Theology- Church and Sacraments Essay Example

Theology- Church and Sacraments Essay All of which I am about to write in this short synthesis is solely taken from the book entitled, Church and Sacraments by Victoria D. Corral, Ed. D. Et al. No other reference was used in the makings. The 12 chosen apostles of Jesus Christ were the first footsteps taken to the creation of the Church, which was born from the Fathers plan in order to continue the mission He had done and that is to proclaim the Kingdom of God. The early Christian community was the beginning of the Church as each apostle begins the Journey of spreading His Word to all nations. Despite the universal acceptance of the many, it ad not always been as acceptable as it is now, before in Christs time. The division between Jews and Gentile had been in continuous tension since then. After the death and resurrection of Christ, the apostles had received the Holy Spirit which enabled them to receive the knowledge of His Word and began to preach immediately afterwards. The converts grew and not too long after had others been convince to widen their horizons and soon began preaching to Gentiles as well. Peter, a disciple of Jesus began teaching to the Jews, while Paul (Saul), though untimely born, taught to the Gentiles. The spread and development of the Christian community grew yet as I have stated a while back, it was not readily accepted to communicate with the Gentiles as Jews became more tapped with the Gospel. And amongst these, Paul took on the stubbornness of the Jewish Christians by preaching radical liberations to temples and synagogues. To Paul, the encounter he had with Jesus at the Road of Damascus had sent the message that it is time to break the boundaries that separated these two. We will write a custom essay sample on Theology- Church and Sacraments specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Theology- Church and Sacraments specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Theology- Church and Sacraments specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Paul, who participated in the Council of Jerusalem with other apostles, had defended the Gospel of freedom from the Law and among the iscussed issues was that of Circumcision and keeping the law. The conflict between Paul and the Judaizers, people who believe that he Jewish Law is a must to attain salvation, was resolved when the council had resolved to believe that of Pauls argument. Pauls mission reached as far as the Greco-Roman world with Barnabas as a companion along the Journey. The young Church did not remain at peace when it had first been established. It received much hatred from the Romans who believed that their emperor was Divine and laws were important. As such, the apostle James ecame the first apostle to be martyred during Herod Agrippas persecution of the Church. Christians during this time were blamed for every crime done during then; be it treason, wars, illnesses, and such. Christians did not experience the luxury of life back then having faced death untimely, persecutions, and many devastating events. An example would be the reign of Nero. Nero, who put parts of Rome in fire, blamed the Christians as the cause and caused many to die so he could divert the punishment to him. Peter and Paul had died as well and by then all the apostles had ied by martyrdom, which gave the Churchs image as the Church of the Martyrs. St. Ignatius first coined the term Catholic Church which means the Universal Church. Still, it faces difficulty as people begin to oppose the doctrines of the Church and replaced it with other beliefs. These people were called Heretics or people who commit heresy. Heresy in the East dealt with Arianism which denies Jesus as but only a first divine creature. While the West dealt Donatism which claims that anyone committing a grave sin will never be able to return to grace. During the reign of Emperor Constantine, at a point the Church and State had come to common grounds such that Catholic religion became close to being the national religion, the ranks of popes and bishops were established, and the Arianisms spread was paused due to the establishment of the Council of Nicea. But, not too long afterwards, the-so-called religious purpose had turned political where the Church became subservient to the State and with the change of heart of Constantine to side with Arius after exiling him during the Council of Nicea. The reign of Theodosius became the year where the Catholics had been at its peak as he declared Catholic as the national religion. Despite attempts to regain the lost during the disparities, much of the original doctrines have been shattered. Arianism at some point ended but was again spread due to the coming of the West migrants such as Visigoths. Destroying many Catholic churches and bringing disaster, Roman Empire enters the Dark Ages period. Although, at the time, bishops and popes became more functional in civil authority, it was not of power, but because of the opportunity to impart the religious authority. Afterwards, Catholic Church soon became the Roman Catholic Church. On the other hand, the East maintained traditions and at the Council of Chalcedon, Pope Leo disagreed with the decision to make Constantinople equal to Rome and fought for papal primacy. Written in Pope Leos papacy was the greatest mission taken place that when the empire collapses, the only way to protect all was the conversion of the barbarians. When Christendom was created, it paved the way to the conversion of the barbarians. When Clovis, for example, was baptized, he used the Church in stabilizing moral codes towards his men. Gregory the Great laid the foundation of the medieval Christendom making the pope supreme. But still corruption and abuses remained. Monks also played another role in the Church as they accompany the dissolution of the Empire. The monks who created monasteries allowed intellectual life to continue as the Roman Empire crumble. But it also created a split-level Christianity and this was provided by St. Benedict. He influenced monasticism as a place of religious and economical way where it became a place of learning. He went as far as the West and earned the title Father of the Western Monasticism. After a short while, a new religion came called Islam which had converted many into Moslems. They conquered many Christian based countries such as Jerusalem. The East felt abandoned as the West ignored their plea for help. Charles Martel led the people to victory when he defeated the Moslems and expanded the Church and its defense which was an act inherited by his son Pepin. He earned his legitimacy to the throne from Pope Zachary who was later succeeded by Pope Stephen. It became traditional that the pope crowns a king when Pepin helped Pope Stephen defeat the Lombards which made Pope Stephen to crown Pepin a second time. Pepins second son Charles or Charlemagne was considered the best ruler at the time since he was ble to unify the Western Europe making Europe Christendom, put all disagreements towards Pope Leo Ill away, and united the Church with the State. But it could not be avoided that Charlemagne became concerned with the matters involving both the government of the Catholic body and life in Church. He, in a way, had taken authority over the Church and it was not the kind of alliance the Church had thought it would turn out. By the 800-1517, papacy and imperial authority began to fade. Although in the 10th century, it had revived much of the power and authority had moved to the emperor, both papal and imperial. This happened in the Kingdom of the East Franks led by Otto the Great who was said to have continued Charlemagnes seeking of the crown from the pope. Otto had great use of the Church making bishops his greatest collaborators since bishops were intellectually learned and bore no child which made it easy for him to replace one. He collaborated with the Church by granting it an independence of a Papal State and the no Pope would be consecrated until he had pledged to the emperor. As the years move on, Feudalism was introduced and it was not warmly welcomed by the Church as its negative effect reached until the Church itself and its bishops. When the bishops became feudal lords, it made monasteries and Episcopal Sees wealthy, but it had come from the labor of the helpless people who were subjugated to be part of the feudal system. It created corruption which reached the monasteries, suffering the consequence was their spiritual life. Thus a new monastic foundation was created to counter the abuses. The monastery of Cluny was one of the two monastic reforms that led to the revival of the monastic life. Clunys monks had been given freedom from the interferences of the