Blog

Cultivating effective communities of practice

Cultivating effective communities of practice

Student name:

Instructor:

Institution

Introduction

In order to successfully implement communities of practice in organization there are seven principles involved (Wenger, McDermott, and Snyder, 2002; Cross, 1998). They are explained as follows:

i. Design for Evolution: Communities of people are common, designing them is more important. Communities are the personal networks that helpful to organization in many ways. In communities, the dynamic nature is a key to their evolution.

ii. Open a Dialogue between Inside and Outside Perspectives: The design requires is about inside perspectives. It is to tell about, what the community is about. The organization knows what is required for the output. Good design brings the best result to the organization. The one who understand the issues in the organization tells how to develop that in the community. One should realize the issues in the community are less in technology and more about the business issues in developing the technology.

iii. Invite different levels of Participation: Good community invites different levels of participation. They consider all the activities about the person who are in the community and increase their value, improve their skills and knowledge. They encourage all the community members to participate equally.

iv. Develop both public and private community spaces: The dynamic communities are rich in both public and private community. The public communities are the websites and meetings. The private communities are one to one networking and the people interact with each other. Both communities are interrelated, they develop both network.

v. Focus on Value: Value is most important key of community. The good communities increase the value in both private and public community. The communities must increase the value of organization to show themselves as community member. So, the community member’s value increased in the organization.

vi. Combine Familiarity and Excitement: Successful communities show their interest to give new ideas and new people to the community. They arrange the projects, teleconferences and a regular meeting to discuss about the ongoing activities. They conduct the exciting events to develop the knowledge.

vii. Create a rhythm for the community: They create a rhythm for their daily activities like waking up, getting ready for work, checking mail, attend the meetings and so on. Regular meetings, websites and teleconferences are the heart of good communities. All the communities that follow the rhythm are the key to community’s development.

On adapting the above mentioned steps organizations can efficiently implement communities of practice and thereby creating a flexible and innovative work environment.

References:

Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivatingcommunities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press

Cross, K. P. (1998, July-August). Why learning communities? Whynow? About Campus, 411. Retrieved Dec 25, 2011, from http:// faculty.washington.edu/swithers/geog397/learningcommunities.pdf

Culminating Research Paper-Apple INC- Can apple withstand competition from Samsung

Culminating Research Paper-Apple INC- Can apple withstand competition from Samsung(Name)(Course name)(Instructor’s name)(Date of submission)

SWOT Analysis of Apple INC.

Strengths

Apple, the US based global mobile phones and computer developer has been the leading tech development company in the world for a long time. The company has developed appealing mobile devices attractive to Internet users the world over. Its recent achievements  in the mobile sector has been the launch of the iPhone 5 and the all new I pod that boasts of new and improved features. Apple was the first company in the world to launch smart phones under the iPhone brand name. The company introduced phones attractive to business executives and tech savvy students making it the global innovations leader in the smart phone market. The company rivaled mobile giants such as Nokia and Blackberry leaving it in a class of its own. Under the stewardship of Steve Jobs, the company also produced desktop computers of a kind under the Mac platform. The company also ventured in the laptops business and developed enhanced Mac book laptops incomparable to others in the market. Apple also has such a strong brand name renown and respected all over the world. Apple’s logo is itself a respected logo that is recognised the world over. The company’s Apple lights at the back of every laptop and is designed to attract the potential buyer. The logo lights up brightly during the day and even more conspicuously during the night making it very attractive on those who do not own one. Besides being displayed at the back of laptops, the company has also made efforts to make sure the logo is well displayed during TV commercials. As a result of these aggressive but unique marketing campaigns, the company has become a globally respected brand; no wonder many people do not complain much about the cost of buying Apple products compared to those of its rivals.Another strength that apple has is the robust financial performance. The company has got a huge capital base that has enabled it to penetrate foreign markets and dominate overseas markets. The company has also been able to open manufacturing plants in other countries such as China where production and manufacturing is much cheaper than in the US. China is also a global communication and transit hub that opens to wider global markets. Apple being cognizant of the above factors knows that Apple, its main rival has an ambitious expansion program to become the global market leader in the Smartphone market.  In fact, Samsung has got much bigger financial pockets than Apple; it has outdone Apple in the sale of Smart phones especially in Europe, Asia and African countries. Samsung has also been a global tech innovator by coming up with unique applications and, capabilities especially in its Galaxy phones and other Galaxy gadgets such as the Galaxy camera. As a result of this, Apple has embarked on an equally ambitious program to increase its sales and penetrate markets dominated Samsung but where demand for the Apple products is also very high. The company pumped more than $7.1 billion in 2012 in capital spending in order to enhance supply chain and minimize supply shortages and missed orders. The company CEO Tim Cook has termed this as the beginning of the company’s journey in dominating the Smartphone market. This will help the company outdo Samsung and retain its former position as the market leader.

Weaknesses

Besides all the above strengths, Apple has also faced and had a number of weaknesses. First is patent infringement. The company has had looming and constant court battles with Samsung for patent infringements. The past two years have witnessed unending lawsuit battles between Apple and Samsung. Apple has time and again sued Samsung for patent violations although Samsung has denied these accusations. All court rulings seem to have been made in favor of Samsung and, many are left to ask, Can Apple withstands competition from Samsung? To answer this question, I will first analyze the competitive capabilities of Apple. First, Apple is known for producing extremely superior products compared to its rivals such as Samsung. Hardly does anyone hear of breakdowns among Apple products which have often been experienced among its rivals such as Samsung products. Apple products are not prone to breakages because they are designed to last for a long time. Besides this, Apple products are also superior in the sense that they use an operating system that is only unique to Apple products as compare to the Samsung products that operate under the Android application platform which is available to all willing mobile developers. Secondly, apple has been a real cutting edge hardware developer. Its designs are unique and elegant unparallel to those of its closest rivals. There are companies such as Sony and Toshiba that have come close at times but still Apple retains the tag for producing the best and most unique hard wares. This is true due to the fact that even with the intense competition in the market, still no company has been able to produce a hardware MP3 player such as the I pod which was produced by Apple. Comparing Apple’s Mac computers with other computer brands in the market, Apple is still the company to look out for in producing outstanding products in the future. The Mac computer is one of its kinds and it boasts of being a super computer combining the monitor with the CPU into one unique unit. The Mac book laptops are also uniquely designed in their operation to make them much easier and comfortable to use for travelers especially in an airplane. Another weakness by Apple has been product recalls. Some Apple products after being distributed in the market have had to be recalled after having some technical errors. This has proved to be damaging to the companies image and is considered a major wekness on the part of the company by a majority of the tech pundits.

Opportunities

The company’s opportunities are the increasing demand for more capable and enhanced mobile devices with better battery life and mobile charging capabilities. The company also has threats such as the emergence of Samsung as the company with the largest market share in the smart phone market. Samsung being Apples main rival has launched major advertisements campaigns to water down Apple’s efforts of being the global innovations leader. Apple also faces threats with the increasing amortization of raw materials used in the manufacture of its products.There are also increased opportunities in the Smart phones market especially in African countries where the demand for western products continues to grow by the day yet Apple has a very small presence there. Apple should also consider opening up new stores so as to tap the untapped markets.

