Dayton Business Daily

How do you feel about NATO forces being posted in the West Bank? The proposal is under current consideration by President-elect Obama but is meeting with a hostile Israeli response,since it would effectively end their 41-year military occupation. The Palestinian Authority views the proposal with understandable apprehension but is apparently keeping an open mind. What is your opinion? Would this facilitate Palestinian independence or is it simply a matter of relieving the IDF of international pressure to get out,but effectively changing nothing?

Should the US use extreme force in response for grenades anad automatic weapons used agianst US ships? The pirates promised to murder US and French sailors and they are trying to keep their word. http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/04/14/somalia.pirates/index.html (CNN) -- The Liberty Sun, a U.S.-flagged cargo ship bound for Mombasa, Kenya, was attacked Tuesday by Somali pirates, according to a NATO source with direct knowledge of the matter. "The pirates fired rocket-propelled grenades and automatic weapons at the vessel, which sustained damage," said a statement from New York-based Liberty Maritime Corporation, which owns the vessel.

Does NATO play a part in USA's decision over the flotilla attack? Turkey is a NATO signatory, and Article 5 of the NATO charter states that armed attacks against one or more NATO members in Europe or North America will be considered an attack against all of them, and each will take action (including the possibility of armed force) "to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area." Article 6 explicitly mentions the Mediterranean Sea as a location for where attacks will trigger responses. Doesn't the USA have to side with Turkey because of NATO? Turkey civilians were attacked in international waters. Your thoughts

Israel distracts millions -- but from what and why ? Now that our attention has been focused on Israel and their continued slaughter of people in a walled prison with no possible escape What other things of note are going on that we are no longer paying attention to ? Pakistan has closed a vital supply route to NATO and US-led forces in Afghanistan, preventing supply trucks from crossing into the country. Pakistan has closed the supply route several times; in September Islamabad closed the route and barred trucks carrying fuel and other supplies to US-led and NATO forces from crossing into Afghanistan in response to US cross border attacks, which have violated the sovereignty of the country and left scores of civilians dead. http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=79924&sectionid=351020401 Chinese and Russian military chiefs have spoken to each other on a new phone hotline for the first time amid warming ties between the two countries. Chen Bingde, chief of the general staff of China's army, and his Russian counterpart Nikolay Makarov, speaking Monday for the first time on the new hotline, pledged to communicate frequently in order to push forward military ties. http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=79897&sectionid=351020404 A US battleship anchors at the Georgian port of Poti amid reports that the Georgian military is regrouping near the South Ossetian border. http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=79882&sectionid=351020606 Russia has begun to sell surface-to-air missiles to seven countries, including Libya, Syria and Venezuela, according to a Russian newspaper Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez says US charges that Iran is using Venezuelan planes to ship missile parts to Syria are nothing but fabrications. A former KGB analyst and Russian academic predicts a civil war in the United States which will lead to the eventual fall of the country. http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=79878&sectionid=3510203

Why Pakistani Government is not sued in International Court of justice for the voilation of human rigthts? It`s going hell in Pakistan. Akhter Jan Mengal and thousands of Pakistanis are kidnapped and arrested by Military Intelligence. They are under torture and even,face extra-judicial killings. The villages are destroyed and burnt down. In Balochistan, the military is contining bombardment and killing the people, using even chemical bombs. Talibans are sponsored and infiltrated in Afghanistan by Pakistan who are killing NATO forces and Afghans.In Pakistan, Women and small girls are being killed & raped. Police is committing million Rs. robbries Why not Musharaf, his military is not sued in "International court of Justice" in Hague? Why not total sanctions are imposed on Pakistan by U.N. for voilations of Human rights in Pakistan? Why world community think about only Talibans (Pakistani Jehadis) killing Afghans and NATO Forces in Afghanistan? .....and why not think about Pakistani Military killing and harassing his own citizens? It`s boiling point pl. response !

Nuclear war scenario for History homework - what do you think ? Okay , we have been asked for homework to write a East bloc v. Western bloc war scenario. So here is a summary of my primary idea for it ; - tell me what you think , or what I need to improve ETC - any advice appreciated It's 1983 , Reagan is in power as the US president (obviously) and tensions with the Soviet Union begin to build. Operation Able Archer '83 ends on the 11th of November , but leaves a noticeable feeling of hostility and mistrust between the two sides. The Soviet Union , in the December begins to suffer vast fuel shortages , weakening its economy. The US domination of the Persian gulf prevents the Soviets being able to purchase the necessary amount of Oil from the region to revitalize its economy. In an attempt to force the US into a position where it has to consent to the Soviet Union purchasing oil from the region , the Politburo orders Warsaw Pact forces to blockade West Berlin. However , this time , a much more dangerous scenario occurs than in 1949 , The Soviet Union vows to shoot down any NATO aircraft that enters the airspace of East Germany , effectively cutting the West Berlin off from the west. As the people imprisoned behind the Berlin wall find that supplies are running low , negotiations fail. And the American Strategic Nuclear Forces reduce to a status of Def con 3. Pershing II missile which could hit the russian capital within eight minutes of their launch are deployed across western Europe , intensifying the situation. In the February of 1984 , The Berlin Brigade is mobilized and this action makes the Soviet Union feel increasingly threatened. Soviet TU-95 Patrols begin to penetrate American airspace undeterred by the intercepting American fighter aircraft. Then , in march , a squadron of Soviet bombers is detected heading towards Anchorage (Alaska) , Fighter jets are scrambled to meet them , however , they continue , despite warning shots being fired across their path. The US air force decides to take action and orders that they shoot the bombers down if they penetrate US airspace - they do. Relations between the Kremlin and Pentagon fall to an all time low , and the US government decides to prepare the NATO forces in Europe for an all out war with the Soviet Union. A massive Convoy is readied which contains military supplies and troops destined for Europe , on hearing this , the Soviet Union decide to mount a massive naval blockade , running from the tip of Southern Norway , to the Northern spain , and announce passing it will be an act of war. The US convoy , escorted by Royal navy escorts , penetrates it , and a massive naval battle ensues. After the first hour over 15% of the Convoy is destroyed, but then the tide turns and the US and British navies manage to use the air superiority provided by their aircraft carriers in the area to attack the soviet fleet damaging and sinking it. The Atlantic shipping lanes remain open , but world war three has begun. Last ditch diplomatic efforts come to nothing , and across Europe , governments begin to broadcast terrifying civil defense programs. Now the NATO forces in Europe are fully mobilized and a period of non-action passes. Then in May , the Soviets surprise everyone and invade Iran and Iraq. NATO forces in Europe are ordered to begin an advance into East Germany to free West Berlin and deter the soviet action , meanwhile , the US scrambles bombers to attack a massive Soviet airbase set up in Iran. The bombers are attacked by fighter aircraft and shot down , so , in a chilling turn of events the US air-blast a nuclear bomb over the airbase. The airbase is destroyed but in response The Soviets authorize a attack on the West German capital Bonn using biological weapons. Now , the US decides to respond in kind , Strategic Air Command authorizes nuclear attacks on Vladivostok , Leningrad and Murmansk as part of a response to show their resolve. In response attacks early warning stations across the UK attacking with bombers armed with conventional , non-nuclear weapons as well as attacking New York , New Orleans and Newport News with ICBMs. The USA sees no alternative. Strategic air Command takes to the air and SIOP is initiated. The Soviet Union launches its Nuclear weapons in response , and targets across Europe and America are destroyed - in total 4000 megatons are exchanged. So what do you think - any comments ?