feudal lords, granting them the ability to spread Benedictine monasticism quiet prayer and ignified performance of liturgy. Bernard of Clairevaux was the second movement of monastic reform. Considered one of the greatest spiritual leaders, became a counselor to the popes and kings. The birth of two mendicant orders happened afterwards. The Franciscans and Dominicans, which inspired the renewal and rejection of abuse in the Church. During Pope Gregory VII (Hildebrand)s rule as pope, he strengthened the Churchs control over itself by giving all power to the pope, making it the supreme head of Christendom. He issued a document called Dictatus Papae(Dictates of the Pope) giving authority to the pope. It also raised the dominance of the code of canon law which made the Church more institutionalized. Many of his reforms included the prohibition of lay investiture, simony, and clerical celibacy. Developing even more, in the rule of Innocent Ill, the Church became more of a papal church and through the Gregorian reform, in hopes of the freedom from secular control; the church became worldly and greedy. Yet despite that, the Popes control over the Church intensified and Christendom experienced its golden age. Through the 13th century under the rule of Pope Urban II, the Church became known s an imperial Church as it waged into war. Knights fighting to recover the Holy Land from the Moslems were called Crusaders. Pope Urban II promised eternal reward to those who Joined and it did not take long for people to be attracted. But despite the main motive of retrieving the Holy Land back, some had Joined for the sake of land and material possessions. Many had died, but according to them, they slaughtered because Deus vult(God wills it). A total of seven Crusades were followed. In the First Crusade called by Pope Urban II, Antioch was retrieved from Moslems, broke through Jerusalem, massacred both Jews and Muslims, retrieved Jerusalem, regained influence of Rome to the East, Crusaders were honored and given indulgence, and exempted from taxes. In the Second Crusade called by Pope Eugene II, due to lack of unity among leaders, the Muslim took hold of all the land the Crusade took, including Jerusalem. In the Third Crusade led by Frederick Barbarossa, who died drowning with his army; Duke of Austria and Philip Augustus, who did not get along with Richard the Lionhearted; and Richard the Lionhearted, who did gain control of some lands, were ll considered as a failed attempt to re-capture Jerusalem as the people became more concerned with the treasures rather the Jerusalem. In the Fourth Crusade and the succeeding Crusades, no attempts of retrieving Jerusalem ever happened again. They ransacked and stole treasures and such destroying churches and caused the Church to split. There was violence and the separation between east and west gotten worst as the Empire weakened and the papacy lost stature. But despite the disadvantages that happened, there were several advantages as well. They opened trade routes, introduced new products like soaps and spices, brought wealth to the West, advance learning on Mathematics and Science, brought philosophical works from Greece, and through all the new discoveries made by the Crusade, it eventually led to the period called Renaissance. But the Crusade was still considered as one of the dark pages of the Dark Ages. Another dark page is the Inquisition started by Innocent Ill. This began due to the desire to eliminate those who are heretics and intending to be both a spiritual leader and a political master, Pope Innocent Ills plan backfires on him as he became the first Pope to apply force in suppressing religious opinion. Back in 1054, during the schism of the East and West, the opposing views of the two sides caused an even greater disparity as they resent each others claims. When Michael Cerularius became patriarch of Constantinople, there was little respect towards the papacy and when the Pope insisted that all living in the West must bow to western rituals, so did the Easts insist on their side. Refusing to acknowledge that preaching could be preached in other languages, Rome and Constantinople ended the connection and separated from each other. Both leaders on the Orthodox Church (East) and Roman Church (West) excommunicated one nother. And with the Fourth Crusade happening at the time, who ransacked Constantinople, only disintegrated the relationship of both Churches and until now remains divided. Now the once spiritual beginning of the Church has become political and divided. In the Avignon Papacy, seven popes established their residence at Avignon, France being precedent by Clement V. His desire for peace between France and England made him establish a new residence but failed. The Avignon papacy weakened the papal authority and eventually leads to the Great Western Schism. Due to the Avignon papacys seventy year absence from Rome, it caused the Great Western Schism which had two popes at the same time, namely Urban VI, who was chosen by the citizens of Rome and Clement VI, who was elected by French cardinals in Avignon as anti-pope as a question to Urban VIs legality. During this time, the division between papal authorities grew and dividing the nations to whom they take orders from as well. Confusion and the need for political control grew in parallel to it. Creating a solution to the crisis, the Concilarism was brought forth. A council took place at Piza where the bishops decided to depose both Popes and lected Alexander V who was succeeded by John XXIII, but both Popes refused making the schism last for 40 years. By the end of the schism, the Council of Constance deposed two claimnants, John XXIII and Gregory XII for the sake of harmony in the Church and thus electing a new Pope, Martin V. Although the papacy triumphs in the concilarism, they did not succeed in reestablishing spiritual leadership over Christendom. Martin V succeeds much in terms or political restoration, but failed to restore the Church and due to this failed attempt, the Protestant Reformation came about. During the 14th to the 16th century, the Renaissance movement had greatly affected the Church as well. Popes became preoccupied with luxury and war, monasteries became consumed with wealth and corruption, learning of Theology as a study of the Scriptures in daily life became nothing more than lifeless teachings. Some tried to recover the essence of the Scriptures like John Huss and Savonarola, but died in flames as heretics. This was also the time where several people became influential in canonizing Christian faith. St. Vincent Ferrer, who spread and brought countless people to repentance; St. Bernandine of Siena, condemning the abuses; and St. Catherine of Siena, who convinced Pope Gregory Xl to return and restore papacy of Rome. At the time the Renaissance began, as I have stated in the last paragraph, it was a time of political improvement but a radical decrease in spiritual growth. The Church fell into corruption, politics, unworthy cardinals, failure to call for a reform council, and such. Popes such as Alexander Xl and Sixtus, failed to uphold the standards of the Church by appointing cardinal seats to family members causing a great imbalance to religious functions. Pope Pius II who wanted the reform trying to limit the involvement of the Pope in political matters, died before issuing it. Several reforms were made by the people who remained in faith with God and despite those in the higher positions failing to be models of Christian faith, simple priests and monks continued to show love and care towards the people. A reform later on called Protestant Reformation became another stone to the Church we see now. At the year 1517-1900, Martin Luther cries out a reform publishing his famous Ninety-Five Theses. At the very beginning, Luther was a monk of the Order of St. Augustine, who kept monastery rules and spent much time studying the Bible where he came to realized that it is by grace through faith that everyone is saved and not by good works. During his time, the selling of indulgence was at its peak and many believed that as they pay their indulgence, their sins are cleanse but Luther knew better. Luther knew how corrupted the Church had become and how money or good works will not save a person. He also knew how people relayed on the external ways man could come up of easy salvation and thus, he passed his writing, Ninety-five Theses, to the Church. Unknown to him, his writings had been translated and sent out to numerous people and many had negative reactions towards it, yet Luther had no intentions of making rebellions act but only share and discuss. A priest complained about him in Rome and a hearing was made whether Luther was a heretic and that