Threats

Apples biggest threat is the intense competition posed by Samsung as an emerging global innovator is the Smartphone market. Samsung now commands the lions share in the smart phones market globally. Its galaxy 4S smart phone has by far outdone Apples iPhone 5. Many smart phone users cite the Galaxy phones as being better than the iPhone 5. Intensive marketing campaigns have also contributed to the increased uptake of Samsung products than Apples product. The company has launched aggressive marketing ads especially in the US to portray the iPhone 5 as a midget product compared to Samsungs Galaxy S phones. The company has also rivaled Apple in the tablet market by developing Samsung Tabs to rival Apples I pads. In the light of all this, many tech pundits have been left asking whether Apple will be able to withstand Samsung’s competition especially given the fact that the company has a tough financial muscle than Apple.RecommendationsApple needs to address the major challenges that it faces today sooner than later or else it will go down like former giants Nokia and Siemens. First, Apple must address the competition threat posed to it by Samsung. The company needs to adapt robust and intense marketing strategies to water down the euphoric atmosphere created by Samsung. Secondly, the company is known to produce products only for the uptown people and city dwellers. This is making the company loose a huge chunk of the market to Samsung. The company should consider producing products for the middle and low class people in the social ladder. Thirdly, Apple should consider utilizing its legal patents to raise more money to enable it raise more capital for expansion purposes. Lastly, there is the common notion that Steve Jobs was the face of Apple. This could prove to be a challenge to the company since Steve Jobs is no longer alive. The company should consider upgrading its image to be seen not just as Steve Jobs but as a respected brand even in the absence of Steve Jobs.

Executive Summary

Apple Inc is the largest mobile phone manufacturing company in the US. Apple was the first company to launch smart phones in the world. The company produces mobile gadgets under the ‘I’ banner such as the iPhone, iMac, iPod, and iPad. The company has had the lion’s share in the Smart phones market for a long time but has recently been overtaken by Samsung. The company’s founder was Steve Jobs and has been its CEO for a long time until his demise. He was succeeded by Tom Cook who is its current CEO.Apple has innovative capabilities and has produced gadgets unparallel to those of its closest rivals. The company’s closest rival is Samsung that produces products almost similar o those of Apple. The company’s major strengths are production o superior products and a strong brand name that is recognized and respected the world over. The company’s weaknesses are failure to meet deadlines, failure to meet demand at times and supply shortages. The company’s products are not readily available in some African countries. The company’s opportunities are the increasing demand for more capable and enhanced mobile devices with better battery life and mobile charging capabilities. The company also has threats such as the emergence of Samsung as the company with the largest market share in the smart phone market. Samsung being Apples main rival has launched major advertisements campaigns to water down Apple’s efforts of being the global innovations leader. Apple also faces threats with the increasing amortization of raw materials used in the manufacture of its products.Finally, the writer gives recommendations on how Apple can improve its global presence at the end of the text.

ReferencesHamel, G. (2012). What matters now how to win in a world of relentless change, ferocious competition, and unstoppable innovation. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass.Ireland, R. D., Hoskisson, R. E., & Hitt, M. A. (2006). Understanding business strategy: concepts and cases. Mason, OH.: Thomson Higher Education.Jones, T. (2012). Growth champions: the battle for sustained innovation leadership : the growth agenda (2nd ed.). Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.

Reflection Essay Assignment

Name

Professor’s name

Course

Date

Reflection Essay Assignment

`The primary theme in Chapter 11 of the textbook ‘Counseling the Culturally Diverse Theory and Practice-8th edition revolves around racial, ethnic, and cultural identity for people of color. The textbook also incorporates sub-themes that form the subject of discussion.

Racial awakening

Racial awakening is one of the sub-themes that the authors tackle in this textbook. In my viewpoint, racial awakening refers to the heightened awareness that black people possess. Racial awakening is spurred by personal experiences and the education of people of color.

Racial identity has to do with how people of color perceive and make sense of themselves. As far as racial, ethnic and cultural identity goes, people of color have for a long time struggled with acceptance, but they have always faced the issues head-on by pushing for equal rights for all people. The main question in regard to this chapter has to do with the struggles that people of color go through in their journey of acceptance from other people where the racial identity is concerned.

The thematic element that makes the most sense was racial awakening. I believe people of color have come a long way in their journey to acceptance and equality. Worth noting, there has been increased racial awakening among people of color. Various factors such as awareness raising, government support and constitutional provisions have favored the awakening of people, which has changed people’s attitude on racism. Another question that arises on this issue has to do with the value that a general racial, ethnic, and cultural identity can provide and do people of color stand to benefit from it.

Cuban Missile

Cuban Missile

Name

Course

Date

Introduction

The effects of the crisis on the missile issues between United States of America and Russia –Cuba alliance created unprecedented division amongst nations in the world. The Cuban missile did not only create tension between the two countries but generated an extended division internationally amongst the countries allied to the three countries (Cuba, Russia and U.S.A). This is comprehensible from the model on how the communist and the capitalist nations reacted to the stand-off. The realization of the impending dangers in the neighboring country (Cuba) drove American to rethink its model on the superiority and war power as it had held before. Furthermore, the tension sent American leaders to the drawing board to actualize the best framework of tackling war threats and security.

However, Khrushchev made ​​by the U.S. administration guarantees of non-aggression on Cuba, which, despite fears Castro were met and respected to this day. After a few months of U.S. missiles in Turkey, according to Khrushchev provoked him to the placement of weapons in Cuba were also dismantled. In the end, thanks to technological advances in rocketry, there is no need to deploy nuclear weapons in Cuba and in the Western Hemisphere in general, because in a few years the Soviet Union has had enough of intercontinental missiles capable of reaching any city and military installation in the United States directly from the territory of the USSR.

Even though from the public view, the Cuban Missile Crisis looked simple-Cold War aspect, its real nature and possible consequences would have resulted in a massive destruction of the components of world’s sources of livelihood and humanity had real wars occurred. Therefore, credit goes to those who managed and eased the conflict. I can categorically say that the people of the 60s handled this crisis better than if this were to happen now because of the way the families were structured back then. In light of the insidious nature of the information about the crisis, especially in the public domain, this monograph explores various literatures to demystify the reality about the crisis: how the people responded (from individual to national level) and the shear lesson learned from the crisis.

ANALYSIS OF THE CRISIS

Political changes that have occurred in the middle – the second half of the twentieth century,led to rapid geopolitical changes in the world and the formation of newworld order characterized by political, economic and ideological confrontation between the two nuclear superpowers – the U.S. and the USSR, and the real threat of military conflict, the consequences of which could be catastrophic. As we know, the first U.S. strategic concepts considered nuclear weapons as a tool of war , in particular the doctrine of ” massive retaliation” and not as a means of deterrence against a nuclear attack . Events of the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 brought for the first time world to the brink of nuclear catastrophe, forcing a new look atglobal issues of life and established priorities. The lessons learned from a nuclear conflict off the coast of Cuba, became the starting point of American foreign policy revision strategies. US- Soviet confrontation during the Cold War secrecy imposed on many of the documents relating to the history of the conflict in the Caribbean. The narrowness of the range of sources did not allow a comprehensive approach to the study of this

question. End of the 1980s, was a turning point .Due to the change of foreign policy priorities , and the normalization of relations between the U.S. and the USSR been possible on the basis of the analysis of new , previously classified documents to reconsider traditional approaches to the problem of the Cuban missile crisis and a deeper analysis of events in 1962 qualitatively new stage in the study of complex and controversial conflict of the Cold War marked a 1998 The collection documents the National Security Archive

Edited by U.S. American researchers Lawrence Cheng and Peter Kornbluh. This book is a six-year project to collect and classify materials relating to the history of the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 and the issue of settlement.The book published as official government documents , and closed presented to the public for the first time . Of particular interest are materials declassified U.S. State Department, which analyzes the results of the conflict and its impact on the future of American politics . They are represented by the following documents :

1. Secret Report of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Raymond Garthoff , entitled ” Meaning of the Soviet retreat for the future of American politics ” from October 29, 1962 The document was declassified February 10, 1988 The report , which is divided into 3 parts , contains information about the short-and long-term consequences for the Cuban Missile Crisis the U.S. and the general conclusion .