Game idea (need oppinon)? I am a book writer and have recently gotten the idea of developing a game based on the book. Please let me know: 1. does it sound good 2. would you play it. Russia is in termoil. Rebel Seperatists have seized several major locations throughout main and eastern russia. Moscow sends in its best response force but is ambushed.. This is where the game comes in. The world is not ina hurry to help. NATO sees it as a chance however to widden their control, and China sees it as a chance to control trade in Asia by taking over the large amount of untapped resources in Russia and stop trading what it usauly does. The United States sees the future of a unstable russia as a threat. You must choose a side: Moscow, Rebels, or the US. you will have to decide what to use, where to deploy it, and how to fight. The majority of Russia must be controlled by your army, or World War III will erupt as China and NATO might get involved. It will be set up kind of like a RISK board. The player will have a set number of roles. Each role will consist of adding new troops, intell gathering aon enemy units, targets, and attacking-defending. please let me know what you think. would it surprise you to know that as a writer it was Tom Clancy's "Red Storm Entertainment:" that first inspired me as a writer.

Is this a good pitch for a flash game? Hallo alle! I have come up with an idea which I think would make for a great flash game. I'm 12 though, so don't expect it to be perfect. OK _____________________________________________________________ So, it's the day of the Chernobyl incident in Ukraine. You are a worker there, and are on the outskirts of the city on lunch break (or something) when the meltdown happens. You are knocked out though, for you fell and hit your head as you rushed to the window to see what was happening. You awake several hours later. It's night time, and the streets are cleared. You first suspect that NATO has made a preemptive strike on the U.S.S.R. and grab your Makorov PM and start fortifying the building your in. You then contemplate the prospect that NATO could have of possibly launched a strategical nuclear missile against your general area, and dawn a radiation suit. You wait until the night, and then decide to go to the rooftop with a megaphone and call for any survivors. This is a bad decision, though. All the residents of the surrounding area have been transformed into Zombie-like beings, and attack your building. The radiation has malformed them, and they possess an increased strength. You hold them off the first night. Immediately after, you get on your radio and try to contact anyone else. You can't manage to contact anyone, but you can pick up a message from the president of the Soviet Union, and you can make out him saying that there has been a slight 'accident' in the Chernobyl nuclear plant, and that aid will be along quickly. You also hear, though, that it will be at least a month before help is 'available' . You buckle down and prepare for 30 more onslaughts upon your building. You can spend 15 hours of every day searching, among other things. To go very far into the city (which will unlock more weapons and the like) requires an upgraded radiation suit. To do this, you have to have certain materials, gathered by searching. This process will also take hours of your day away. Available weapons will be things such as the AK-47, Dragonuv SVD, dual Makorov, AK-74, PK machine gun, and the ultimate Soviet beast of guns, the Shipunov GShG-7.62 minigun (Ready for 6,000 rounds a minute, COMRADE?). The zombies will get progressively harder. After 30 days, a massive soviet response force rolls in. But they're not here to aid you. Rather the opposite. They are here to cover up the evidence that anything besides the nuclear reactor exploded and a handful of people died. If the west knew of the zombies, they would possibly begin experimentation with it and form their own army. So, you face off against helicopters, infantry, Tanks, the works. This will last for about 5 rounds. After this all, you learn from listening to the radio that a Strategic Nuke is heading for Pripyat. You almost figured they'd do that though, and had a plan. There was a downed helicopter not too far away that was still airworthy. You decide it wouldn't hurt to try and pilot (Well, actually it could) it and escape the immediate blast. You get in it, and eventually get the hang of it. As your flying away, you can actually see the nuclear warhead heading to it's target. You push the shi* to full throttle and do your best to get outta there. It's impossible though. You crashland somewhere in a surrounding forest. I will make a sequel from there, If I make this at all. Well, truth be known, I don't have the time of the day to make this. I would like anyone who likes this idea and wants to develop the game to mail me at ZacTSharpe@Yahoo.com And, if you make it without my consent, atleast mail me the link to the game hence published. Peace. I want it to be a game much like last stand 2.

Was the US bombing of Pakistan really such a good idea ? Pakistan closes NATO supply route Tue, 30 Dec 2008 10:00:32 GMT Pakistan has closed a vital supply route to NATO and US-led forces in Afghanistan, preventing supply trucks from crossing into the country. An estimated 70 percent of NATO supplies move through Khyber to support US-led troops stationed in Afghanistan. Pakistan has closed the supply route several times; in September Islamabad closed the route and barred trucks carrying fuel and other supplies to US-led and NATO forces from crossing into Afghanistan in response to US cross border attacks, which have violated the sovereignty of the country and left scores of civilians dead. http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=79924&sectionid=351020401 Pakistan was outraged at the mini invasion led by the US -- where they chased "bad people" into Pakistan and killed a lot of people , civilians children women and small villages put together with mud and sticks Some US citizens actually believed Pakistan agreed to this in secret - Most didn't care because the US can do anything it pleases so shut up ------------------------- Now -- in response - the nuclear armed and former friend of the US -- has retaliated by closing it's border to the people who were bombing them and killing their women and children and destroying mud huts along the border ------- How long will it take Fox news to twist that into something unrecognizable ? ----------- Was it really a good idea to bomb people in a nation who hold the keys to the highways into another war ? --------- What is the logic of the US foreign policy -- if any in all of this ?

What do you really think about Sarah Palin? What do you think about this article? I think it's right on! Sarah Palin is the perfect exclamation point to the Bush years. We’ve lived through nearly two terms of an administration that believed it could create its own reality: “Deficits don’t matter.” “Brownie, you’re doing a heckuva job.” “Those weapons of mass destruction must be somewhere.” Now comes Ms. Palin, a smiling, bubbly vice-presidential candidate who travels in an alternate language universe. For Ms. Palin, such things as context, syntax and the proximity of answers to questions have no meaning. In her closing remarks at the vice-presidential debate Thursday night, Ms. Palin referred earnestly, if loosely, to a quote from Ronald Reagan. He had warned that if Americans weren’t vigilant in protecting their freedom, they would find themselves spending their “sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was like in America when men were free.” What Ms. Palin didn’t say was that the menace to freedom that Reagan was talking about was Medicare. As the historian Robert Dallek has pointed out, Reagan “saw Medicare as the advance wave of socialism, which would ‘invade every area of freedom in this country.’ ” Does Ms. Palin agree with that Looney Tunes notion? Or was this just another case of the aw-shucks, darn-right, I’m-just-a-hockey-mom governor of Alaska mouthing something completely devoid of meaning? Here’s Ms. Palin during the debate: “Say it ain’t so, Joe! There you go pointing backwards again ... Now, doggone it, let’s look ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to do for them in the future. You mentioned education, and I’m glad you did. I know education you are passionate about with your wife being a teacher for 30 years, and God bless her. Her reward is in heaven, right?” If Governor Palin didn’t like a question, or didn’t know the answer, she responded as though some other question had been asked. She made no bones about this, saying early in the debate: “I may not answer the questions the way that either the moderator or you want to hear.” The problem with Ms. Palin’s candidacy is that John McCain might actually win this election, and then if something terrible happened, the country could be left with little more than an exclamation point as president. After Ms. Palin had woven one of her particularly impenetrable linguistic webs, Joe Biden turned to the debate’s moderator, Gwen Ifill, and said: “Gwen, I don’t know where to start.” Of course he didn’t know where to start because Ms. Palin’s words don’t mean anything. She’s all punctuation. This is such a serious moment in American history that it’s hard to believe that someone with Ms. Palin’s limited skills could possibly be playing a leadership role. On the day before the debate, the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, Gen. David McKiernan, made an urgent appeal for more troops, saying the additional “boots on the ground,” as well as more helicopters and other vital equipment, were “needed as quickly as possible.” The morning after the debate, the Labor Department announced that the employment situation in the U.S. had deteriorated even more than experts had expected. The nation lost nearly 160,000 jobs in September, more than double the monthly losses in July and August. Conditions are probably worse than even those numbers indicate because the government’s statistics do not yet reflect the response of employers to the credit crisis that has taken such a hold in the last few weeks. Where is the evidence that Governor Palin even understands these complex and enormously challenging problems? During the debate she twice referred to General McKiernan as “McClellan.” Neither Ms. Ifill nor Senator Biden corrected her. But after Senator Biden suggested that John McCain’s answer to the nation’s energy problems was to “drill, drill, drill,” Ms. Palin promptly pointed out, as if scoring a point, that “the chant is ‘Drill, baby, drill!’ ” How’s that for perspective? The credit markets are frozen. Our top general in Afghanistan is dialing 911. Americans are losing jobs by the scores of thousands. And Sarah Palin is making sure we know that the chant is “drill, baby, drill!” not “drill, drill, drill.” John McCain has spent most of his adult life speaking of his love for his country. Maybe he sees something in Sarah Palin that most Americans do not. Maybe he is aware of qualities that lead him to believe she’d be as steady as Franklin Roosevelt in guiding the U.S. through a prolonged economic downturn. Maybe she’d be as wise and prudent in a national emergency as John Kennedy was during the Cuban missile crisis. Maybe Senator McCain has reason to believe that it would not be the most colossal of errors to put Ms. Palin a heartbeat away from the presidency. He’s got just four weeks to share that insight with the rest of us. More Articles in Opinion » A version of this article appeared in print I didn't like her before I read articles about her. I'm obsevant enough to make my opinion based on her interviews and speeches. I just think that what others write sums it up precisely.