he rewrite his writings, but he refuses and continued writing. In December 1520, a papal document stating that if he continues his acts, Luther would be excommunicated arrived to him. Along with others who had the same belief as he, burned the document and on January, he was excommunicated. Luther in the ollowing years was unable to control the movement but despite that, it was evident that in every movement, Luthers cry was in it. Another movement was under Ulrich Zwingli and John Calvin, which gave birth to Churches now called Reformed and Presbyterian. But the tensions between the two opposing groups cause the thirty years war which was the b test war in Europe. Although there were some g in the Reformation, it was not to Luther, whose intentions were purely religious which escalated into bloodshed and political conflict. Not only that but it had divided the one church into many and hostile churches as well. When the time came where the Catholic Church finally decided to address Luthers questions, the split between the two groups were far too wide already to which still remains today. As a counter- reformation by the Catholic Church was put up, Pope Paul Ill summoned the Council of Trent and made several meetings, some of which were unfruitful, and others of which made progress. The council, after much discussion, answers Luthers question by making the model of the Church as a hierarchical society. The council also reaffirmed the doctrine as salvation that comes from grace, but required good works contradicting Luthers and the Bible), tradition of the Church is source of authority with the Bible, Pope as supreme head of the Church, seven sacraments chosen by Christ, Christ is present in the bread and wine of the Eucharist, saints are intermediaries, and Mary is mother of God and the Church. To assure that all is as followed, Pope Paul Ill instituted the Congregation of the Holy Office or the Inquisition. The Jesuits played an important role as well. Pledging absolute obedience to the Pope, the Jesuits who were intellectually learned made it inevitable that they would be at the forefront of the Catholic resistance to the Reformation. The Council of Trent became an evident fact of the difference between Catholic teaching and Luthers teaching. The council ended when Pope Pius IV approved all their decrees. After all these events, the Catholic Church returned into a Papal Church, Catholic missionaries went back to spreading their religion, Catholic religion grew, but remained as a European Church and Popes became less concerned with civil and political issues. In 1700s, a new philosophy came about called the Age of Reason or Age of Rationalism. The Age of Enlightenment was an intellectual movement where reason is the primary source of legitimacy for authority. It was ushered by Francis Bacon and Rene Descrates. Several philosophers like Spinoza and Emmanuel Kant stated the reason alone can help mankind arrive to truth which is why the motto of the Enlightenment period was Take courage to use your brain. During the Enlightenment period, people began to think that if every man can reason out, why must they be dictated what to do? Thus, people came to the point where freedom to decide for themselves, opened up. A movement called Freemansory took place, wherein they believed in doing good works based on human motives making people began to oppose the Church. To begin with, the philosophers were not technically anti-Christians, simply questioned the narrow-minded thinking of the belief. Some scholars took the time to re-evaluate themselves as well in their understanding of the Bible which led them to a conclusion that some things in the Bible can be understood literally, some had no contradiction with mans explanation, and some biblical truths were open for various interpretations. In the years that passed, the Age of Reason turned into the Age of Revolution due to the battle of individual rights which reached the lower class particularly in France. This caused the French Revolution where division between the rich and poor grew wider. Most nobility at the time had despised the Church for its inability to understand freedom of self. Not only was society divided but even the clergies who were divided by social statuses. The French Revolution was the climatic end for the Enlightenment as the Freemasons stir the people into going against the Church. Despite good attempts to make the French Revolution a nonviolent event, it turned into war as the common people found it no good to simply consult the King, rather they took everything into a radical and omprehensive reform changing the traditional governance into a governance free of controls. By removing King Louis XVI as King, they could gain the freedom they sought, but with Louis decision to bring in mercenary troops, the subtle reform turns bloody. In the following events prior to the plans and orders of Louis, many bishops and priest against to the idea of making the church into a state-run church and that the positions of priest and bishops were to be elected by the people. The priest and bishops who were against such solutions were either exiled or killed. Thousands of onasteries were destroyed and in 1793, Louis XVI was beheaded. The French Revolution ended the reign of the Church in Europe. Leading the army, Napoleon Bonaparte restored the countrys order and conquered Western Europe and was threatening Russia. He invaded Italy when Pope Pius VI sided against the revolution, but Pius died not long after. To gain more support for his rule, he re-established the Catholic Church in France where several terms which the bishops and priests had declined before was made. The Pope agreed to the terms which granted the bishops and priests salary in return for agreeing to the terms. When Napoleon was to be crowned emperor, Pope Pius VII was asked to crown him only to find himself imprisoned and Napoleon crowning himself as a sign of insult to the pope. Pius VII excommunicated Napoleon, while Napoleon imprisoned Pius VII for 6 years. When Napoleon was defeated at the Battle of Waterloo, the Congress of Vienna returned the peace and order of France after 30 years. It went back to the monarchial way and Pius VII was returned to Rome. Despite returning to old ways, much of what happened in the French Revolution was visible that civil divorces, civil marriages, and reedom of religion were evident. A great secularization became the consequence of the French Revolution. After the end of Napoleons reign, the Catholic Church took for a better turn as it had a great revival both spiritually and intellectually through the effort of Pope Pius X. King Louis XVIIIs return to the throne brought relief to the Church as he returned the Papal State to Rome, religious order long restrained in France, and many more which made the Church flourish once again. The rule of Pius IX as pope was considered as the longest papacy in history. Concerned with many hings that had changed during the French Revolution and the Enlightenment period, he condemned modern errors and those associating liberalism, rationalism, and the likes. His power reached climax when he called bishops to Rome for Vatican Council I defining papacy primacy and papal infallibility. In the 19th century a new era called Industrialization was formed which made the Industrial Revolution possible where the improvement of technology changed the lives to people creating many divisions and insufficient wages. Pope Leo XIII issued the encyclical Rerum Novarum which ought for the dignity of workers, making him the first pope to concern with social problems. Industrial Revolution and Rationalism soon turned into Modernism trying to interpret Christianity in modern understanding. And as changes go on, many following popes came to defend and did not side with the modernism. John XXIII became the new pope and announced a meeting of an Ecumenical Council would meet. He saw that the Church could not adapt to the changes of the modern world He called forth the Curia for a preparatory work for the Second Vatican Council. The purpose was to promote unity and adaptation to the new world changing many hings in the way they perceived things. It also declared Religious Freedom where all may choose whichever they choose as religion no longer having Catholicism as mandated. After the death of John XXIII, many had mourned for his death as he became a legend in the eyes of men changing the way Catholic religion viewed the world. He was succeeded by the following afterwards: Cardinal Montini (Paul VI), John Paul l, John Paul II, and Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict WI). Making realized to one man the importance of knowing the Churchs rich and long yet fulfilling history.