2 . Private message to the national security adviser and chairman of the Policy Planning Walt Rostow George Ball , Under Secretary of State for Economic, Business and Agricultural Affairs . The document is dated 15 November 1962 and is called ” Some Lessons of Cuba .” The secrecy was lifted Oct. 31, 1989 , indicating that the high value of the message for the U.S. government. In the 22 sectionsRostow recounts his vision of the lessons that can be learned from the events of October and offers them for discussion at a meeting of countries

NATO in December of the same year . Secrecy was lifted only October 31, 1989 , indicating that the high value of the message for the U.S. government. It is noteworthy that the document is shaded section 9 and its contents remain closed for researchers and nowadays. These facts give them the opportunity to identify new approaches to the study of conflict and its influence on the formation of American

foreign policy concepts .

3 . Memorandum to the president. Its author, Arthur Schlesinger , Kennedy adviser .

The document is dated 29 October 1962 and eloquently entitled ” After the death in Cuba .” Declassified October 19, 1976 Memorandum includes a preamble , which reveals the purpose of the message , and 8 points, which sets out the main findings of A.Schlesinger of the Soviet- American confrontation off the coast of Cuba.

Based on the analysis of these documents the findings of American experts, on the outcome of the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 to the United States can be divided into three groups:

I. Domestic political factor.

In considering the item was revealed weakness of the U.S. leadership in the most important foreign policy decision- making and rapid response to the threat. Focused on the need for more thorough analysis of unforeseen circumstances , finding alternative ways out of conflict situations. This should help to improve information security. Emphasized the role of communications systems for effective policy planning. Especially it is necessary to conduct covert operations. In particular ,

cited the example of a lack of security services on the placement of Soviet nuclear warheads in Cuba and delayed transmission of information to Washington. In addition, a question was raised about the need to create a direct link between the American president and the Soviet premier to better agreed control in complex political situations.

Without losing the sight of the psychological component of the consequences of the Caribbean

crisis for the United States , a show of unity of the nation.Focused on the fact that such events do not carry a negative effect and is not considered morally.

II. Foreign factor.

Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the Soviet threat . The first question put to that pursued the Soviet Union , putting nuclear warheads in Cuba. According to U.S. experts , the motivation of the USSR was the following :

1 ) the desire to show the world , especially U.S. allies

indecision American leadership facing a real threat of war;

2) show the possibility of a nuclear first strike against the U.S.

the armed forces ;

3) create a counterweight to the U.S. and NATO bases abroad;

4) as a response to the invasion of the Bay of Pigs in April 1961 ;

5) try to win concessions on the Berlin issue.

Further raised the issue of Soviet expansion in the Western Hemisphere . Americans have expressed concern that the Soviet Union increasingly penetrates the “third world.” – Cuba is the first example of the ” leap long distances ,” primarily political rather than military . As underlined by Rostow , ” is now not only the Soviet premier can travel across the ocean , but his rocket .” It was noted that in the current situation , when the Cuban government allowed to host the Soviet missiles , the United States has become increasingly difficult to maintain in Latin America ( member countries of the Organization of American States – OAS)

sufficiently high level of political and economic development . Thus attempts States to focus on solving major problems become problematic , making it difficult to further funding domestic programs of Latin American countries .

U.S. paid much attention to the possible reaction of the allies onactions of the Soviet Union. Despite the fact that the Caribbean is on the periphery of the interests of NATO , the deployment of Soviet missiles in Cuba affected not only the interests of Washington , but also jeopardized the basic NATO’s nuclear forces . There was a willingness to help allies in the conduct of the Cuban operation. Rostow announced a proposal : in the event of a serious crisis in the future U.S. president to appoint a commander of NATO. Do not lose sight of the Berlin crisis in 1961 Due to the fact that the problem of settlement was regarded as one of the possible causes of enemy action , emphasized the need to uphold a firm stand against Berlin.

III. Military factor .

This question I would like to highlight separately and consider three components :

navy and naval deployment of U.S. bases abroad , intelligence and nuclear weapons . According to a number of independent researchers , naval bases and the U.S. NATO allies Turkey and Italy , which were the “apple of discord ” in US-USSR confrontation showed seemingly need to limit their number . American experts in autumn 1962 did the opposite conclusion . They saw the need for it to increase the number of naval bases of the North Atlantic alliance abroad. It was stressed that these databases should not be nuclear-tipped missiles . Drew attention to the fact that the military force of the UnitedStates lies precisely in the superiority of the sea, and demonstrated that the navy during the quarantine off Cuba . On him, convinced Rostow , should bet in the future. Special emphasis on the important role of intelligence services in maintaining the stability of the foreign policy . A few years ago , in peacetime intelligence work was interpreted as a provocation , the events in Cuba made ​​the world differently look at its work , contributing to the prevention of violence. Control and stability – these should be the main objectives of U.S. intelligence. Interest was aroused by the fact that they were brought new tools for conducting intelligence activities over Cuban territory, allowing faster transfer intelligence. The Ministry of Defense called for the U.S. government to rely on the evolutionary development of technologies for data collection and analysis.

Aftermath

On October 30, the Special Group stopped the sabotage component of Operation Mongoose and later the Special Group was abolished. However, secret action against Cuba continued. The ExComm was renamed the Standing Group and reduced in size to five members at the fall of 1962. The members of the Standing Group included McCone, McNamara, Sorensen, Bundy, and Robert Kennedy.

The possibility of real nuclear war saw Soviets relent on their missile construction efforts –On November 20, 1962, the Soviets took a step to remove the remove II-28 bombers, the tactical nuclear weapons, and their six nuclear bombs. Castro was infuriated by this withdrawal act because he had wanted to keep the tactical weapons in Cuba. In addition, Khrushchev’s decision to withdraw the missiles came as a surprise to Castro –he was neither consulted nor informed about it. The news about the withdrawal of the missiles reached him through a radio broadcast.

To authenticate the withdrawal exercise, CIA published a memorandum on November 29 to verify that the total number of missiles that had been deployed to Cuba was actually withdrawn. After the verification exercise, the CIA confirmed that the Soviets had actually done as was expected –withdrawn all of the offensive weapons (42 missiles). The CIA’s report also indicated that the Soviets were ready to withdraw the IL-28 bombers, which had been delivered prior to the quarantine.

During the crisis, Soviets had amassed other several weapons systems in Cuba such as coastal defense missiles, flight aircraft, SAMs, and Komar missile boats. These elements, including the equipment for four armored combat group, remained in Cuba. Nuclear warheads were not seen in Cuba until the aerial photographs taken during the crisis period were reviewed in the post-crisis. The photographs taken from October 14 indicated that there was a nuclear warhead processing facility at the western end of the runway at the Mariel Naval Airfield. On October 23, one of the warhead vans at the San Cristobal MRBM launch site had its rails extended and it seemed to be transferring a warhead to a truck that had parallel rails in its beds. Furthermore, the post-crisis analysis of photography indicated that the Soviets had fueled and mated the warheads and had practiced transferring the missiles to the erectors.

Other views hold that the compromise was a sharp embarrassment for Khrushchev and the Soviets due the fact that United States’ withdrawal of Jupiter missiles from Turkey and Italy was donesecretly –not made public. For Cuba, the withdrawal was perceived as a betrayal by the Soviets –the decision to withdraw the missiles was made without the knowledge of Castro.

On the side of the U.S., there were some (such as General LeMay) who felt that the compromises made by Kennedy’s administration implied greatest defeat in the history of America.

The positive aspect of the crisis is that it necessitated the formation of Hotline Agreement, which was a direct communications link between Washington, D.C. and Moscow (the infamous Moscow-Washington hotline). This was crafted with the aim of facilitatinguninterrupted communication between the administration officials of Soviets and U.S.