Can we get news source citations for White House press releases to discern good PR from propaganda? http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/nationalsecurity/ President Bush Addresses CENTCOM Coalition Conference "Our main enemy is al Qaeda and its affiliates. Their allies choose their victims indiscriminately. They murder the innocent to advance a focused and clear ideology. They seek to establish a radical Islamic caliphate, so they can impose a brutal new order on unwilling people, much as Nazis and communists sought to do in the last century. This enemy will accept no compromise with the civilized world. Here is what the al Qaeda charter says about those who oppose their plans: 'We will not meet them halfway, and there will be no room for dialogue with them.' These enemies have embraced a cult of death. They are determined to bring days of even greater destruction on our people. They seek the world's most dangerous weapons. Against this kind of enemy, there is only one effective response: We must go on the offense, stay on the offense, and take the fight to them." President George W. Bush May 1, 2007 America and Our Allies Are Working Together to Keep Our Nations Safe On Tuesday, May 1, 2007, President Bush Addressed The CENTCOM Coalition Conference At MacDill Air Force Base In Tampa, Florida. America is joined in the fight against terrorists by more than 90 nations, including every country represented in the CENTCOM Coalition. The work of these countries has helped liberate millions of people, has kept brutal enemies on the defensive, and has helped keep millions of our citizens safe. •Currently, 64 Nations Have Military Representatives Assigned To The CENTCOM Headquarters. CENTCOM is one of nine Defense Department Unified Combatant Commands assigned operational control of U.S. combat forces. Its area of responsibility includes Iraq and Afghanistan as well as: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Iran, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the Seychelles, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Yemen, and the northwestern Indian Ocean, Arabian Sea, and Arabian Gulf. America And Our Allies Are Working Together To Address The Dangers Of Our Time An Era Of New Threats Requires New Forms Of Engagement, So We Have Reinvigorated Historic Alliances, Such As NATO, And Formed New And Dynamic Coalitions To Address The Dangers Of Our Time. Our broad Coalition has protected millions of people. We have worked to stop the spread of dangerous weapons, and we have taken the fight to the enemy where they live, so we do not have to face them where we live. •Working Together, America And Our Allies Have Shared Intelligence That Has Helped Thwart Many Terrorist Plots. oWe uncovered and stopped terrorist conspiracies targeting embassies in Yemen and Singapore and ships in the Straits of Hormuz and Gibraltar. oWe stopped a Southeast Asian terror cell grooming operatives for terrorist attacks and an al-Qaeda cell seeking to develop anthrax. oBritish authorities disrupted a plot to blow up aircraft flying over the Atlantic toward the United States. •Coalition Forces Have Captured Or Killed Key Leaders Of Terrorist Networks. oPhilippine forces killed top leaders of an al-Qaeda affiliate. oSpanish police captured fugitives wanted in connection with the Madrid train bombings. oTerrorist cells have been broken up by countries including Britain, Canada, Denmark, Italy, France, Indonesia, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, and Turkey. •America And Our Allies Have Shut Down Funding Channels And Frozen Terrorist Assets, Making It Harder For Our Enemies To Finance Attacks, Purchase Weapons, And Train Recruits. The international community through the United Nations has imposed measures to identify terrorist financiers and prevent them from using international financial systems to fund acts of terror. •America And Our Allies Are Training Local Forces To Conduct Counterterrorism Activities In Their Own Regions. oWe are helping key nations – including Indonesia, the Philippines, and Yemen – stop terrorists from establishing safe havens inside their borders. oThe Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Partnership provides counterterrorism and military assistance to Chad, Mali, Niger, Mauritania, Algeria, Morocco, Nigeria, Senegal, and Tunisia. oThe East Africa Counterterrorism Initiative provides border security and police training to Comoros, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Tanzania, and Uganda. •Our Coalition Is Taking Steps To Stop Terrorists From Obtaining The World's Most Dangerous Weapons. More than 80 nations have joined the Proliferation Security Initiative and are working to stop shipments of materials related to weapons of mass destruction on land, at sea, and in the air. •America And Other Nations Have Acted Boldly To Confront Adversaries Who Threatened International Security. In Afghanistan, Coalition forces drove the Taliban from power, removed al-Qaeda training camps, and helped bring freedom to 25 million people. Our Coalition Is Going On The Offense Against The Taliban And Its Al-Qaeda Allies In Afghanistan Since Their Liberation, The Afghan People Have Made Enormous Strides. Afghans chose the first democratically-elected President in their history and held free elections for a National Assembly. The Afghan economy has doubled in size, and more than 4.6 million Afghan refugees have come home in one of the largest return movements in history. The Taliban And Its Al-Qaeda Allies Are Actively Working To Undermine This Progress And Reclaim Power, And Our Coalition – Led By NATO – Is Going On The Offense Against Them. Coalition and Afghan forces have conducted dozens of operations over the past few months to go after the enemy in their strongholds, including an operation launched this week targeting the Taliban in Helmand Province in the South. We have seized dozens of caches of weapons, ammunition, and improvised explosive devices, and we are making progress in training the growing Afghan National Army. •At Least 20 Other Nations Are Supporting Efforts To Rebuild Afghanistan. The United States appreciates these contributions, and we will stand with our partners and the Afghan people until our work is done. We Are Also Committed To Winning The Fight In Iraq After An Extensive Review, President Bush Ordered A New Strategy In Iraq And Appointed General David Petraeus To Carry That Strategy Out. This new strategy recognizes that our top priority must be to help the Iraqi government secure its capital so they can make political and economic progress. The Iraqis cannot yet do this on their own, so the President ordered reinforcements to help Iraqis secure their population, go after those inciting sectarian violence, and get their capital under control. •This Strategy Is Still In Its Early Stages, Yet At This Early Hour, We Are Seeing Some Signs That Give Us Hope. Some of the reinforcements General Petraeus requested have not yet arrived in Baghdad, and he believes it will take months before we can accurately gauge the strategy's potential for success. Yet at this early hour: oCoalition forces have captured a number of key terrorist leaders who are providing information about how al-Qaeda operates in Iraq. oCoalition forces have stopped a car bomb network, which had killed many citizens of Baghdad, and they have destroyed major car bomb factories. oThere has been a decline in sectarian violence. oIn some areas of the capital, Iraqis are returning to their neighborhoods with an increased feeling of security. •Success In Iraq Is Critical To The Security Of Free People Everywhere. Terrorists continue to unleash horrific acts of violence in Iraq, and al-Qaeda is playing a major role. Last week, General Petraeus called al-Qaeda "probably public enemy number one" in Iraq and said that al-Qaeda has made Iraq "the central front of their global campaign." America Is Deeply Grateful For The Contributions Of Nations Supporting Operations In Iraq. Today, more than 30 nations are supporting operations in Iraq. Seventeen NATO nations have contributed forces or been part of the NATO Training Mission to help train Iraqis, and Georgia also recently decided to contribute 2,000 troops. America joins in honoring the Coalition troops who have been killed in Iraq and the others who have been wounded in combat. America Is Also Grateful For The Increasing Contributions International Organizations Are Making To Iraq's Stability. •On May 3, the United Nations will host a conference in Egypt to sign an International Compact for Iraq. This agreement will bring new economic assistance in exchange for greater economic reform in Iraq. On May 4, Iraq's neighbors will meet to discuss ways to promote political reconciliation in Iraq. These meetings will be attended by Secretary Rice and senior officials from the G-8 nations. Iran and Syria have been invited to attend.