Following Her Heart †Creative Writing Story

Following Her Heart – Creative Writing Story Free Online Research Papers Following Her Heart Creative Writing Story Once upon a time, in the early 19th century a girl from a low class society lost her parents. She was left alone at the age of 14 and was looked after by her Aunty Rose. Aunty Rose, herself, had a family so she couldn’t spend a lot of time with Geneva. Geneva was a tall, slim girl with very blonde hair, so blonde, that it looked almost white. Her sparkling blue eyes showed her naà ¯ve behaviour towards life. Already for a month she was being raped by a neighbour who was supposed to take care of her, while Aunty Rose was away. Geneva was told not to tell anyone about this or she would be killed. It began gradually from making comments that the neighbour shouldn’t say to the whole sexual abuse. Then it was happening almost every time when Aunty Rose was not here. â€Å"Ok Geneva, I have to go, see you in a week.† Said Aunty Rose and as usual turned to Paul. â€Å"Paul will not look after you dear.† She said, smiling at Paul and leaving him with Geneva. In the evening Paul as usual went to play cards and after he cam back, he asked Geneva to undress. Geneva couldn’t bare it anymore and with a scream ran outside. She was running †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. and it was difficult for her to find a way because the pine forest crept in on all sides and †¦.. the trees were thickly grown. She came to an old house and fearing that she was chased, got inside. The air was hot and foul. Spider webs covered the whole place. It was dark and only on the second floor light was seen. She approached the stairs and began moving to the second floor. When she approached the room, it was deserted. She looked inside the window and saw an image. Geneva jumped backwards to the wall and recognized her mother. She could see her mother’s tears running down her cheeks. Geneva saw the sorrow on her mother’s face. The Geneva heard a voice. â€Å"I came here to warn you not to go back, follow your heart and you will find a peaceful place to live.† After these words her mother vanished. Geneva came out of the house and confused went to the direction she was looking at, following her heart. Research Papers on Following Her Heart - Creative Writing StoryThe Spring and AutumnThe Masque of the Red Death Room meaningsMind TravelThe Hockey Game19 Century Society: A Deeply Divided EraPersonal Experience with Teen PregnancyHarry Potter and the Deathly Hallows EssayComparison: Letter from Birmingham and CritoHip-Hop is ArtUnreasonable Searches and Seizures

HR Working Practices & Patterns Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3750 words

HR Working Practices & Patterns - Essay Example Industrial Revolution: Industrial revolution brought in picture big organizations and factories first in England and later in North America. The concept of Economies of Scale also came in the picture according to which large people were required to work to achieve cost benefits. The involvement of large number of people in work areas brought complexities. In the initial days, however, the emphasis was more on machines than people. The working conditions favored machines and their efficiency rather than people and their capabilities. As a result, working conditions were dismal for people. Welfare/Social Secretaries: The growing issues associated with the work force, made them raise their voices against human problems. Employees started forming Unions to make their voices heard. In order to deal with such issues the post of welfare secretaries or social secretaries was created. This can be considered as the most primitive form of HR function after the industrial revolution. The initial task of such secretaries was to keep workers from directly reaching managers for their grievances. Secondly, they were required to discourage employees from dealing with unions or forming unions for their problems. The creation of the post of secretaries can be considered a move to give a specialized status of dealing with the issues related to employees. Before such posts were created operating managers were also dealing with the issues of employees. The creation of these new posts relieved operation managers of this extra burden. Birth of Scientific Management: Frederick Taylor was the person who put forward the concept of scientific management. He emphasized on the inclusion of scientific study in the management arena. He suggested improvement in management practices i.e. study of different situation be carried out to bring about improvements. He basically worked on A steel plant called Bethlehem Steel Plant and studied the typical procedures and made his recommendation to improve the whole process. He also introduced an incentive system to improve the whole process and so human capital management made an important component of his study. "He worked out an incentive system that paid each man $1.85 a day for meeting the new standard, an increase from the previous rate of $1.15. Productivity at Bethlehem Steel shot up over night" (Daft 1997). Primitive HR: 1900 brought primitive HR departments within large organizations like AT&T. So welfare secretaries were replaced by these new departments that were called personnel department. This change started from the period ending World War I. "While historians disagree on the specific date assigned to the appearance of the first personnel department, most agree that, between 1900 and 1920, more organizations were employing specialists to assist with personnel matters" (Jamrog & Overholt 2004). Their tasks generally included compensation handling, dealings with unions and other employee concerns. Though a separate department was dealing with the needs of employees, but production, finance and to some extent marketing was considered important functions or departments. However, with the passage of time the personnel department started getting more attention from top management. Hawthorne Studies: Hawthorne studies conducted at Western Electric's Hawthorne plant can be considered instrumental in bringing changes in the HR function.

Penetrating testing techniques Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Penetrating testing techniques - Research Paper Example This article will analyze some of these modern computer attacks, how they happen and ways of mitigating them. A DDoS attack is an ill attempt to make a network or server resource unavailable to users, often through disrupting or suspending the services of a connected host from the internet. The DDoS attack can be achieved by two main ways. First, the attacker, using malware or Trojan can take over several computers on the internet, creating a botnet in the process. Secondly, the attacker then controls the affected computers and makes them attack simultaneously the target thus achieving their initial goal (Gu & Liu, 2007). The DDoS attacks can be resolved, mainly through the incorporation of blocking and detection mechanisms, that apply even during the spoofed attacks, when attacker profiles and identities are constantly changing. Others include, giving more complete capabilities of verification than either IDS signatures or static routers filters can provide. Prevent dependence on configuration changes or network device resources. In-built intelligence processes being infused with only contaminated traffic packets that would guarantee minimum scaling costs and maximum reliance. Implement procedures for communication standards to help guarantee maximum reliability and interoperability. Blocking and identifying individual spoofed packages to guard genuine business transactions (Patel & Patel, 2014). TCP session, or session hijacking, is generally a means of taking over a session of a web user by obtaining surreptitiously the session Id and pretending to be the official session user. Once accessed, the invader can pretend to be the official user and freely access and manipulate data as they please. Hackers popularly use routed IP packets from the original source to hijack a session. Through re-routing the communication to go through his computer, he can communicate with the different machines simultaneously. An effective example of such

Iran-Iraq War Essay Example for Free