However, critics such as Seymour Hersh and Seymour Mellman held the opinion that the Cuban missile crisis fueled U.S. use of military means in countries like Vietnam.

Lessons learned from the U.S. as a result of the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 , defined a new direction for American foreign policy in the world.

First, the U.S. continued to upgrade military- political doctrines to

raise the threshold of a possible US-Soviet nuclear conflict , reduce the risk of unintentional collision and outgrow conventional regional conflict involving the great powers in a nuclear war . American experts had proposed the concept of “mutual assured destruction” that develops within

strategy of “flexible response .” In 1968, the U.S. strategy of “flexible response” was the basis for the fourth NATO strategic concept , dubbed ” strategic concept defense of the territory of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization ,” which showed greater cohesion in the alliance allies around the United States . Second, the U.S. and the Soviet Union intensified negotiations on arms control , in particular , the limitations of missile defense and strategic offensive arms .

Third, steps were taken to increase the technical capacity to

conduct direct dialogue USSR and the U.S. in an emergency. June 20, 1963 between Moscow and Washington was established line ” hot link “, which is round the clock work mode allowed the leaders of both nations to communicate with each other. Thus were laid the foundations of the US- Soviet rapprochement , which continues with a few adjustments and now .RESPONSES/REACTIONs FROM THE CIZENS

It is almost five decades since the occurrence of the infamous Cuban missile crisis. The events that unfolded in the fall of 162 have attracted many researchers, who have focused on the analysis of how Cuba, a small island nation, became the focal point of the Cold War. One of the most researched and written about events in the Cold War is the Cuban missile crisis. Prominent researchers have taken this course to give the political view and possible consequences of this infamous event. Various authors and experts have compiled extensive amounts of information from a number of different written sources and interviews. Nonetheless, there are no classified sources of information about how the public reacted after the announcement of the Cuban Missile Crisis by President Kennedy – as most of the information was always restricted to the Oval Office. Despite such inadequacy, the role playedby the individuals, rather than national governmentcannot be taken for granted. Some quantitative researches conducted among the U.S. population show that people reacted differently but with caution. A study by Jiri Nehnevajsa showed that significant number of Americans got involved in crisis related activities after the news about the Cuban missile crisis went on air (Mast 1966). The research was particularly conducted in post-crisis period, that is, 1963. The research questions were about whether the sample Americans got involved in any crisis related activities during the Cuban Crisis. The activities comprised efforts to respond to the threat posed by the crisis in a cautionary way, including calling the Civil Defense office, building shelter for their families, leaving their homes, purchasing food and drugs, discussion and provisions.

There are interesting points that were shown by the research. It revealed that the relative size of the geographical unit where respondents lived had a significant effect on the extent of their overall response to the crisis. On the one hand, those who lived in metropolitan areas showed higher levels of engagement in the crisis related activities. On the other hand, those who lived in smaller towns showed lowest rate of engagement in crisis related activities. In addition, respondents that engaged in crisis activity met the following classifications: were better educated, tended to earn more money, thought of themselves as middle class, they were often married, and younger in age. They maintained remarkable level of optimism, showed the a great sense of need for perotection. These respondents seemed to be less oriented to collectivity-centered efforts, and instead preferred to rely on their families and themselves. This signifies that family structure played a significant role toward the easing of the crisis. The negotiations that were going on between the leaders of the states that were involved in the crisis required sound social platform, which was provided by the rational discussions within families. The research revealed that the most common activity in which the respondents averagely scored higher was the discussions within the families (30% of the respondents). The rest of the activities scored relatively lower: making provisions (15%), building of shelter (14%), increased food-drugs purchase, calling Civil Defense office, and moving to safer location averagely scored 5%.

The theoretical perspective about the results of the research is that the modal individual who engaged in the crisis related actions appeared to be more like the middle class type, who seemed to be oriented toward and related wellto their society. Similarly, a report by Stephen Whitney produced in 1961, showed that 6% of sample size of 1,474 adults had built shelters (Mast 1966). The relevance of this finding to this paper is the attributes of those respondents who built the shelters. These people were different from most of the general populace –they tended to be better educated, had higher incomes, and had value perspectives that set them apart somehow from the national averages. They somewhat discredited the notion of rebellion and regarded it as immature idea. They welcomed the idea of rationalism in trial times like during the crisis.

The implication of Whitney’s conclusion is that shelter builders were responsible individuals, who were somewhat conservative, intolerant of deviance, not driven by compulsion, and took value opinions of the society earnestly.

Teachings from the Cuban Missile Predicament

The principal rough drafts of the past are almost always unreliable

For one to draw lessons from history, it is important to wait until full story is acquired. With this regard, the journalistic accounts written in October 1962 only captured a small fraction of what was happening within the Kennedy administration and fundamentally ignored the Russian and Cuban perspectives. A few years after the crisis ended, the early journalistic accounts were supplemented by memoirs written by the key participants such Robert F. Kennedy’s subsequent account, “Thirteen Days”-that was initially released in 1969. The Kennedy family and their direct aides immeasurablyswayed almost the complete early versions of the crisis, and thus told the story from their point of view.

Significant delay was witnessed in providing the evidence about the crisis. Detailed documentary evidence began to be available to scholars at the fall of 1980s when the National Security Archive in Washington won a landmark court battle for the access to the records of the State Department historian. The was even much delay on the Soviet and Cuban accounts of the disaster. They arose in 1990s succeeding the downfall of communism in the Soviet Union besidesthe momentous consultations in Havana in 1992 and 2002.Preposterously, official Soviet and Cuban records are largely inaccessible to western historians even today. Despite three years of freedom of Information Act appeals, there is still no perfect piece of info about the unintended October 27, 1962, over flight of the Soviet Far East by Captain Charles Maultsby (an event that Khrushchev to President Kennedy could push them to real war).

Presidential decision making calls for unusual steps in any regime, instead of the allegedsystematizedsteps

In the hopeof claimingrecognition for Khrushchev’s abrupt about-face on the dawn of Sunday, October 28, the Kennedy family aides coined the concept of the “Trollope ploy” to define the U.S. diplomatic policy on Black Saturday. Actually, Robert Kennedy created this notion and he proposed that President Kennedy had better ignore Khrushchev’s appeal on Saturday daybreak for a Turkey-Cuba rocketswitch and instead accept his ambiguously worded offer to dismantle the missile sites in return for a U.S. guarantee not to invade Cuba.

However, a rewrite reply to Khrushchev focused more on the conciliatory-sounding aspects of the first letter. In addition, the reply was done and reviewed by many authors. Even though President Kennedy ignored the second Khrushchev letter, he ordered Robert, his brother, to tell Dobrynin that the U.S. would pull out its artilleries from Turkey. Moreover, he began setting the diplomatic foundation for anopen Turkey-Cuba switch. Straightforwardly, the “Trollope ploy” account of history pronouncesbetterrationality and logic to the edgyExComm debate of Saturday early afternoonthan anyonesensed at thatstage.

The view from the Oval Office is very limited

The president of the United States may be the best-informed and most powerful person in the world. But there is still much that he may not know about the true security situation. In light of this fact, President Kennedy did not know numerous thingsduring the missile crisis of October 1962.Principally, the Defense Secretary Robert McNamara articulatedto President Kennedy on 20th October that there were between 6,000 and 8,000 Soviet technicians on Cuba. On the contrary, there were 43,000 Soviet troops on Cuba, including heavily armed combat troops. Second, President Kennedy was not aware that the Soviet defenders possessed 98 tactical nuclear warheads, with capability of wiping out U.S. beachheads in addition to the Guantanamo Naval Base. Russian soldiers had relocatednuclear-powered cruise missiles up to 15 miles close to the naval base at the height of the crisis. Declassified U.S. intelligence reports also confirm the movement of unidentified artillery equipment. Third, President Kennedy believed that an intervention was forthcoming at a period when the vessels were in excess of 500 miles apart. He was deluded about a potential clash amongst the U.S. Navy in addition to Soviet missile-carrying freighters. That was on October 24. Additionally McNamaraarticulated to President Kennedy that a 37 mm antiaircraft explosive had hit a U.S. Navy reconnaissance plane on the afternoon of October 27, and that the plane was not damaged. On the contrary, a U-2 had been brought down in Cuba by a Russian surface-to-air rocket early on the October 27th.