Zaibach Empire (Anime: Escaflowne) vs Modern Day Military (USA, NATO)? This is just for fun! What woud happen if let's just say that the Zaibach Empire manages to sends in their forces to Tokyo where they send in their Mechas into the city and all of the sudden, this is where the final battle begins on Earth aka The Mystic Moon. What do you think? For example, if the JSDF (Japanese Self-Defense Force) were outnumbered by Zaibach's army filled with Guymelefs & flying Fortresses, how effective would a missile defense system or ICBM do to their floating fotress as well as their Mecha? Another example, if the Zaibach's Guymelefs turns invisible, could we still detect them on radar? Or with Infared Heat sensor since we could still detect their heat? How much damage would it take to take down one Guymelef with SABOT Rounds, JDAM (Joint Diect Atack Munition) or simply 105/120mm tank rounds. Also, if Japan were suddenly invaded by Zaibach, how would the US military responses? Please give me some advantages and disadvantages for the modern military going up against the Zaibach Empire and be specific, I would like someone else to know other stratagies such as how effective is the F/A-18 Hornet or an F/A-22 Raptor go against either a Zaibach's Guymelefs or simply, Escaflowne in a dogfight! Please do not leave bad comments or I will delete them. Thank you! Sorry for those who can't read all the details I wrote...

Is it ok if Russia parks nuclear weapons in Cuba as a response to the missle shield ? October Putin says the missle shield was the same as the Cuban missle crises pointing out that a shield is a safe place for the US to fire missles at Russia from ---- Bush and Rice dismiss the warning Ha ha what your problem Roosky ??? http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/oct/27/usa.russia Then Russia said if you actually deploy that thing we will respond in a military fashion "If a US strategic anti-missile shield is deployed near our borders, we will be forced to react not in a diplomatic fashion but with military resources," a statement from the foreign ministry said. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/080708/world/czech_us_missile_military_nato_georgia_6 Bush and Rice more or less said ---- So what ? Now Russia is going to place nuclear bombers in Cuba - (ironic isn't it ) So is that ok - Are Bush Rice and the American people going to laugh that one off too ? "While they are deploying the missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic, our strategic bombers will already be landing in Cuba," Russian newspaper Izvestia quoted an unnamed senior Russian air force official on Monday. A spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry declined to comment on the report Monday, but did not deny it. http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=64473&sectionid=351020602 Mark my words Bush and Rice and probably McCain are going to act surprised by all of this What --- ???? Oh no --- no one could see that coming at all even though it has been warned threatened and so on for months now - No one could have seen this ! Obama will likely act shocked as well Brian A shield is a safe place for the Americans to launch missles at Russia It is a place the US can hide behind - and attack someone from Don't you get that ? I can not be shot at because of my shield --- it is therefore safe for me to shoot at you - because there will be no retaliation - It is a really simple concept Try -- think hard try try Brian

What to do in these crisis? (Pakistan)? Pakistan's role in the Washington-led "war on terrorism" promises to remain a matter of great internal acrimony until we do not formulate a policy that conceptually, politically and operationally locates it within the context of our own national interest and in keeping with our own Constitution and legal frameworks. So, is there a national interests dimension to our participation? Yes, there is. Pakistan does face an acute internal security crisis. This, and this alone, is the broad formulation of our national challenge. It is within this broad formulation that elements like suicide bombings, rising militancy, foreign militants, the Al Qaeda presence, rising sectarian killings, the receding write of the state, US pressures, Pakistan's UN obligations, the external factor, the Pakistani-Afghan border situation, must be placed and then comprehensively examined for policy options available to Pakistan. Instead of such a formulation there are numerous examples that manifest at best confusion and at worst the continuing poverty of policymaking, especially where tackling militancy and terrorism is concerned. Three recent examples are noteworthy. First, official Pakistan's response to the first-ever US ground attack on Pakistani territory and Pakistani civilians was neither coherent nor sustained. The Pakistani civilians who died in South Waziristan were killed late night by US soldiers who opened fire on sleeping men, women and children. Pakistan's response to the attacks, included the passage of a parliament resolution condemning the attack, the then presidential candidate Asif Zardari and the foreign secretary separately summoned and reprimanded the US ambassador, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee announcing that another attack will force Pakistan to take action, the army chief cancelling a meeting with an Islamabad-based US major general. A less publicised letter was written to US government by the Pakistani national security advisor complaining to his counterpart that the ground attack was a violation of Pakistan's sovereignty and territorial integrity. An initial Pakistani reaction of using the leverage it enjoys over the NATO and US forces stopping supplies through Pakistan was hurriedly reversed and the Americans were informed the supply was stopped due to security reasons. All these noises notwithstanding US aerial missile attacks have increased killing hardly any Al Qaeda operatives but leaving civilians dead. Significantly, the army chief, Gen Parvez Kayani, and the DGMO, Lt Gen Pasha, met with the US General Mullen, the CENTCOM chief and the US general based in Afghanistan on board the US carrier Lincoln prior to the ground attack. The only information regarding this meeting was that the American praised Pakistani handling of "terrorist elements." The second example of our policy confusion and perhaps lack of transparency are Washington's statements about Pakistan's cooperation convey complete satisfaction with the cooperation being extended by it. What is the basis of this satisfaction while the government of Pakistan is publicly angered by the ongoing US attacks? How does the new government explain this unless there are new unpublicised rules of engagement that have been agreed upon? The third and most recent example of a lack of policy coherence flows from the newly elected president's statements made at his inaugural press conference held jointly with the Afghan president. President Asif Ali Zardari's first articulation of the problems accrued to Pakistan from internal terrorism, from a destabilised Afghanistan and from Washington's attacks on Pakistani territory raised several questions. For example, when he was asked about the government's response to the United States' continued attacks on Pakistan, instead of using the opportunity to emphasise commitment to Pakistan's sovereignty and integrity, he merely stated that the government had registered its complaint. Karzai used stronger words to reprimand the US for killing Afghan civilians. Admittedly, words do not substitute action, yet they reveal mindsets and understanding. Somewhat perplexing was the president's response to a rather naïve yet logical question, that would he call the US government terrorists for the deliberate killing of women and children Pakistan. Zardari said that the Americans are there in Afghanistan under the UN sanction, if you want to call the UN a terrorist organisation, then you can do so." This rather incomprehensible statement is counterfactual too. While under the UNSC resolution 1373 all UN member-states are obliged to cooperate in UN-sanctioned international efforts to curb terrorism, equally all nations under Article 51 of the UN Charter have the right to act in self-defence. More importantly, attacks on Pakistani territory and Pakistani civilians have been carried out by US drones and US forces, and not by UN-sanctioned forces executing a UN mandate. In fact, Washington ha

help with history questions about the cold war...? 1. How was Germany and specifically Berlin divided after WWII and what is the significance of the Berlin Wall? 2. Why did the Allies conduct the Berlin airlift and what does the Berlin Airlift signify today? 3. What was NATO's role in stabilizing Europe during the Cold War and was it effective peacekeeping force during the Cold War? 4. How were the political divisions of Europe in the Cold War in the 1950's problematic for future generations in the Soviet Unions? 5. How did the Hungarian Revolt (1956) and the Czechoslovakian Rebellion (1969) show the problems with communism? 6. How was the Sovie Union's response to changes and challenges in the Soviet Bloc different from 1950 to the 1960's? 7. What characteristics does the Cold War have that make it unique in comparison to WW1 and WWII?