Iran-Iraq War Essay The Iran-Iraq War is considered as one of the longest and most violent battles in history. This eight-year long armed conflict was actually the result of many events. The rivalry between Iran and Iraq can be traced from the seventh century. It was a rivalry grounded on the antagonism between Persians and Arabs, just as it was based on the conflict between Sunni Muslims and Shi’a Muslims. These ethnic and religious divisions were further intensified by territorial disputes, which would continue until the 20th Century. In addition, politics played a role in initiating the war itself. The rivalry existed many years ago, but the war was aggravated by the changes in governance in both countries. The Iran-Iraq War was a violent combat between the aforementioned nations from September 1980 until August 1988. The conflict was only stopped with the intervention of the United Nations. The battle proved to be a long and tedious one, as the tension between the countries extended for years. There were also countless casualties as a result of the disastrous occurrence. When the war ended, neither nation could truly be declared the victor. Both Iran and Iraq did not succeed in gaining new territories or political advantages. It is important to note that Iraq was the nation responsible for starting the war. However, the aggression of Saddam Hussein was not the main cause of the war’s occurrence. In fact, there is no single cause to be blamed for the war. The origins of the Iran-Iraq War are deeply rooted in ethnic, religious and territorial conflicts which date back from the seventh century; it was exacerbated in the modern era due to ambitions of dominance. This term paper aims to discuss the reasons behind the Iran-Iraq War on two accounts: the dispute over the Shatt al-Arab river and the political tension caused by the Islamic Revolution and the rise of Ba’ath regime. The Iran-Iraq War occurred because of various reasons. The conflict between the two nations involved was characterized by other conflicts. The tension that had long persisted between Iran and Iraq were caused by differences in religious beliefs and political positions, as well as disagreements on the borders (Iran Chamber Society [ICS], 2009). The problem between the countries was fueled by the problems between the following opposing parties: Sunnis and Shia Muslims, Arabs and Persians, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and Saddam Hussein (Ehteshami Hinnebusch, 1997). Moreover, both Iran and Iraq sought to gain supremacy in the region (Brown, 2008). The Iranian-Iraq War which started in September 1980 was a testament to the extended conflict regarding the boundaries of their territories and their share in the Shatt al-Arab river (Hunseler, 1984). The war was also a result of the struggle of both parties to become the most dominant and influential in the region. However, it is important to point out that there is a significant difference between the 1980 war and the conflicts prior to it. The early conflicts between Iran and Iraq were settled with the interference of European countries which only meddled to safeguard their respective interests. As for the 1980 war, both sides fought to preserve their own interests. No external power intervened with that war. Two main reasons why the conflict became prolonged are the mutual disputes over territory (especially the Shatt al-Arab) and the involvement of both sides in the domestic problems of the other (Hunseler, 1984). The Beginning of the Persian-Arab Conflict The origins of the conflict between Iran and Iraq started many centuries before both nations were established. It is important for one to be familiar with the history of the conflict why the 1980 war began in the first place. According to Hunseler (1984), the Iran-Iraq tension had its roots in the seventh century with the Arab-Persian conflict. It was this centuries old rift which ignited the battle over the Shatt al-Arab. Persia stood out from the others because despite being under the control of the Arabs, it retained its national identity (Hunseler, 1984). In AD 636, the Sassanids of Persia lost to the armies of Arab General Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas at the Battle of Qadisiya. Meanwhile, the Persian Empire became dissolved in AD 642 due to the Battle of Nihawand. While they held on to their state’s culture and territorial honor, the Persian population embraced Islam in the aftermath of the collapse of the Persian Empire. The Arabs and the people they conquered viewed Islam and Arabism as a union. However, despite being under the influence of Islam, the culture of Persia cannot be restrained (Hunseler, 1984). An important thing to consider in understanding the history of Persia and its political and social existence is what Hunseler (1984) called the â€Å"juxtaposition of Persia and Islam† (p. 8). The principle was said to have been derived from the notion of the state based on Zoroastrianism. According to the Zoroastrian notion of a state, it must have the following: â€Å"a secularly-legitimized kingship, the survival of the Persian language and the proud awareness of a distinct Persian history† (Hunseler, 1984, p. 8). After two centuries, the Sunni-Arab Abbasid caliphate had become interested in the Persian literature (Hunseler, 1984). In time, the Persian families which belonged to the caliphate of the Abbasids began to assume control by grabbing power repeatedly. From AD 954 until 1055, the Buyid dynasty possessed enough authority to manipulate politics in the western portion of Persia and Iraq. In addition, they also had the power to strictly limit the function of the caliphs of Abbasid to religion only. This was the reason why the legacy left by the Buyids in Iraq was considered as the conflict between Persianism and Arabism (Hunseler, 1984). In the 17th century, the Safavids in Persia declared Shi’ism as the state religion (Hunseler, 1984). The Safavids exerted influence on Persia for 15 long years; they stayed in the state from 1623 to 1638 (Hiro, 1991). The declaration was seen as Persia’s attempt to establish its boundaries and separate itself from Arab nations while keeping the matters under the influence of Islam. Shi’ism became a crucial part of Islamic history, as it was the first to present a rift in the unified world of Islam. This was because Shi’ism founded itself in a separate state. The kings of the Safavids considered themselves as mainly secular leaders; they assigned the religious functions to the theologians. In turn, the Shi’a ministers did not want to give up their posts which were assigned to them under the Safavid rule. Most especially during the time of the Qajar leaders, the clergy were given money and land. The awarding of such gifts allowed them to be financially independent from the king; it also gave them the opportunity to exert political influence. Meanwhile, no such similar progress had occurred in the Sunni Arab states (Hunseler, 1984). The Sunni-Shi’a Problem The existing Persian-Arab conflict had taken a complicated turn with the addition of yet another conflict: the Sunni-Shi’a problem (Hunseler, 1984). The problem was not exactly about tension between the differing branches of Islam. Instead, there was antagonism due to the amount of influence that a particular religion has on the development of political power in the state. The conflict continues at present day, as there are still areas wherein the Arab communities consist of both Sunni and Shi’a factions (Hunseler, 1984). Those who head the Shi’a clergy in Arab countries such as Iraq and Bahrain found difficulty in assuming certain social positions (Hunseler, 1984). In Persia, the Shi’a clergy had no problems exerting influence in society because Shi’ism was revered with national significance. In addition, Shi’a leaders faced with two issues regarding loyalty. First, they encouraged the spread of Shi’ism in states whose population were not exclusively Shi’a. Therefore, they became involved in the centuries-old conflict between the Shi’a and Sunni. Second, they were victims of the suspicions of Arab rulers who thought they were submitting to the influence of non-Arabs (Persians). They were often seen by their Arab counterparts as promoting non-Arab causes. This situation caused the Arab Shi’as to be constantly detached from their political leaders. The separation was also caused by doubt on secular leadership, as well as Shi’a millennialism (Hunseler, 1984). The Persian-Arab conflict and the attempts of both sides to become more dominant and influential than the other in the Middle East became evident in areas where the Sunni and Shi’a groups, and the Arabs and Persians, fought against each other (Hunseler, 1984). Even though the Persians and Arabs in the Arabian peninsula had the Persian-Arab Gulf to set them apart in terms of geography, the conflict eventually made itself apparent on the boundaries on land. This was the primary reason why the conflict persisted for many years; both sides incessantly tried to acquire the territories of the other and the quest for a mutual border dragged on (Hunseler, 1984). The Origin of the Conflict over the Shatt al-Arab The conflict between Iran and Iraq over the Shatt al-Arab river originated in the 17th century and began as the rift between the Ottoman Empire and Persia (Hunseler, 1984). The sultan of Turkey, Murad IV, captured Baghdad in 1638 and the initial resolution regarding the boundaries with Persia was drafted a year later. The Kurds and the Armenians occupied the north while the Arabs dominated the south. The boundary fell on areas wherein the tribes did not consider either the Persians or Turks as their masters. As a result, the border settlement was drafted with consideration to the tribes and the names of the places. The agreement also took in consideration the intention of both parties to