The conclusion of the past can change over time

The immediate aftermath of the crisis gave the perception that Kennedy was the big winner because he had achieved his basic objective of removing Soviet missiles from Cuba. It also gave a view of Castro as the biggest loser because Khrushchev decision to withdraw the missiles only reached him through the radio at his chagrin. On the contrary, Castro can be viewed as the biggest winner because despite the America’s efforts to overthrow his government and subdue the communist system that was spreading in Cuba, he emerged stronger after the crisis and ruled for more than four decades. In addition, Kennedy was assassinated by a Fair Play for Cuba Committee activist despite having triumphed in the foreign policy.

The victory on missile crisis, which had gone the way of the U.S. culminated in unintended consequences. One such result was the intensification in the Cold War weaponriescompetition as Soviet leaders pursued to expunge the recollection of the Cuban humiliation. It is noted that the Soviet assistant foreign minister, VasilyKuznetsov, ushered a threat to a senior U.S. official,not long after the withdrawal of the Soviets’ missiles from Cuba.The leaders who succeeded Khrushchev embarked on a massive intercontinental ballistic program to achieve military parity with the U.S. However, as a result of huge expenses in military budgets, Soviet finally went bankrupt and the communism system became unpopular.

Containment worked

The missile crisis marked a pivotal point in the argument about whether a nuclear war could be overcome. Earlier, before October 1962, a prominent group of generals led by Curtis LeMay had preferred a first strike against the Soviet Union. But after the crisis, a different perspective emerged among such generals –they realized that it was not possible to kill all the communists without harming millions of Americans.

Character counts

Finally, the crisis demonstrates the rare pivotal role of personality in politics. It suffices to mention that had someone else been president in October 1962, then the crisis could have culminated in real and ruinous war. President Kennedy himself embraced the role played by the senior advisors who took part in the ExComm debates –he noted that all were “energetic and bright”. However, Kennedy held a contrary opinion that if any member of the team were president, then the world would have been probably rushed into a disastrous war.His view borrowed from the fact that many of the dozen senior advisors who took part in the ExComm debate had favored bombing the missile sites on Cuba, a step which could have been perilous. Therefore, due to the possibility of occurrence of catastrophic war had things been handled otherwise, it is worth giving credit to President Kennedy for his decision to resort to a blockade of Cuba (Quarantine) rather than waging an air strike. He is surely not to blame for not taking the risk of exasperating the Russians to take a clumsy retaliatory response.

Conclusion

Over the past five decades, the United States has experienced several major foreign policy crises. However, the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 is probably the one that most gripped the nation. This event was of enormous importance in the history of America and the world beyond the American boundaries. It posed a clear and present danger to the nation, galvanized the populace, and compelled the political leadership into forceful and decided action. Even though the crisis affected the nation, the public was neither terrorized nor paralyzed. The U.S. people maintained political and psychological resilience in the face of this confrontation. They absorbed the shock, supported their leaders, and continued with their lives. It indicated the symbol of the U.S. society in times of great trials.

The Cuban missile disaster has been studied and analyzed from the perspective of crisis management and presidential power. However, interviews with U.S. and Soviet participants and new archival discoveries show that the implication of the crisis is the haphazard returns of the crisis management and limits of presidential power. It is in record that both Khrushchev and Kennedy did not want war in October 1962 because both of them had first-hand witness of the destruction and loss of life during World War II.

The major drama at the height of the missile crisis was not whether Khrushchev and Kennedy wanted to control events that were unfolding; it was whether they could. Both leaders had played a role in increasing the tension that existed between the two nations. Kennedy had authorized the invasion of the Bay of Pigs and the Operation Mongoose. These two events made the Soviet believe that Kennedy’s administration was determined to get rid of Castro once and for all. In an attempt to protect his Caribbean ally, Khrushchev made the hasty decision to deploy nuclear missiles nearly ten thousand miles from Soviet shores, near America’s boundary. Therefore, the two were struggling to contain the specter of nuclear destruction that they themselves had initiated.

Bibliography

Abshire, Manker David. Triumphs and Tragedies of the Modern Presidency. Washington, D.C.: Praeger, 2001.

Chang L., Kornbluh. The Cuban Missile Crisis 1962. A National Security Archive Documents Reader. N. Y.: The New Press, 1998. 430 p

Dobbs, Michael. One Minute to Midnight: Kennedy, Khrushchev, and Castro on the Brink of Nuclear War. New York: Vintage, 2008.

Dobbs, Michael. “Why We Should Still Study the Cuban Missile Crisis”, 2008.

Kennedy, Robert. Thirteen Days: A Memoir of the Cuban Missile Crisis. W.W. Norton & Company, 1969.

Franklin, Jane. Cuba and the United States: A Chronological History.Melbourne: Ocean Press, 1997.

Rodriguez. Shadow Warrior: The CIA Hero of 100 Unknown Battles. John Weisman. Simon & Schuster, 1989.

Rostow W.W. Op. cit. P. 327.

John F. Kennedy. “Proclamation 3447—Embargo on all trade with Cuba”.The American Presidency Project. Santa Barbara, California

Blight, James G.; Bruce J. Allyn and David A. Welch. Cuba on the Brink (paperback ed.). Lanham, Maryland: Rowmand and Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2002.

George, Alice L. Awaiting Armageddon: How A

Perplexity in Plato’s Dialogue

Name

Professor’s name

Course

Date

Perplexity in Plato’s Dialogue

Plato’s dialogue Meno is generally regarded as among the most influential and essential works. It answers questions about virtue and belief. The dialogue has a dramatic significance. We witness Socrates reduce Meno, who starts by confidently assuming they know what virtue is. This unpleasant experience is presumed common for people that engage Socrates in debates. Anytus, who will be the prosecutor responsible for the trial and execution of Socrates, is seen warning Socrates to be cautious about what he says, especially when speaking about his Athenian Begley, colleagues. This text delves into the issue of perplexity in Plato’s dialogue, the Meno.

Perplexity is important in a number of ways. Its value is represented by what it means to be good and carry out the role of encouraging Meno and Socrates to figure it out. Perplexity is important as it influences the growth of knowledge by forming an unknown window that is yet to be learned and discovered. The concept of perplexity is a critical concept to grasp as it serves as the foundation for people continually seeking to gain knowledge (Begley, 301). The confusion that comes from being taught a particular subject and not completely understanding it leads to a perplexity complex and pushes people to know what they are try perplexed about. As a result, people learn by gaining missing information. For instance, in the text, Socrates tries to break down the perplexity by saying that he still wants them to how being good entails. The perplexity is showcased by a state of what it entails to be good. It plays a significant role in encouraging Meno and Socrates to figure things out. As such, perplexity tends to sway the growth of knowledge by developing an unknown window which is yet to be learned and discovered.

Socrates makes people perplexed by encouraging them to ask questions about everything, including right and wrong. Socrates would ask questions that people in society are afraid to ask. Socrates questioned everything about society. He asked tough questions to establish the good and bad in society. Asking these questions helped Socrates shape the legal behavior of Western society. Socrates makes people perplexed by proposing two hypotheses; virtue is a form and knowledge, and if good is not knowledge, then there is a possibility that virtue is not knowledge. Socrates employs questions to draw admission of ignorance of the person he is debating with, and the dialogue finishes in s ate of inconclusive perplexity. The reactions of the other characters are unique. Because the dialogue entails only a pattern of refutation and arguments, Plato takes important steps beyond the reach of Socratic dialogue as he describes how Socrates questioned the slave boy.