Is a conflict with Russia on the horizon -? Putin on Friday said Kosovo had set a "terrible precedent, which will de facto blow apart the whole system of international relations." Russia's new representative to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, said the same day that Moscow had the right to "use force" if NATO or the EU challenged the UN over Kosovo. About 1,000 Russians demonstrated against NATO and Kosovo's independence at a Moscow rally organised by the Communist Party on Saturday. The Greek communist party organised a similar event in Athens at which several hundred people burned the EU and US flags. Serbian officials and media have welcomed Russia's support in opposing Kosovo's independence. "Russia enters in war for Kosovo!," read the front-page headline of Belgrade-based daily Press on Saturday in response to a criticism of the West by Putin and other Russian officials.The Press quoted a senior official of the ultra-nationalist Serbian Radical Party, Aleksandar Vucic, saying that "only Russians could stop NATO's fascist measure http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/080223/world/serbia_kosovo_politics_56 We too would then have to proceed from the view that in order to be respected, we must use brute force - in other words armed force." http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=fb28fc0e-0a27-460a-bce7-4a85e37a2d6b&k=6249 Russia talks about pre - emptive nuclear strikes http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=1051739787281584894&q=nuclear+war+russia&total=351&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

It should be no surp[rise when Russia "responds" but what do you think they are planning? Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin warns that the country is to respond to the presence of the NATO naval forces in the Black Sea. “The reaction will be calm, without any sort of hysteria. But of course, there will be an answer,” Interfax quoted Putin as saying on Tuesday. Moscow has warned Washington that it will respond to deployment of interceptor missiles and radar facility in Poland and the Czech Republic. "If the decision to deploy missile interceptors is made, if the radar is switched on, we will have to respond to that because we haven't received any reasonable explanation why it's being done," Dmitry Medvedev said in an interview with Italian RAI television broadcast Tuesday without specifying what the response would entail. http://www.presstv.ir/defaultault.aspx

Video game idea? I am working on a game that a friend is going to help me try to get developed and want to see if anyone would like to see it or play it: Keep in mind this is based on a book I am writing. Russia is in termoil. Seperatists, tired of the government, curroption, and horrible economy have seized a large number of locations vital to stability in Russia. (particularly in the east). They now threaten to attack Moscow and over throw the government. Russia sends a response team, the best counter attack force they have ever had, one which saw a lot of good action in Afghanistan and other revolutions in Europe during the Soviet Union days. However ambushes reduce this force to a fraction of its size. This leaves Russia in a civil war. As fighting continues between regular Russian units and the seperatists, the United States, NATO, the United Nations, and several other countries become worried and curious about Russia's future. this is where the game comes into play: As a player, you must choose a side: The seperatists, the U.S., or Moscow. you will help decide the fate of a torn nation. As your side, you must develop weapons, provide transport, build bases, and decide where to place them, how to get there, what to attack, what to defend. There will probably be a timer. NATO and China both have personal reasons to get involved in the future of Russia. If Russia is not stabilized by the end of the timer, it could mean World War III. Not even the United Nations can help you, as they become sure that it is not worth their time or trouble.

The Taliban, Fragmented groups, Fighters. Whatever we call them: They don't give up easily, do they? ~~~~~ Afghan supplies torched in Pakistan ~~~~~ Taliban fighters are increasingly attacking Nato and US supply routes into Afghanistan [AFP] A guard has been killed and scores of lorries set on fire in an attack on a Pakistani supply terminal used by Nato and US forces in Afghanistan. Kashaf Alam, a police official, said around 30 suspected Taliban fighters attacked the terminal with rockets and guns early on Sunday near Peshawar city in the country's northwest. The fire engulfed around 100 lorries and shipping containers. Kifayatullah Khan, the terminal's manager, said 62 of the destroyed containers carried Humvees and other military vehicles for Western forces in Afghanistan. He said his terminal only handled lorries carrying military supplies for Afghanistan. Supply route targeted The Taliban has carried out a a series of similar attacks in recent weeks, aimed at disrupting the vital supply route for US and Nato troops into Afghanistan through the Khyber Pass. Supply lorries carry 75 per cent of the food and fuel for the foreign troops in Afghanistan. A Taliban spokesman told Al Jazeera two weeks ago that such attacks would continue "until the [Afghan] government and the Americans are smashed". "We want to show them they are not all-powerful and the mujahadin of Afghanistan can carry out attacks on our enemies in any part of the country," Zabiullah Mujahid, the spokesman, said. Coalition forces have reportedly discussed opening new supply routes into the country through Russia, and even Iran. 'More attacks' Al Jazeera's Kamal Hyder, in Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan, said: "It is not the first time that such an attack has taken place. "Just a few months ago over 60 trucks laden with fuel were sabotaged by elements, who later on took responsibility, opposed to the war in Afghanistan and want to send a strong signal. "[The government] has not been able to provide the necessary security. There are critics of the government who say that all the security is employed to look after the very important personalities and the elite elements of society." Imitaz Gul, a political analyst in Islamabad, told Al Jazeera: "I think the likelihood is there are going to be more attacks ... I think we are likely to see more reaction by the Taliban, by the militants, to what the American troops and in particular the CIA [do]." Hamid Mir, a Pakistani journalist, told Al Jazeera: "I think that this particular incident is a response to attacks yesterday by the Americans in the North Waziristan area. "The growing tension between Pakistan and India will certainly help these militants. If Pakistan's army moves from the western to the eastern border then these militants will be the beneficiary. "Because of the Indian-Pakistan tension they [the Pakistan army] are not concentrating on beefing up the security in Peshawar." Source: Reuters Middle East news ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Devestation continues throughout the Middle East. Will the carnage, killing, destruction and fighting ever end? Or will it all progress until we all kill each each?

Do you think the US really means what it says? The US Defence Secretary has told Sky News that another Russian attack on Georgia once it has joined Nato would result in an American armed response. Robert Gates told Sky's foreign affairs editor Tim Marshall that Nato's charter would require it. "I have been a very strong proponent of the view that Nato is a military alliance not a talk shop," he said. "Article five means what it says - so there is a commitment to go to the assistance of our allies if they are challenged." Meanwhile the Russian Navy says the war in Georgia has shown the world that Moscow is once again a force to be reckoned with. Should the people in the UK be afraid?