unite the tribes of Istanbul or Esfahan. The Kurdish-Armenian boundary caused many conflicts after it was established, but order was always restored in reference to the 1639 resolution. Unfortunately, the 1639 agreement proved lacking in setting the boundaries in the Shatt al-Arab region. On one hand, Persians believed the river itself was a natural border. On the other hand, the Turks upheld the claim that the river belonged to the Ottoman Empire. According to the Turkish point of view, the Arab tribes which occupy both sides of the river are considered a single entity from Arabistan. Arabistan is part of the Ottoman Empire. Hence, the Shatt al-Arab was to be considered as under the possession of the Ottoman Empire (Hunseler, 1984). In the 19th Century, boundary problems continued. In 1823, a boundary problem surrounding the Muhammarah surfaced and Persians settled in the city (Hunseler, 1984). Both Russia and Great Britain extended their assistance on the matter. On May 15, 1843, a boundary committee was formed and gathered in Erzerum, a city in Turkey. The committee consisted of representatives from Turkey, Persia, Russia and Britain. A treaty was created on May 31, 1847, and contained three major guidelines. First, Muhammarah and its harbor, as well as Khidhr Island, were awarded to Persia. Meanwhile, Turkey was granted admission to Zuhab and Sulaymaniyah. Second, the committee was designated â€Å"in situ† to delineate the specific course of the boundary (Hunseler, 1984, p. 11). Lastly, the Ottoman Empire was given the entire Shatt al-Arab extending to the marker on the east, except for the territories mentioned above (Hunseler, 1984). The treaty of 1847 was rather ambiguous, and its inherent vagueness proved to be its biggest flaw (Hunseler, 1984). The treaty did not address the question of which nation had the responsibility over the eastern shore. While the Shatt al-Arab was placed under Turkish jurisdiction, the specifications of the border were not indicated. Turkey wanted to resolve the issue over the treaty’s vague statements regarding Arabistan/ Khuzistan. As a result, Russia and Great Britain included an â€Å"explanatory note† to assert that the problem raised by Turkey was not compromised by the treaty’s lack of clarity (Hunseler, 1984, p. 11). Turkey declined to approve the treaty until Persia acknowledged the note as part of the treaty (Hunseler, 1984). Mirza Muhammad Ali Khan acknowledged the note and signed the treaty as a delegate of the Persia. After the Persian administration discovered the inclusion of the added note, it nullified the treaty and failed to approve it. They argued that the Persian representative had no power to sign the document (Hunseler, 1984). To address the issue, the boundary committee inspected the Turkish-Persian border from 1850 until 1852 (Hunseler, 1984). Unfortunately, the commission was not able to do its job properly because of the opposing claims of Turkish and Persian commissioners. Persia maintained that they were given the entire expanse found east of the Shatt al-Arab, while Turkey opposed the claim. The committee was unable to provide a definite proposition to solve the problem. While the committee continued its efforts in the northern area of the Shatt al-Arab, the determination of the boundaries of the river’s region was postponed indefinitely (Hunseler, 1984). Persia was relentless in its efforts to claim territories and continued to bring up its border issues in the succeeding years. Persia sought Russia and Britain to mediate on the border problem (Hunseler, 1984). Persia wanted to share control of the Shatt al-Arab with Turkey; the state also wanted to discuss the rights with regards to the harbor. Unfortunately, Britain and Russia were not in agreeable terms since the mid-19th Century. Hence, both nations were not prepared to mediate in behalf of the Shatt al-Arab tension. On August 31, 1907, the Anglo-Russian convention had an agreement. This agreement divided Persia into three separate zones. In the northern part of Persia, Russia maintained a sphere of influence. In the southern area, Britain had its own sphere. Meanwhile, the middle area was considered as neutral ground. It was not until after this division was established that the Anglo-Russian concern for the Turkish-Persian border was revived (Hunseler, 1984). Russia became once again involved with Persian-Turkish affairs because it was specifically interested with the province of Azerbaijan in Persia (Hunseler, 1984). The interest was the result of strategic and economic factors in relation to Turkey. On the contrary, Britain was different from Russia because its interests were not limited to Persia alone. Britain was also focused on the Turkish territory of the Shatt al-Arab because it played a crucial part in British interests in the Gulf area. In July 1911, an Anglo-Turkish mediation in attempt to come up with a resolution that would define the territorial claims and rights in the Arab-Persian Gulf region began. On July 29, 1913, the resolution was signed by Turkey and Britain. The agreement included the decisions regarding the status of Arab sheikdoms. The resolution also included the agreements about the Shatt al-Arab and its significance to the increasing British authority in Arabistan and Iraq. The resolution proved to be beneficial for Turkey, but only because Britain acted on it for its own advantage. Meanwhile, Russia was outraged by the Anglo-Turkish agreement and initially renounced it. Britain caught Russia by surprise by awarding the Shatt al-Arab in its entirety to Turkey. Russia had its own interests to protect in Shatt al-Arab and the Gulf area, and the agreement served as a hindrance to the Russian cause. However, Britain gave Russia the guarantee that it would offer assistance in the latter’s interest in the northern section of the Turkish-Persian border. After Britain gave its guarantee, Russia acknowledged the Anglo-Turkish agreement (Hunseler, 1984). On December 21, 1911, Persian Foreign Minister and Turkish representatives from Tehran gathered in Istanbul to create a boundary commission to resolve the Turkish-Persian border problem (Hunseler, 1984). The commission began to meet in March 1912; by August, the commission had convened a total of 18 times. In the beginning, the efforts of the commission seemed futile due to Persia’s disapproval of a specific â€Å"note explicative† of April 26, 1847 (Hunseler, 1984, p. 13). However, Russia exerted influence and Tehran was forced to agree on the note on August 15, 1912. The early progress of the Turkish-Persian commission was accompanied by statements already found in the Four-Power Protocol of Constantinople dated on November 17, 1913. With regards to the area of the Shatt al-Arab, the definition of the border was determined in conformity with the Second Treaty of Erzerum of 1847. According to the treaty, the Shatt al-Arab is considered as a Turkish territory excluding the limitations concerning Abadan and Muhammarah. By November 1913, two-thirds of the border assignment was completed. The task of settling the complete boundary was given to a Four-Power Delimitation Commission. This commission had to define the border based on what was 1869’s â€Å"carte identique† (Hunseler, 1984, p. 13). The commission started working in 1914. Unfortunately, the First World War broke out. The emergence of the war hindered Persia and Turkey from acknowledging the border (Hunseler, 1984). The Aftermath of World War I: The Iranian-Iraq Disagreement on the Shatt al-Arab The conflict and rivalry between Iran and Iraq officially started after the First World War (Hunseler, 1984). The outcome of the war significantly altered the issue over the borders concerning the Shatt al-Arab. Hunseler (1984) explained: â€Å"The British mandate of Iraq, which had come about in Mesopotamia, entered into the Turkish boundary claims against Iran, although it also impinged upon British navigational privileges on the Shatt al-Arab† (p. 14). The aftermath of the Great War also allowed Iran to experience a dramatic political transformation. In 1921, Muhammad Reza Khan came into power. Under his reign, Iran became resistant to the established agreements regarding the Shatt al-Arab (Hunseler, 1984). It was also in 1921 when Khaz’al, the Sheik of Muhammarah, lost. Khaz’al was a known supporter of the British cause. With his defeat, Iran was granted the opportunity to fervently defend its own interests on the Shatt al-Arab conflict. Due to the new found empowerment of Iran, Britain was suddenly placed in a position wherein it should implement its rules without putting its Iranian interests in jeopardy (Hunseler, 1984). Meanwhile, Iraq asserted its control over the Shatt al-Arab (Hunseler, 1984). Due to the claim, Iran declined to recognize the state of Iraq. In 1929, Iran did give diplomatic recognition to Iraq, but only because it sought to gain the attention of Britain. Iran hoped that by acknowledging Iraq as a state, Britain would be sympathetic towards the Iranian cause. Britain was still interested in Iran because of economic