Perplexity is a sign of personal improvement as it pushes people to keep seeking new knowledge continuously. Knowledge is important as it gives a person new perspectives on life situations. The concept of complexity comes off in the context of professional social work settings that tend to encourage uncertainty recognition and create new opportunities for personal growth, meaningful relationships and social reform. Perplexity also honors the dissonance that exists between new and past understandings.

In closing, Plato’s dialogue remains an influential work to this day. Perplexity is important as it keeps people seeking new information. As a philosopher, Socrates perplexed people because he asked questions about society’s good and wrongs. Perplexity informs personal improvement because it pushes people to seek new knowledge even in professional settings.

Works Cited

Begley, Keith. “The Structure of Enquiry in Plato’s Early Dialogues.” (2020): 301-303.

Cuban missile crisis impact on American citizens

Name

Professor

Course

Date

Cuban missile crisis impact on American citizens

If there is anything that kept many people in America and the world at large worried since the Second World War and during the Cold War, it must be the Cuban missile crisis. This crisis started in October, 15 1962 when an American spy plane noticed and reported the presence of Soviet SS-4 Nuclear Missiles in Cuba. Although these were medium range missiles, the proximity of Cuba, 90 miles off the cost of the US, meant that such a missile could perfectly hit any town or city in American continental land (McConnell, 12). Although the Soviet Union, which was entangled in a cold war with the US, denied any intentions of installing offensive weapons in the Western Hemisphere, the mere presence of the missiles and the news of more being shipped from USSR to Cuba betrayed any honest they may have harboured. The US quickly placed its defence on alert, to wad of any invasion or aggression. Tension between US and the Soviet Union rose to enormous proportions, and many people became weary of a Third World War which would be devastating due to the use of nuclear weapons. For fourteen days in that month, “October 1962, humanity stood on the precipice of a nuclear war as the US demand for withdrawal of the weapon” (McConnell, 17). Any miscalculation on either of the sides, the Kremlin and the White house could have orchestrated a catastrophe. During this time, the Americans experience a great feeling of panic, fear, anxiety and an anticipation of an Armageddon.

Julia Álvarez, story is the first good example of the panic and anxiety the American had. People had their hearts in their mouths since it was only a matter of time before their lives came to an end cutesy of nuclear warheads. Any mention of a bomb was enough to cause confusion among the people. For instance, when the narrator in Alvarez book saw snow flakes and shouted “Bomb! Bomb!” everyone was very frightened and even the girls in her class started crying (Álvarez 184). Sister Zoe who was in charge of the girls was also shocked. She rose and rushed to Alvarez side, her action betraying her fear and panic. Alvarez states that the shock on the Sister Zoe’s face faded away after she saw what made the narrator shout “Bomb! Bomb!” certainly signifying the Zoe was relieved to know that there was no bomb around. The relief she exhibit after realisation that the young girl had confused snow flakes for bombshells is symbolic of the relief the American had after fourteen days when the crises came to an end.

Due to the fear of contamination of food and water resources by nuclear poisoning, most American made early preparation to avoid the contaminations. According to George (69) some citizens bought all bottled water and food from retailers exhibiting their desire not to feed on food contaminated by radiations or drink contaminated water. Most retailers ran out of theses products. The other products that the Americans wiped for the retailers shelves include guns and transistor radios. It seems that the citizens wanted to know what was happening at all time and were ready to engage in the war to protect themselves if the war reached the mainland. This move, which clearly indicated planning for war, shows that the Americans expected the crisis to end in a Third World War, and they did not want the be found flat footed. With the nuclear missiles as close as Cuba, the citizens’ faith in their country defence system to defend them was certainly undermined.

The absence of protection from nuclear radiations encouraged the citizen to move from one place to another in search for safety. Although, the government had shelter the could protect people from long-term effects of radio active radiations resulting from nuclear bombs, the shelters were not enough and were mostly preserved for government official and politicians such as the congressmen. Only a few other citizens could be accommodated because the government had no appropriate plans for its citizens. As a result, most urban dwellers migrated to rural areas that were believed would survive nuclear attacks. This was a product of the belief that if a nuclear attack was launched against the country, cities and large metropolis and towns would bare the brute of the destruction (McConnell, 12). The rural areas would generally be safe and; therefore, most people chose to remote areas far away from urban centres. Ironically, some citizens remained ambivalent and took no preparations to defend themselves or avoid the effect of a nuclear attack. They did this due to the conviction that the nuclear war would not become a reality or that take any precaution to protect one against nuclear attacks was an exercises in futility. This group went on with business as usual.

Children of a school going age were also negatively affected. Juts as Álvarez writes, children had no understanding of nuclear weapons and only learned about them for their parent and the mushroom like structures their teachers. For instance, the narrator in Alvarez story states “Sister Zoe explained how it would happen. She drew a picture of a mushroom on the blackboard and dotted a flurry of chalk marks for the dusty fallout that would kill us all” (Álvarez, 184). This means that all the news they got came from the senior member of the society, despite the trust they had in their senior counterparts, the information was not enough to stop their anxiety. According George (139) children learned about the nuclear war from parents, teachers and media and could include the drawing of nuclear mushroom in their doodles. The information was just not enough and served to increase the fear in both older members of the society and in children. Álvarez narrator states that when she picked up English and could understand some conversation, she quickly learned about the crisis. She vividly reports what she saw on TV: President Kennedy’s worried look, informing the nation that the country might be on the verge of a war against the communists (Álvarez 184). Such image sowed fear in the hearts of the young ones, and compounded by the information they received from the adults such as Sister Zoe, it is not surprising that the young girl was freaked and shouted “Bomb! Bomb!” when she saw the snow through the window. George (139) also reports similar encounter for children. According to her account, the information children receive denied them the innocence children experience in their homes (George139). The stories of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombs had given children nightmares. According to George “by the end of 1950s, 60% of children had reported nightmares about nuclear wars” (139). Now that the reality of a nuclear war that could eliminate them, was obvious to them, the anxiety and emotional torment they experienced was great.

Under the panic and threat, American adults too had to accept a fact that had all along shunned-an all nuclear war on their land. The preparation of those who moved away from urban centres and those who purchased consumer goods from sellers is an indication of the acceptance of the reality. After the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombing, newspaper articles, novels among others had propagated an idea of an all nuclear war that would be totally devastating to the world as we know it (George 19). Most people looked at them as comics and myths that had no foundation. This disregard was also reported by the Director of Civil Defence Administration in Eisenhower government. He stated that, “Most American people have simply not accepted yet the possibility of an enemy attack on the United States from the Skies by intercontinental bombers carrying these tremendous nuclear weapons. It is also something that still appears fantastic” (George 19). The director also felt the Americans imagination of a nuclear war portrayed it as fantastic fantasy. However, the prospect brought about by the Cuban Missile Crises changes their believe system. The government, which had also shared the citizen believe had no means of providing protection to the citizens in case of an attack other than retaliating and engaging the enemy. This is why all citizens other that the government officials, and politician who had bankers, had to rush to the rural areas to protect themselves.

The preparation of the government to engage the enemy also served to add the fear. The narrator in Álvarez story notes that they heard air drills while at school. During the drills “an ominous bell would go off and we’d file into the hall, fall to the floor, cover our heads with our coats, and imagine our hair falling out, the bones in our arms going soft” (Álvarez, 184). Clearly, the citizens remained in a state of uncertainty for fourteen days.

