnesian War cannot be considered a fair measure of the Greek (and especially Athenian) ideals of justice and morality. It discusses how the treatment by the Athenians of defeated enemies, allies and citizens of neutral states can be considered unworthy of the enlightened ideals that have characterized the best in Hellenic civilization down through the ages.
From the Paper
"Treating prisoners of war badly is a moral issue because it involves the universally recognized wrong of harming people who are at your mercy and really have no way to protect themselves from whatever you choose to do to them. The ancient Greeks were keenly aware that this was not right (immoral). The fifth-century Athenians were particularly sensitive to the issue because of the origins of their democracy. Their great lawgiver, Solon, was chosen by both the common people and the nobility to reform the state, which was in disarray because of struggles between the two groups. His reforms protected the weaker majority from the powerful, propertied minority and created constitutional mechanisms to make the state serve the needs of all classes. He set up representative bodies where all freemen could play a role in devising and passing the laws that affected the political, social, and economic life of Athens--and their lives. "
| |
|
The Peloponnesian War, 2005.
A discussion on whether it was the Athenians or the Spartans that caused the Peloponnesian War (431 - 404).
1,231 words (approx. 4.9 pages), 7 sources, APA, $ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides an insightful review and analysis of the major events leading up to the Peloponnesian War. It also compares the Spartan and Athenian ways of life and determines if war was inevitable.
From the Paper
"Epidamnus was the catalyst for the war. Epidamnus sought aid from Corinth in a rebellion against Corcyra. A civil war broke out between the democrats and the oligarchs in Epidamnus. Epidamnian democrats appealed to Corcyra for aid and were refused. The oligarchy which ruled Corcyra was sympathetic to Sparta but there was a considerable democratic element which favored joining the Athenian empire. Delphi oracle advised Epidamnus to seek Corinthian aid. Corinth sent aid because Corcyra represented a threat to Corinthian commercial interests. Corcyra demanded that Corinthian's cease aid to Epidamnus, Corinth refused. Corcyra attacked Epidamnus, Corinth prepared to attack Corcyra. "
| |
|
The Peloponnesian War, 2006.
An overview of the Peloponnesian War, the battles fought, the victories won and the turning point of the war.
1,564 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 51.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper takes a look at one of the greatest wars fought in the history of Greece, the Peloponnesian War. The paper explains that while both the opposing sides, the Athenians and the Spartans, controlled a great deal of land and sea power there were actually rather few direct confrontations and this lack of direct confrontations made the battle of Amphipolis all the more important as well as a turning point in the war. The paper explains the significance of this battle by looking at how the war had progressed up to the point of the battle of Amphipolis, by examining the military strength of the warring Athenian and Spartan factions and by explaining the history of the Amphipolis war and the circumstances that made it so devastating.
From the Paper
"The first major explanation for the battle of Amphilpolis's importance as a turning point is the loss of military leaders during its battle. When Cleon, the commanding general of the Athenian land forces marshaled a massive army outside of Amphilpolis to reclaim the city, Brasida also amassed a large army of almost 2000 hoplites and 300 cavalry inside the walls of Amphipolis. When the battle appeared imminent however, Brasida confused Cleon by withdrawing from battle and refusing to fight on the fields outside of Amphipolis. Thinking that the army of Sparta would not come out to fight, Cleon began to withdraw his troops, only then did Brasida storm out of the walls and attack the hapless soldiers of Cleon. In this attack Cleon was killed by one of the commanders of the Spartan forces and in its escape more than 700 Athenians were killed by the onslaught. This resounding defeat was devastating in its numerical loss because the main force of the Athenian army was devastated, but even worse; the most competent general of the Athenian military staff was also killed."
| |
|
The Peloponnesian War, 2006.
A historical review of the Peloponnesian War and its lasting implications.
1,678 words (approx. 6.7 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses and evaluates the Peloponnesian War through an examination of the individuals involved in the war, the circumstances surrounding the war, the culture of the time and the legend of the war.
From the Paper
"Although Athens was on a course of reconstruction and economic development the between Sparta and Athens began to deteriorate. In a rather small war between Corcyra (supported by Sparta) and Corinth (supported by Athens), Athens became subjected to a Spartan siege or a participant in the great Peloponnesian War or wars from 431BC to 404BC. Not only was Athens under continual attack from Sparta but also in 430BC Athens was beset with a plague that lasted several years and consumed almost 25% of the Athenian population. However, even with the plague Sparta was unable to pierce the defensive walls of Athens that linked Athens to Piraeus and as such foodstuffs managed to be brought into the beleaguered city Warner, 1954). As a sidebar note, and absent of any recorded historical evidence, the plague that nearly crushed Athens was thought to be the work of the Spartans - by catapulting their own plague afflicted soldiers over the walls into Athens. In an attempt to rid their city-state area of Spartans Athens sent an enormous army of soldiers (415BC) against the Spartans. As a direct loss of the in the battlefield Athens suffered political uncertainty and in 411BC democracy was officially dismantled and the system was replaced by a council of 400 men who attempted to assert control over all Athens."
| |
|
The Peloponnesian Wars, 2000.
The following essay discusses The Peloponnesian Wars exploring the ways in which Athenian growth lead inevitably to its war with Sparta.
1,860 words (approx. 7.4 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 59.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the ignorance people have had with regards to remembering the Peloponnesian Wars as a major historical event which took place between 431 and 404 b.c. and was fought between the two leading city-states in ancient Greece, Athens and Sparta. This paper retells the story and accounts of the war.
From the Paper
"In order to understand the outcome of the war it is important to understand the nature of the alliances headed by these two city-states. The Athenian alliance might be better described as an empire, for it included most of the island along with the coastal states around the northern and eastern shores of the Aegean Sea. Sparta was no weak opponent, however, for it was the leader of an alliance of independent states that included most of the major land powers Central Greece along with the Peloponnese, joined with the might of the great sea power Corinth."
| |
|
Why Were the Athenians and Peloponnesians Engaged in Conflict 460-404?, 2001.
An essay on the causes of the Peloponnesian War, and the reasons for its longevity.
2,220 words (approx. 8.9 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 68.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the causes of the Peloponnesian War, and the nature in which it took place. It discusses Thucydides' view that the underlying reason for the war was Spartan fear of Athens, as well as the more immediate factors. Finally, it examines how the structure of the Athenian and Spartan states gave the war its longevity, which only ended when an external power, Persia, became involved.
From the Paper
"By 460 Athens, primarily through her navy, had risen to the status of a great power. Her dominance of the Delian League had led to an empire; this generated enough wealth to rebuild her home city which had been destroyed by the Persians in 479. Sparta, by contrast, had been reduced in status; previously the major power in Greece, her lack of a navy had led to Athens' leadership of the Delian League, and now erupted a great rivalry between the two powers. However, there were many restrictions upon both sides on the terms at which they could go to war, and these restrictions, alongside many other factors, would influence the indecisive and prolonged nature of their conflicts over the next half a century. The main source for this period is Thucydides; his reliability, although questioned, is far superior to other contemporary sources, and the huge amount of critical analysis done on his history is a compliment rather than a criticism of his work, as by providing such a detailed and political account he is alone in allowing such debate. Thus, he shapes our analysis of the outbreak of war. For example, what he calls the Peloponnesian War is the period from 431-404, which excludes the previous thirty years of conflict, a period which he treats with lesser detail. As to the outbreak of war, he gives a long account of the events leading up to the war of 431, and to an extent he implies which ones were of greater consequence. However, he qualifies this: 'the real reason for the war is, in my opinion, most likely to be disguised by such an argument. What made war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear which this caused in Sparta' ."
|
|
|