reasons; the former is involved with the latter through the Anglo-Persian Oil Company. Moreover, Britain was still interested with the Shatt al-Arab issue. This was because it could provide the British complete access to the refineries located in Abadan. On August 11, 1929, the Iranian and Iraqi governments had interchanged several notes. This exchange gave way to the establishment of a temporary arrangement to manage the relations between the two states involved. The arrangement included settlements on trade and navigation. However, the negotiations failed because Iraq and Britain refused to recognize the jurisdiction of Iran on the half of the river (Hunseler, 1984). When Britain decided to remove its authority on Iraq and break away from their alliance in 1930, it imposed the right of the British navy to pass through the Shatt al-Arab anytime, regardless if it was wartime or peacetime (Hunseler, 1984). However, Iran had no intention in being involved in a peaceful settlement. The Iranian government also declined to accept the legitimacy of the border. On March 25, 1924, Iran announced its non-acceptance of determination of the boundary as stated in the Constantinople Protocol. The Iranian government also refused to recognize similar settlements created on September 20 and December 2 in 1931. The situation worsened when Iran sent four gunboats to pass through Shatt al-Arab and proceed until Muhammarah. Due to this incident, problems regarding the pilot and the flags of the ships were added to the already intense conflict (Hunseler, 1984). The boundary issue as well as the flag and pilot inquiries which remained unanswered increased the tension surrounding the conflict (Hunseler, 1984). On November 29, 1934, the Iranian government was forced to seek assistance from the League of Nations in an effort to address the problem. Unfortunately, the League of Nations and the representatives it sent failed to bring any positive change in the current situation. The only thing which provided temporary resolution to the problem was the Middle East pact of 1935, which Iran had introduced with the help of Turkey. The pact presented an opportunity wherein all points of disagreement could be settled. On July 4, 1937, a treaty on the Iranian-Iraqi border was agreed upon in Tehran. The treaty upheld the conditions indicated in the 1913/14 Protocols of Constantinople. According to the treaty, the Iran-Iraq border would remain along the east bank of the Shatt al-Arab. There were specific considerations made for Abadan and Muhammarah. Iran was also awarded an anchorage zone in Abadan which was four miles long. In addition, the treaty rendered the river as open territory, as it allowed access to naval ships of Iran and Iraq and traders of all countries. A transit fee was imposed, but this would be utilized for purposes of maintenance as well as the development of the shipping lanes in the river. In another decision, both sides agreed to accept the protocol within two years after the agreement had been reached (Hunseler, 1984). The adoption of the covenant was not implemented (Hunseler, 1984). On December 8, 1938, the commission in charge of the Iranian-Iraqi boundary started working on the confluence of the Shatt al-Arab and the Khayeen. The efforts of the commission were stalled by opposing translations of the treaty and the definite determination of the border. The Iranian government submitted suggestions regarding the balance of power between Iran and Iraq with regards to supervising and safeguarding the Shatt al-Arab shipping lanes. Meanwhile, the Iraqi administration saw this move as a threat to the sovereignty of the Iraqis on the river (Hunseler, 1984). In the 1950s, Iran and Iraq had another opportunity to resolve their issues regarding the Shatt al-Arab border (Hunseler, 1984). In 1955, both countries, along with Britain, Pakistan and Turkey agreed upon the Baghdad Pact (Karsh, 2002). This pact was initiated by the West and was established to strengthen defense and security in the region. In October 1957, King Faisal of Iraq paid a state visit to Iran (Hunseler, 1984). In this encounter, both nations reached an agreement regarding the Shatt al-Arab problem. Iran and Iraq agreed on two points. First, there will be a commission to be based in Baghdad which is assigned to work out the details of the joint supervision of the Shatt al-Arab. Second, a Swedish adjudicator will be in charge of delineating the border; this arbitrator is to be situated in Tehran and must work with the joint commission. Once again, an agreement between Iran and Iraq was hindered by yet another occurrence. On July 14, 1958, a revolution broke out in Baghdad (Hunseler, 1984). The change in Iraqi governance eventually disrupted the recently resumed development of Iranian-Iraqi ties (Hunseler, 1984). Also, the political change once again awakened the border conflict on the Shatt al-Arab and the land borders. Four short months after General Abd al-Karim took control, the revolutionary administration of Iraq declared that they would extend their claim on the river to 12 miles. On November 28, 1959, Iranian Shah Reza Pahlevi revived their request to have the border line of the river drawn along the middle. He justified his demand on grounds of Iraq’s clear violation of the 1937 treaty. He also argued that because they were already in the 20th Century, a river which served as a boundary such as Shatt al’Arab cannot be attached to the absolute sovereignty of either nation. General Qasim addressed the demand of the shah with another demand. Iraq sought to regain the anchorage zone awarded to Iran in the 1937 treaty. Despite their counter demand, Qasim still wanted to resolve the dispute through peaceful means. Iraq was willing to withdraw their claim of the anchorage zone if Iran would acknowledge the Iraq’s demands on the river and the treaty of 1937. The peaceful settlement was not reached. On December 10, 1959, Abbas Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Aram declined Iraq’s offer. Nine days later, General Qasim reasserted Iraq’s legal right to the anchorage zone without insisting on its return. He also appealed for Iran to value the early treaties. General Qasim suggested that they could address the problem with the help of the United Nations. However, Iran provoked Iraq again when the local newspaper Ettelaat stated that â€Å"the existence of Iraq was in any event a historical misunderstanding and the whole of Iraq a Persian province† (as cited in Hunseler, 1984, p. 17). An armed struggle between Iran and Iraq was quelled before the further tension could develop. On March 5, 1959, Iran became involved with the United States in a defense settlement (Hunseler, 1984). Soon after, Iran felt coerced by Russia. Iran had reasons to be concerned. It was threatened by Soviet influence and the possible circulation of further revolutionary ideals. Meanwhile, Iraq was also concerned with the threat of the United Arab Republic, a state established in 1958 as a result of the merger between Syria and Egypt. Abd al-Karim Qasim was frightened that Syria might provide assistance to Iraqi Nasserites if and when a war with Iran occurs. Hence, there was no real war between both parties at that time. The tension manifested itself through a media war between Iran and Iraq (Hunseler, 1984). In 1967, Britain declared its wishes to pull out from the Gulf area. Prime Minister Harold Wilson expressed the desire of the British administration to remove its military troops located ‘east of Suez’ (as cited in Hunseler, 1984, p. 17). With this announcement, Iran wanted to replace British forces with their own troops on the moment of the latter’s departure (Hunseler, 1984). The 1967 blockage of the Suez Canal was a welcome development, as it prevented Soviet activity in the Gulf region. In terms of security concerns, Iran wanted to unify and lead the Arab countries in the region. The supposed partnership had the goal of preventing the spread of Soviet control and power of revolutionary nations and factions, such as South Yemen and Iraq. The Arab countries in the Gulf were cautious in dealing with Iran. While they were hesitant to collaborate with Iran which was associated with Israel, they did not want to create a rift among the states (Hunseler, 1984). Iran continued to strongly pursue its ambition of becoming an unshakeable force in the Gulf region (Hunseler, 1984). In 1969, it condemned the 1937 treaty. The shah knew that if Iran wanted to govern and manipulate the shipping lanes in the Gulf, it must have exclusive control of the river. This move would also liberate the Iranian ports on Abadan and Khorramshahr from Iraqi jurisdiction. On one instance, an Iranian vessel sailed despite the absence of an Iraqi pilot. It departed from the Khorramshahr port with the assistance of Iranian patrol vessels and successfully arrived at the Persian-Arab Gulf. Iraq was aware of the violation, but it did not wage a war against Iran due to the weakness of the military (Hunseler, 1984). After 1972, the shah became more determined to cripple Iraq. After