In conclusion, the Cuban Missiles Crisis placed the American citizens in fear, panic and anxiety with some of them not understanding what would become of them as some hungered for information about the attack. Any single alarm was enough to throw people in confusion. Most people took precaution stocking food and water as others rushed to places that were believed to be safe, certainly indicating their acceptance that the possibility of a nuclear assault was a reality and not a myth from comic books and novels. Children too were also tormented with the information they received from the older members of the society and the media. The end of the crisis was a relief to the citizens. However, the crisis made a clear statement to the American, that the possibility of a nuclear was a reality and not a fantastic fantasy.Work Cited

Álvarez, Julia. “Snow” Literature: A World of Writing. Ed. David L. Pike and Ana Acosta. London: Longman Publishing Group, 2011. P.184-P.185. Print.

George, Alice L. “Awaiting Armageddon: How Americans Faced the Cuban Missile Crisis.” Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003. Print.

McConnell, William S. “The Cuban Missile Crisis.” San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005. Print.

Neuroscience has to do with

Name

Professor’s name

Course

Date

Neuroscience has to do with the scientific study of the nervous system, including the brain. Neuroscience analyses the brain’s composition and the broader nervous system, including its biological and chemical processes. Behavioral genetics is the study of the relative effects of heredity and the environment on behavior and organisms’ mental processes. There are two theories as regards the origin of behavioral genetics. The view of nature maintains that hereditary factors and genes influence who we are, including our personality characteristics and physical appearance. On the other hand, nurture has to do with the fact that all the environmental variables impact us, including aspects such as our upbringing, our childhood experiences, our surrounding culture, and our social relationships. Human beings inherit 23 chromosomes from each parent, and each chromosome contains thousands of genes.

Heredity is one of the methods of studying inheritance among human beings. Human heredity can be understood more by engaging in studies including family studies, twin studies, adoption studies, and genetic abnormalities. Heredity is a statistical formula that shows a variation in percentage in a population attributed to genetic factors instead of the differences in the environment.

There are various misconceptions about genetics that exist. The first misconception is that genetic traits are inflexible; hence they cannot be fixed, which is not true. Environmental factors and lifestyle have the ability to determine if genes will be expressed or not. Additionally, the other misconception is that estimates of heredity only apply to groups and not individuals. In the real sense, estimates only apply to populations and not individuals. Another misconception is that gene and the environment and inseparable. The truth is that it is impossible to separate the influences of the environment and genes because the two affect each other.

Neurons, also known as nerve cells are the basic building blocks of the nervous system and are responsible for processing, receiving, and transmitting electrochemical information. The glial cells are responsible for providing nutritional, structural, and other support for neurons and communicating with the nervous system. The main parts of a neuron are the axon, cell body and dendrites. The dendrite is the fibrous root that branches out of the cell body. They receive and process signals coming from axons of other neurons. The cell body is the core of the neuron. It carries information, provided energy for activities, and maintains the structure of the neuron, Axon is a tail-like long structure that connects the cell body at the junction called the axon hillock. Axons are insulated with fatty substances called myelin. Myelin help axons conduct electrical signals. Terminal buttons are found towards the end of the neuron, and their function is to send alerts to other neurons. Neural communication is an electrochemical event made possible by various specialized structures in the neuron such as axons, dendrites, terminal buttons, and synaptic vesicles.

Neurotransmitters affect us in various ways. For instance, acetylcholine, which is found in acting drugs such as marijuana, nicotine, and amphetamines, is known for various effects such as rapid-eye movements, learning, muscle action, attention, and sleep motivation. Additionally, a decrease in acetylcholine plays a role in Alzheimer’s disease. Dopamine (DA) is a transmitter that is known for its effects on memory, movement, emotions and has been linked to Parkinson’s disease. On the other hand, endorphins affect memory, learning, mood, pain, appetite, and sexual activity. Epinephrine affects memory storage, energy release, and metabolism arousal. Serotonin affects moods, sleep, pain suppression, sleep, and appetite. Glutamate is known for its effects on movement, memory, and the nervous system. Drugs and poisons also affect our brains in various ways. Foreign chemicals such as drugs and poison can mimic and block ongoing actions of neurotransmitters, thus interfering with the body’s normal functioning.

The endocrine system is a network of glands found in the body which manufacture and secrete hormones and release them into the bloodstream. Hormones circulate in the bloodstream leading to bodily changes. The central nervous system comprises the spinal cord and the brain, while the peripheral nervous system entails all the neurons that are connected to the central nervous system. The brain has the ability to reorganize and change its structure through the formation of new neural connections. Reflexes of the spinal cord are produced by the central nervous systems’ pathways that lie entirely on the spinal cord. Sensory fibers evoke reflexes that enter the spinal cord activating spinal motor neurons directly or using a chain of spinal interneurons.

The brain is made up of three parts the hindbrain, forebrain, and midbrain. The hindbrain has the medulla, cerebellum, and pons. The medulla carries out automatic and vital functions such as heartbeat and respiration. Pons carries out movement, respiration, sleeping, waking, and dreaming. Cerebellum coordinates balance, muscle movement, perception, and cognition. The midbrain is a collection of structures responsible for coordinating sleep, movement patterns, and arousal. The forebrain comprises the thalamus, limbic system, cerebral cortex, and hypothalamus. The limbic system carries out primary physiological functions and is involved with memory and emotions. Hippocampus is involved in retrieving memories, while the hypothalamus governs sex drive and hormones. The amygdala controls emotions such as fear and aggression. Frontal lobes of the brain are responsible for speech production and motor control. Parietal lobes found at the top of the brain receive and interpret bodily sensations. Occipital lobes are responsible for vision. Temporal lobes are involved in audition and language comprehension. The Corpus callosum is responsible for conveying information between the two sections of the cerebral cortex.

Cuba Missile Crisis

Name

Professor

Course

Date

Cuba Missile Crisis

The Cuban missile crisis and it effect was most grave outcome of the Soviet Union and United States confrontations during the Cold War. Despite the fact that the crisis was short lived it was extremely intense and consumed all the attention it could get for the American president of the time, President Kennedy and his advisers. The crisis lasted only sixteen days on October 1962 and only came to close following the agreement between Kennedy and his Soviet counterpart, Khrushchev, popularly known as the Kennedy-Khrushchev Agreement of 1962, signed on 28th October of the same year. This importance of this document can not be overstated and as a result many scholars have put it to scrutiny and wrote several books about it. The agreement may have ended what would have resulted in a third world war, a war that would have been devastating more than all those that had been fourth before given the nuclear weapon that both the countries US and USSR had in their arsenal stock piles.

The Cuba missile crisis was simply a product of the rivalry between the United State and the Soviet Union that hand built up during the cold war, a war the developed from the class of communist ideas and capitalist ideas.

The Soviet Union lead by Nikita Khrushchev believed that installing intermediate-range nuclear missiles in the United State rebellious neighbor Cuba would counter the growing lead of the United State in manufacturing and deploying strategic missiles arsenals. Khrushchev also devised a plan on how to provide protection to Cubans defense against any U. S. orchestrate invasion similar the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of 1961. The Soviets obtained permission from Cuba’s Fidel Castrol and immediately embarked on developing missile installation in the country. The developments went on for a while without the knowledge of the United States which on the other hand was so engrossed in plans on how to deal with the Fidel Castrol menace.

By July 1962 there was overwhelming indication of increased support to the Cubans by the Soviets Military. The missile installation was very noticeable for instance there was confirmed present of air defense missiles, IL-28 medium-range bombers, medium range ballistic missiles, high altitude air surveillance, and increased strategic air command.