someone plz help me I am stuck!? . Which was an early event in the Cold War? (Points: 3) The United States refused to include Russia in the Marshall Plan. East Germany formed an alliance with the Soviet Union. Stalin kept troops in Eastern Europe instead of holding promised elections. China continued to threaten an invasion of Japan. 2. What was the Iron Curtain? (Points: 3) the security arrangements that Stalin made to protect himself a line of guns and canons that the Soviets spread across Eastern Europe the imaginary wall separating communist countries from democracies a powerful agreement forged at Yalta at the end of World War II 3. What was the policy of containment forged by American diplomat George F. Kennan? (Points: 3) keeping Japan from forming alliances with Korea and China a system of troop deployment that surrounded the Soviet Union firmly opposing Soviet expansion and keeping communism in check a plan to prevent Eastern European nations from becoming economically independent 4. What name was given to the U.S. policy of giving economic and military aid to countries to restrict the spread of communism? (Points: 3) Marshall Plan Yalta Agreement Truman Doctrine Eisenhower Initiative 5. What was the Berlin Airlift? (Points: 3) the American and British attempt to evacuate Germans wanting to leave Berlin the German plan to restore the strength of the air force following World War II the American and British response to the Soviet blockade of Berlin the final attempt by Germans to force the Soviets out of East Germany 6. What was NATO? (Points: 3) the Network for Allied Topography Operations, formed to create accurate maps for the Allies in case of future wars the National Alliance for Training Organization, a school formed to coordinate military training for the Allies the New Atlantic Testing Operation, formed to monitor the detonation of atomic bombs the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, a pact among Western nations to defend against Soviet aggression 7. What policy did the United States implement in postwar Japan? (Points: 3) a strong and permanent military presence reduction in civil liberties collection of war reparations rebuilding the nation 8. What act signaled the beginning of the Korean War? (Points: 3) North and South Korea joined forces to invade Japan. China invaded North Korea. South Korea invaded North Korea. North Korea invaded South Korea. 9. Why did U.S. general Douglas MacArthur leave his command of troops near the end of the Korean War? (Points: 3) He died in combat. President Truman appointed him secretary of defense. He became a five-star general. President Truman fired him for insubordination. 10. What was the outcome of the Korean War? (Points: 3) The two Koreas united and became a democracy. North and South Korea remained separate with a demilitarized zone along the 38th parallel. An initial truce led to a peace treaty that established North Korea as communist and South Korea as a democracy. China took over North Korea and the UN took over South Korea. 11. What did Alger Hiss, Whittaker Chambers, and Ethel Rosenberg have in common? (Points: 3) All were senators that participated in the investigations of the McCarthy era. All were subjects of espionage investigations that occurred as part of a Red Scare. All were newscasters that helped make television the medium people turned to for information. All played a part in developing the agreements that formed the basis for the United Nations. 12. What was McCarthyism? (Points: 3) a policy of providing economic relief to South Korea and other war-torn nations a tactic of spreading fear with baseless accusations of communist activities in the United States. the belief that the United States must save European economies following World War II the hope that communists would be treated equitably and incorporated into American society 13. Which was not an element of President Dwight Eisenhower's foreign policy? (Points: 3) emphasize peace build up the nuclear arsenal increase the size of the military threaten massive retaliation 14. What fear did President Eisenhower express in his farewell address? (Points: 3) Nuclear proliferation would lead to communist takeovers around the world. The power of the military-industrial complex could threaten democracy. The United States would not adequately support its farmers. Without special vigilance, com

Do you believe the average Afghan understands why UN troops have invaded? In the first six months of this year, 386 civilians were killed by NATO or Afghan government forces, including 41 during search-and-seizure operations such as night raids, according to the United Nations. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100812/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan Do you suppose the Afghans see the death of Christian medical aid workers as regretable collateral damages, or a case of mistaken ID, similar to the folks who lived there and got dead at the hands of UN troops? Whenever anyone mentions collateral damages involving Iraqi, Afghan, even by Israel, the response/explanation is always the same: people are going to get killed in war. Unfortunate, but it's going to happen. They were at the wrong place at the wrong time. [Yawn]. Aren't those pundits correct, whether the victims are Afghan kids or Christian medical aid providers?

25 questions? 1: Who made the decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan? Harry Truman J. Edgar Hoover Franklin Roosevelt Dwight Eisenhower 2: Who coined the phrase "Iron Curtain"? Josef Stalin Winston Churchill Harry Truman Joseph McCarthy 3: Stalin blockaded West Berlin in 1948 because: American nuclear bombers were based there He wanted to force Westerners out of the city The Berlin Wall was being built He was unhappy with the results of the Nuremburg Trial 4: Americans persuaded Western Europe to be democratic by: Giving cheap holidays to Disneyland Opening up McDonald's restaurants Creating rock and Roll music Giving money via the Marshall Plan 5: The Berlin Airlift was a response to: The Soviet blockade of West Berlin The unusually severe winter of 1947 The construction of the Berlin Wall Wartime destruction of roads into West Berlin 6: The Marshall Plan was: A strategy for defeating North Korea A strategy for defeating communist China An American economic aid program for Europe A civil-defense plan for surviving a Soviet nuclear strike 7: The Soviet Union responded to the formation of NATO by: Blockading West Berlin Forming the Warsaw Pact Sending advisors to the Organization of American States Creating the Iron Curtain 8: What was the main goal of the Truman Doctrine (a.k.a. Containment)? The elimination of Communism Reconstruction of Western Europe after World War II To prevent the spread of Communism Assist British colonies in Africa 9: The immediate cause of the US military involvement in the Korean peninsula in 1950 was the: Japanese invasion of Manchuria Creation of the DMZ along the 38th parallel Attack by North Korea on South Korea Acquisition of a nuclear weapon by North Korea 10: The first American troops sent to Korea landed on the shores of Seoul Inchon Pusan Wonsan 11: Which of the following statements about Korea is TRUE? Korea was divided in World War II into the Communist North and democratic South Korea was divided in World War II into the democratic North and the Communist South North Korea assisted mainland China in the fight against Chiang Kai-shek South Korea and North Korea were always two separate countries 12: All of the following contributed to Cold War tensions EXCEPT the: United States airlift of food to the citizens of Berlin Marshall Plan Rejection of the Treaty of Versailles by the US Senate Establishment of NATO 13: McCarthyism runied the lives of numerous people because they were accused of having links to ________. The FBI The House Un-American Activities Committee The Communist Party The Baby Boomers 14: Why were the Rosenburgs executed? Espionage Kidnapping Murder Terrorism 15: All of the following contributed to the expansion of the American economy in the 1950s EXCEPT: The Baby Boom Suburban growth The end of the Korean War Increased industrial growth 16: Who was NOT a musical artist from the 1950s? John Lennon The Big Bopper Elvis Presley Buddy Holly 17: Which of the following was NOT a television show broadcast in the 1950s? The Howdy Doody Show I Love Lucy M*A*S*H* Gunsmoke 18: What was the name of the influential book written by Betty Freidan based on her experiences in the 1950s? Peyton Place On The Road Happy Days The Feminine Mystique 19: All of the following occurred during Eisenhower's two terms in office EXCEPT: The continuation of the Korean War NASA was created Alaska and Hawaii were admitted into the Union as the 49th and 50th states The government sent troops to assist the Little Rock Nine 20: Rosa Parks' decision not to give up her seat led to a Supreme Court decision outlawing segregation on city busses. Where did this occur? Memphis, Tennessee Mobile, Alabama Montgomery, Alabama Macon, Georgia 21: The decision in the landmark 1954 Supreme Court case, ____________, ruled that segregation in public schools was illegal. Plessy v. Ferguson Marbury v. Madison Brown v. Board of Education Brown v. United States 22: Known as the _______, these were the teenagers who initially needed military escort to attend their high school classes. Little Rock Seven Little Rock Eight Little Rock Nine Little Rock Ten 23: _____________ was a baptist minister from Atlanta who helped to shape the course of the national Civil Rights Movement beginning in the 1950s. Mahatmas Gandhi Malcolm X Martin Luther King, Jr. Jesse Jackson 24: Students used ______________ as a method to desegregate lunch counters in more than 200 cities. Violent protest Freedom Rides Sit-ins Protest marches 25: The ________ Amendment abolished slavery. 13th 14th 15th 16th