the completion of the Iraqi-Soviet friendship treaty, the Shah approached American President Richard Nixon to ask for assistance in the Kurdish cause in Iraq (Hunseler, 1984). This action was done with the objective of weakening the Iraqi army through an attack on its internal disputes. In August 1972, another uprising emerged in Kurdistan. The Iraqi administration and Kurdish chief Mullah Mustafa Barzani met in March 1970 and agreed on the autonomy of Kurdistan beginning in 1974. However, the agreement was threatened by the support of Iran and the United States for Barzani. Because of this, the Kurdish insurgents continued to hold on to their weapons and proceed with the civil war. Meanwhile, the Iraqi forces benefited from the Iraqi-Soviet friendship treaty, for it allowed for a steady supply of ammunition from Russia. The weapons were instrumental in guaranteeing the military success of Iraq. Nevertheless, the malfunctioning of the army’s weapons and the failure of the Soviet Union to provide more ammunition endangered the progress Iraq had in its fight against the Kurds. In the early part of March 1975, the Iraqi government was prompted to consider Iran’s proposition that it would refrain from supporting the Kurds if the former would approve the latter’s suggestion to resolve the border issue by placing the border line along the thalweg (Hunseler, 1984). On June 13, 1975, Iran and Iraq agreed on yet another treaty in Baghdad (Hunseler, 1984). The treaty consisted of four crucial agreements. First, the boundaries will be definitely marked based on the Constantinople Protocol of 1913 and the 1914 proposal created by the committee regarding the establishment of the boundary. Second, the river boundaries would be situated in the middle, or the thalweg. According to Willet (2004), the thalweg was the â€Å"central deepest part of the river† (p. 7). Third, there are two things to be rebuilt: the mutual trust between both nations as well as the security of the land boundaries they shared. Also, the invasion on both sides will be stopped. Lastly, the problem will be settled upon with the acknowledgement of the aforementioned points. When Iraq signed the treaty, the country accepted the thalweg agreement for the first time. After five years, it became evident that the said recognition was merely the result of coercion from Iran’s side. The acceptance of Iraq was also caused by the failure of the Soviet Union to provide weapons. Nonetheless, the compromise made regarding the Shatt al-Arab paved the way for the Kurdish civil war to stop. Meanwhile, the relevance of the river in terms of Iranian strategy was relatively reduced. This was because Iran transferred its navy from Khorramshahr to the Bandar Abbas port in August 1978 (Hunseler, 1984). The Iran-Iraq War from a Political Perspective The dispute over the borders and boundaries of the river of Shatt al-Arab was instrumental in the emergence of the war between Iran and Iraq in 1980. While the territorial conflicts played a crucial role in causing the war, the political conditions in both countries must also be considered as initiators. The transition in the governments helped influence the leaders on how to deal with the Shatt al-Arab issue. In Iran, there was a dramatic shift in leadership as the Shah was removed from power through a revolution led by a radical Muslim. In Iraq, several coups have altered governance while the rise of the Ba’ath Socialist Party to power resulted in the domination of Saddam Hussein. Both countries longed to dominate the other and emerge as the most powerful in the region (Jacoby, 2008). The Iranian-Iraqi situation under the Rule of the Shah In the 1970s, the tension between Iran and Iraq was heightened (Karsh, 2002). This was because of the Shah of Iran, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, became aggressive and tried to present Iran as the dominant force in the Persian Gulf. The Shah had been governing the Iran for decades. However, he was temporarily overthrown from power. In 1953, the head of the Iranian Parliament started a coup to remove the Shah (Willett, 2004). The coup succeeded and Pahlavi vacated the Iranian leadership for a brief time. However, the United States

The Importance of Adam Smiths Work to Economic Thought Essay -- Adam

The Importance of Adam Smith's Work to Economic Thought Adam Smith is widely regarded as the father of economics as a social science, and is perhaps best known for his work The Wealth of Nations. Throughout this work Smith states and informs towards his belief that society is not at its most productive when ruled over by rules and limitations with regards to trade, and that in order for markets to maximise prosperity, a free trade environment should be made accessible. In this essay I intend to asses the way in which many of Smiths theories taken directly form his works can be applied to past and current situations, first from an economic then social, and then a political point of view. I will also outline some of Smiths major theories on market determining factors, such as supply and demand, and the labour theory of value, with focus on how these theories can be applied to current day situations, demonstrating the strength of his works. I believe it is first important to mention that Smith was raised in a market environment in which Mercantilism was regarded as the most positive policy with which to increase a countries wealth. This theory is based upon the idea that a countries assets are a measure of its prosperity as a nation, and so therefore was often implemented using such policies as high rates of exports, and low rates of imports. In order to ensure this low rate of imports tariffs were often imposed on goods entering the country. Adam Smith was one of the first men to voice his opinions on this mercantile system, stating that the policies were flawed, and that assets and wealth were not good measures of a countries prosperity, and that in fac... ...cy. I don’t believe that without Smith, economics would not exist, but I do feel it would lack in much of its transferability between past and modern day scenarios. References http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/wealth_nations.html - Shopping trolley example of invisible hand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_labour Bibliography http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/wealth_nations.html - Shopping trolley example of invisible hand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_labour Canterbury E R A History of Economic Thought, Penguin, London 1991 Dowd D Capitalism and Economics, Pluto, London 1995 Smith A The Wealth of Nations, Dswavid Campbell Publishers 1991

Benefits of the Internet

Reviews and investigation have concluded that the Internet was one of the most important inventions in the last years, and its development is growing every day. People’s lives have changed since this technology arrived.The main idea of my speech will be to explain the audience how   we benefit from the internet today, and how its development has made our lives easier. It will be an informative speech, but the idea is not to make it a technical speech with technical content, but a speech easy to understand for others. I will have to take into account that almost everybody knows about the internet, but the audience may not realize how useful it is, and how we benefit from it.I will try to give the audience some examples that will make them understand what do I mean by â€Å"benefits†, trying to make clear stories about each of the main uses of the internet, as for example how people started using email instead of regular letters, or visiting web sites instead of spendin g hours in a library. I will have to be clear with my messages and try to maintain the audience’s attention by using simple ideas because people usually don’t like to listen about technology as it seems a boring subject. The information I will use it will be based on my own experience, so that will help the speech content to have a humanized aspect.I don’t think that I will be using many kinds of visual aids in this subject, although I might be presenting some transparencies with facts about the increase in the usage of the internet and the benefits of it, and this will help to reinforce the ideas to the audience while I explain them.While I was having a conversation with my classmates that helped me choose the topic for my speech, I tried to talk to them and see what each of them did with the internet and how they took advantage of it. This will help me to more or less see what can I focus on, and on what I will have to be more specific.The interest of the audi ence will be difficult to maintain if I don’t start with a good motivation, so I will try to begin the speech with something interesting and completely new about the internet, like a future project that engineers are working on that might not be known yet, but that the audience might like for the future. It is a wide topic, so I will try to make it as clear as possible, so as to be manageable and understandable.