Numerous photographs of the soviet installations, some complete and some under construction were taken and show to president Kennedy and his advisers. This was an awakening call to the U.S on the seriousness of the situation and in the preceding week, president Kennedy and his military and civilian advisors embarked on exploring various options available to the U.S. Strong debates ensued in the U.S. administration ranks as Soviet diplomats strongly denied any installation of Soviet offensive missiles in Cuba.

Following the discovery, President Kennedy addressed his nation in a televised announcement on the 22nd of October 1962. His announcement informed the American citizens of the discovery of Soviet installations in Cuba and stated that any nuclear missile attack originating from Cuba would be considered a Soviet Union attack and the American authorities would respond accordingly. President Kennedy also impose a naval burn on Cuba to curtail further shipment of Soviet offensive military artilleries into Cuba. The restrictions affected military equipments that were under shipment to Cuba as well as raised the level or surveillance on Cuba. The use also reinforced its base at Guantanamo and explores various diplomatic channels such as sanctioning quarantine by the Organization of American States. Once the sanction was in effect, Kennedy issue Proclamation 3504 which established the quarantine was in effect from the 24 of October. He then directed the Defense secretary to take appropriate measures to ensure the quarantine is not violated.

Several steps had already been taken to activate military force for emergency situation since the discovery of the military installations in Cuba. Security was beefed and naval as well as air force activities in the Arabian were increased although the defense of the southeastern coast of the united states had started earlier in the year. It was not clear what course the Soviet Union would take, and following the increase rumors of the increased military operation, the United States left nothing to chance. All its entire defense system was on alert. The US was ready to counter any nuclear attack from the soviet.

The America strategic air command started dispatching bombers as well as placed all military planes on alert, equipped and ready to take off within fifteen minutes of a take off signal. The B-52 heavy bomber were placed of extensive airborne alert from the 25 of October to engage in flights for 24 hours a day, each time one landed another one took of. In addition, the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) crews enacted a similar alert status. Submarines were assigned various stations and also stay on alert as the American nuclear firepower was deployed to dissuade any careless confrontation. In Sum All the subdivision is the American armed and defense forces, navy, air force, etc were on high alert and ready to engage. These included North America Defense Command (NORAD), Continental Army Comand, (CONARC), Tactical Air Command (TAC), Army Forces Atlantic (ARLANT), and Air Forces Atlantic (AFLANT) and many other divisions.

The operation to oversee the quarantine was also allocated another command created under a special task force to ensure that the quarantine was not violated. Amy, navy and air force resources were committee to ensure that nothing was shipped into Cuba. A carrier was locate near Cuba with provide support to the military operation in the area and support the Guantanamo US base. The surveillance in the area was beefed to monitor about 2000 ships that operate in the Sothern Atlantic area and searches were conducted frequently by navy aircrafts and SAC bombers. The speed of the movement of military personnel, ships, and aircrafts was amazing

The continued stream of photographic intelligence information that continued to flow from Cuba indicated a rapid build up of offensive weapons. There was continuous construction of intermediate-rage ballistic missiles permanent sites and additional strategic positioning of mobile medium-range ballistic missiles. With all these development in Cuba, the positioning of American forces, it was only a matter of time before a confrontation would develop. Ironically, the potentially devastating exchanges that arise from quarantines similar to that that had been place upon Cuba failed to arise. The first Cuba bound soviet ship was intercepted on 25th of October, however the ship was allowed to proceed to proceed to Cuba after it was ascertained that it was carrying oil and not any dangerous materials. Cuban ships that had suspicious material change course and returned to the home coasts. Tension rose on 27 when U-2 aircraft was destroyed and the Soviet Union called to duty 14, 000 air force reservists, after activating 24 troop carrier squadrons and their supportive units.

During the crises, there was constant communication between the two sides. Communication mostly involved letter, however there was both formal communication and secrete channel communication. The Soviet President sent formal letter to his American counterpart explaining the deterrent nature of its Cuba missile mission, stating the Soviet Union had peaceful intentions. Khrushchev also sent a letter informing Kennedy the if America promised to invade Cuba, or participate in any invasion of Cuba, the Soviet missile installations would be dismantled and the personnel returned to USSR. Next, Khrushchev sent a letter on October 27 demanding demolition of U.S missile installations in turkey in exchange for demolition of its installation in Cuba. The American decided to ignore the second set of demand and honor the first one.

A break through in the crisis was attained on October 28 after the Soviet Union consented to demolition of offensive weapons from Cuba and subjected to United Nations verification. The US promised not to invade Cuba and all the surveillance and quarantine that had been placed upon Cuba were removed. However some Arial surveillance continued to ensure that all missile installation were removed from Cuba.

However, a second crisis emerged concerning removal of Soviet IL-28 bombers for Cuba. The US considered the bomber offensive. Diplomatic talks we held and these bombers were also shipped away under supervision like the previous weapons. The quarantine ended on November 20. The inter America quarantine force was dismantled. An agreement was later struck by the two presidents and America would never invade Cuba again.

Annotated bibliography

Khrushchev, Nikita. Letter. “American Experience.” 23 Oct. 1962

This is a letter written in response to a previous latter by Kennedy which confirm the reception of the letter and also states USSR demands for removal of offensive military installations Cuba.

May, Earnest R. and Philip D. Zelikow. The Kennedy Tapes. President and Fellows of Harvard College. 1997.

This text is important for understanding the Cuban Missile crises. It contains all communications within the white house during the crisis. It is thus important for understanding what ensued in the white house during the crisis.

Medland, William J. “The Cuban Missile Crisis: Evolving Historical Perspectives.” History Teacher, v23 n4 p433-47 1990

This text provides an extensive exploration of the views of various scholars on the Cuban Missile crises and the active surrounding it.

Nathan, James, A. Anatomy of the Cuban Missile Crisis: (Greenwood Press Guides to Historic Events of the Twentieth Century). Greenwood Press. 2000.

These books explore how the Cuba missile crisis almost plunged the world into a devastating nuclear based third world war. It explore how the conflict developed and its consequences

Presidential Library and Museum. “Cuban Missile Crisis.” John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum. The US Government, 2011. Web. 20 Jan. 2011. HYPERLINK “http://www.jfklibrary.org/‌JFK/‌JFK-in-History/‌Cuban-Missile-Crisis.aspx” http://www.jfklibrary.org/‌JFK/‌JFK-in-History/‌Cuban-Missile-Crisis.aspx

This is a secondary source. He website highlights and discuses all the measure taken by the American president Kennedy to handle to missile crisis issue. It state all effort of Kennedy to stop the crisis

Walser, Ray. “Cuban Communism.” Global Museum on Communism. Global Museum on Communism, 2009. Web. 27 Jan. 2011. <http://cuba.globalmuseumoncommunism.org/‌cuba/‌history>.

This article published by Dr Walser explores issues of communism, in Cuba and its relation to the Cuban missile crisis.

Work Cited

Khrushchev, Nikita. Letter. American Experience. 23 Oct. 1962

May, Earnest R. and Philip D. Zelikow. The Kennedy Tapes. President and Fellows of Harvard College. 1997.

Medland, William J. “The Cuban Missile Crisis: Evolving Historical Perspectives.” History Teacher, v23 n4 p433-47 1990

Nathan, James, A. Anatomy of the Cuban Missile Crisis: (Greenwood Press Guides to Historic Events of the Twentieth Century). Greenwood Press. 2000.

Presidential Library and Museum. “Cuban Missile Crisis.” John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum. The US Government, 2011. Web. 20 Jan. 2011. http://www.jfklibrary.org/‌JFK/‌JFK-in-History/‌Cuban-Missile-Crisis.aspx

Walser, Ray. “Cuban Communism.” Global Museum on Communism. Global Museum on Communism, 2009. Web. 27 Jan. 2011. <http://cuba.globalmuseumoncommunism.org/‌cuba/‌history>.