History please help? What? 1: Who made the decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan? Harry Truman J. Edgar Hoover Franklin Roosevelt Dwight Eisenhower 2: Who coined the phrase "Iron Curtain"? Josef Stalin Winston Churchill Harry Truman Joseph McCarthy 3: Stalin blockaded West Berlin in 1948 because: American nuclear bombers were based there He wanted to force Westerners out of the city The Berlin Wall was being built He was unhappy with the results of the Nuremburg Trial 4: Americans persuaded Western Europe to be democratic by: Giving cheap holidays to Disneyland Opening up McDonald's restaurants Creating rock and Roll music Giving money via the Marshall Plan 5: The Berlin Airlift was a response to: The Soviet blockade of West Berlin The unusually severe winter of 1947 The construction of the Berlin Wall Wartime destruction of roads into West Berlin 6: The Marshall Plan was: A strategy for defeating North Korea A strategy for defeating communist China An American economic aid program for Europe A civil-defense plan for surviving a Soviet nuclear strike 7: The Soviet Union responded to the formation of NATO by: Blockading West Berlin Forming the Warsaw Pact Sending advisors to the Organization of American States Creating the Iron Curtain 8: What was the main goal of the Truman Doctrine (a.k.a. Containment)? The elimination of Communism Reconstruction of Western Europe after World War II To prevent the spread of Communism Assist British colonies in Africa 9: The immediate cause of the US military involvement in the Korean peninsula in 1950 was the: Japanese invasion of Manchuria Creation of the DMZ along the 38th parallel Attack by North Korea on South Korea Acquisition of a nuclear weapon by North Korea 10: The first American troops sent to Korea landed on the shores of Seoul Inchon Pusan Wonsan 11: Which of the following statements about Korea is TRUE? Korea was divided in World War II into the Communist North and democratic South Korea was divided in World War II into the democratic North and the Communist South North Korea assisted mainland China in the fight against Chiang Kai-shek South Korea and North Korea were always two separate countries 12: All of the following contributed to Cold War tensions EXCEPT the: United States airlift of food to the citizens of Berlin Marshall Plan Rejection of the Treaty of Versailles by the US Senate Establishment of NATO 13: McCarthyism runied the lives of numerous people because they were accused of having links to ________. The FBI The House Un-American Activities Committee The Communist Party The Baby Boomers 14: Why were the Rosenburgs executed? Espionage Kidnapping Murder Terrorism 15: All of the following contributed to the expansion of the American economy in the 1950s EXCEPT: The Baby Boom Suburban growth The end of the Korean War Increased industrial growth 16: Who was NOT a musical artist from the 1950s? John Lennon The Big Bopper Elvis Presley Buddy Holly 17: Which of the following was NOT a television show broadcast in the 1950s? The Howdy Doody Show I Love Lucy M*A*S*H* Gunsmoke 18: What was the name of the influential book written by Betty Freidan based on her experiences in the 1950s? Peyton Place On The Road Happy Days The Feminine Mystique 19: All of the following occurred during Eisenhower's two terms in office EXCEPT: The continuation of the Korean War NASA was created Alaska and Hawaii were admitted into the Union as the 49th and 50th states The government sent troops to assist the Little Rock Nine 20: Rosa Parks' decision not to give up her seat led to a Supreme Court decision outlawing segregation on city busses. Where did this occur? Memphis, Tennessee Mobile, Alabama Montgomery, Alabama Macon, Georgia 21: The decision in the landmark 1954 Supreme Court case, ____________, ruled that segregation in public schools was illegal. Plessy v. Ferguson Marbury v. Madison Brown v. Board of Education Brown v. United States 22: Known as the _______, these were the teenagers who initially needed military escort to attend their high school classes. Little Rock Seven Little Rock Eight Little Rock Nine Little Rock Ten 23: _____________ was a baptist minister from Atlanta who helped to shape the course of the national Civil Rights Movement beginning in the 1950s. Mahatmas Gandhi Malcolm X Martin Luther King, Jr. Jesse Jackson 24: Students used ______________ as a method to desegregate lunch counters in more than 200 cities. Violent protest Freedom Rides Sit-ins Protest marches 25: The ________ Amendment abolished slavery. 13th 14th 15th 16th

Are these suggestions to government workable? 1) Dismantle the central bank -- and throw away the Empire model of banking established under King George the 3rd which creates debt with the circulation of the currency 2) Make the Finance Minister responsible for the issuance of currency again and circulate this without loan or usury into the hands of the public . Too much will equal inflation and the markets comments to the Minister will be to retract monetary circulation too little will result in depression -- signaling the Minister to circulate more . Stable price indexes along with an economy based on sustainability and not growth would be the result 3) Make environmental fines and other corporate infractions of law a % of net profit and not a set dollar value which some see as a license and others are crippled by 4) Make the board of any and all corporation criminally responsible for the actions taken under their direction ---- The board for the purposes of trial becomes the corporation and jail able 5) Keep the offical head of the Armed forces as the Governor General but make all none defensive manuvers peace keeping missions NATO engadgements and UN sponsored or sanctioned initiatives at the discretion of the people in a binding referendum Each time the government wishes to place our military anywhere that is not a direct response to an attack against our territories should require a simple majority vote in a referendum of the people and not a back door decision of the privy council Are these suggestions to government workable Eartha I really suggest a bad and discouraging name Like "Iceland" .... not a name that terrifies or excites ---- but one that doesn't pop up in a lot of conversations and few people plan holidays to A name that lends itself to being put on the back burner Moderately Friendly land an island who takes it in turns to act as executive officer of the week pending a referendum of ratification -------- There see --- we could have a nice place and with a name like that Rumsfield is likely to steer around the place

american history questions? Which of the following does not help explain why the war in Korea came to an end when it did? Question 16 answers a. The Chinese feared Eisenhower as a former military man more than they had feared Truman. b. The communists suffered huge battlefield losses. c. Mao became gravely ill, threatening the Chinese leadership and encouraging them to end their participation in the war. d. Eisenhower's Secretary of State Dulles made the Chinese believe that the President might use nuclear weapons if the war did not end quickly. e. Stalin died, plunging the communist world into uncertainty. What about Eisenhower's farewell address does Douglas Brinkley call "the kicker" of the speech in his article "Eisenhower the Dove?" Question 17 answers a. Eisenhower's assertion that the U.S. need not try to win the Cold War with the Soviet Union. b. Eisenhower's bragging about U.S. nuclear superiority. c. Eisenhower's warning that the Middle East situation posed the most serious threat to U.S. national security. d. Eisenhower's warning to beware the unwarranted influence of the military industrial complex. e. Eisenhower's complaint that U.S. allies in the U.N. and NATO were unwilling to back the U.S. in Vietnam. During his first months in office, Lyndon Johnson did all of the following except Question 18 answers a. push civil rights legislation proposed by the late President Kennedy through Congress. b. cut taxes by $10 billion for the next two years. c. establish a commission to investigate Kennedy's assassination. d. convince most of his predecessor's cabinet to remain. e. increase the federal budget dramatically. Thurgood Marshall became America's first African American Question 19 answers a. Attorney General. b. Secretary of State. c. Supreme Court Justice. d. poet laureate. e. Secretary of Defense. Which organization was formed in 1949 to prevent communist expansion in Europe? Question 20 answers a. North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) b. The United Nations c. The Kellog-Briand Pact d. The Warsaw Pact e. The Trpartite Pact 1 points Save Which of the following groups was not active during the Nixon years in the White House? Question 21 answers a. feminists b. Native Americans. c. African Americans d. Mexican Americans e. All of these groups were active during Nixon's presidency. Which of the following occurred during the Cuban Missile Crisis? Question 22 answers a. During the crisis, the Americans and Soviets used the newly established "hotline" between their two governments. b. Khrushchev visited the United Nations to protest the high-handed tone of the American government. c. Kennedy declared a blockade on Cuba and warned the Soviet Union that missiles launched from Cuba would result in an attack on the Soviet Union. d. Cuban refugees informed the U.S. thjat the Soviets were moving missiles into Cuba. e. Kennedy refused to give the Russina sthe pledge that they wanted, which would state that the U.S. would never invade Cuba if the Russians removed their missiles. During his first years as president, Reagan Question 23 answers a. sent U.S. troops to tear down the Berlin Wall. b. disavowed the tactic of trying to outspend the Soviet Union in the arms race. c. declared the Soviet Union an evil empire, and the Cold War a struggle between right and wrong. d. reversed Carter's policy of trying to overthrow the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. e. welcomed summit meetings with Soviet leaders. Which of the following does not describe Nixon's response to environmentalism? Question 24 answers a. He came to consider environmentalism a positive force, because it cut across class and racial lines. b. He supported the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency. c. He supported passage of the Endangered Species Act (1973). d. He supported passage of the Clean Air Act (1970) e. He opposed the ban on the use of DDT in the U.S. and its sale to other countries Which of the following occurred as a result of Clinton's foreign policy? Question 25 answers a. American servicemen died on a peacekeeping mission to Somalia. b. An American peacekeeping force in Haiti was repulsed. c. Clinton helped broker talks between Arafat and Rabin on the Mideast peace process. d. allof the above. e. none of the above.

Who made the decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan? Who made the decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan? Harry Truman J. Edgar Hoover Franklin Roosevelt Dwight Eisenhower 2: Who coined the phrase "Iron Curtain"? Josef Stalin Winston Churchill Harry Truman Joseph McCarthy 3: Stalin blockaded West Berlin in 1948 because: American nuclear bombers were based there He wanted to force Westerners out of the city The Berlin Wall was being built He was unhappy with the results of the Nuremburg Trial 4: Americans persuaded Western Europe to be democratic by: Giving cheap holidays to Disneyland Opening up McDonald's restaurants Creating rock and Roll music Giving money via the Marshall Plan 5: The Berlin Airlift was a response to: The Soviet blockade of West Berlin The unusually severe winter of 1947 The construction of the Berlin Wall Wartime destruction of roads into West Berlin 6: The Marshall Plan was: A strategy for defeating North Korea A strategy for defeating communist China An American economic aid program for Europe A civil-defense plan for surviving a Soviet nuclear strike 7: The Soviet Union responded to the formation of NATO by: Blockading West Berlin Forming the Warsaw Pact Sending advisors to the Organization of American States Creating the Iron Curtain 8: What was the main goal of the Truman Doctrine (a.k.a. Containment)? The elimination of Communism Reconstruction of Western Europe after World War II To prevent the spread of Communism Assist British colonies in Africa 9: The immediate cause of the US military involvement in the Korean peninsula in 1950 was the: Japanese invasion of Manchuria Creation of the DMZ along the 38th parallel Attack by North Korea on South Korea Acquisition of a nuclear weapon by North Korea 10: The first American troops sent to Korea landed on the shores of Seoul Inchon Pusan Wonsan 11: Which of the following statements about Korea is TRUE? Korea was divided in World War II into the Communist North and democratic South Korea was divided in World War II into the democratic North and the Communist South North Korea assisted mainland China in the fight against Chiang Kai-shek South Korea and North Korea were always two separate countries 12: All of the following contributed to Cold War tensions EXCEPT the: United States airlift of food to the citizens of Berlin Marshall Plan Rejection of the Treaty of Versailles by the US Senate Establishment of NATO 13: McCarthyism runied the lives of numerous people because they were accused of having links to ________. The FBI The House Un-American Activities Committee The Communist Party The Baby Boomers 14: Why were the Rosenburgs executed? Espionage Kidnapping Murder Terrorism 15: All of the following contributed to the expansion of the American economy in the 1950s EXCEPT: The Baby Boom Suburban growth The end of the Korean War Increased industrial growth 16: Who was NOT a musical artist from the 1950s? John Lennon The Big Bopper Elvis Presley Buddy Holly 17: Which of the following was NOT a television show broadcast in the 1950s? The Howdy Doody Show I Love Lucy M*A*S*H* Gunsmoke 18: What was the name of the influential book written by Betty Freidan based on her experiences in the 1950s? Peyton Place On The Road Happy Days The Feminine Mystique 19: All of the following occurred during Eisenhower's two terms in office EXCEPT: The continuation of the Korean War NASA was created Alaska and Hawaii were admitted into the Union as the 49th and 50th states The government sent troops to assist the Little Rock Nine 20: Rosa Parks' decision not to give up her seat led to a Supreme Court decision outlawing segregation on city busses. Where did this occur? Memphis, Tennessee Mobile, Alabama Montgomery, Alabama Macon, Georgia 21: The decision in the landmark 1954 Supreme Court case, ____________, ruled that segregation in public schools was illegal. Plessy v. Ferguson Marbury v. Madison Brown v. Board of Education Brown v. United States 22: Known as the _______, these were the teenagers who initially needed military escort to attend their high school classes. Little Rock Seven Little Rock Eight Little Rock Nine Little Rock Ten 23: _____________ was a baptist minister from Atlanta who helped to shape the course of the national Civil Rights Movement beginning in the 1950s. Mahatmas Gandhi Malcolm X Martin Luther King, Jr. Jesse Jackson 24: Students used ______________ as a method to desegregate lunch counters in more than 200 cities. Violent protest Freedom Rides Sit-ins Protest marches 25: The ________ Amendment abolished slavery. 13th 14th 15th 16th

history!!!!!? 1: Who made the decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan? Harry Truman J. Edgar Hoover Franklin Roosevelt Dwight Eisenhower 2: Who coined the phrase "Iron Curtain"? Josef Stalin Winston Churchill Harry Truman Joseph McCarthy 3: Stalin blockaded West Berlin in 1948 because: American nuclear bombers were based there He wanted to force Westerners out of the city The Berlin Wall was being built He was unhappy with the results of the Nuremburg Trial 4: Americans persuaded Western Europe to be democratic by: Giving cheap holidays to Disneyland Opening up McDonald's restaurants Creating rock and Roll music Giving money via the Marshall Plan 5: The Berlin Airlift was a response to: The Soviet blockade of West Berlin The unusually severe winter of 1947 The construction of the Berlin Wall Wartime destruction of roads into West Berlin 6: The Marshall Plan was: A strategy for defeating North Korea A strategy for defeating communist China An American economic aid program for Europe A civil-defense plan for surviving a Soviet nuclear strike 7: The Soviet Union responded to the formation of NATO by: Blockading West Berlin Forming the Warsaw Pact Sending advisors to the Organization of American States Creating the Iron Curtain 8: What was the main goal of the Truman Doctrine (a.k.a. Containment)? The elimination of Communism Reconstruction of Western Europe after World War II To prevent the spread of Communism Assist British colonies in Africa 9: The immediate cause of the US military involvement in the Korean peninsula in 1950 was the: Japanese invasion of Manchuria Creation of the DMZ along the 38th parallel Attack by North Korea on South Korea Acquisition of a nuclear weapon by North Korea 10: The first American troops sent to Korea landed on the shores of Seoul Inchon Pusan Wonsan 11: Which of the following statements about Korea is TRUE? Korea was divided in World War II into the Communist North and democratic South Korea was divided in World War II into the democratic North and the Communist South North Korea assisted mainland China in the fight against Chiang Kai-shek South Korea and North Korea were always two separate countries 12: All of the following contributed to Cold War tensions EXCEPT the: United States airlift of food to the citizens of Berlin Marshall Plan Rejection of the Treaty of Versailles by the US Senate Establishment of NATO 13: McCarthyism runied the lives of numerous people because they were accused of having links to ________. The FBI The House Un-American Activities Committee The Communist Party The Baby Boomers 14: Why were the Rosenburgs executed? Espionage Kidnapping Murder Terrorism 15: All of the following contributed to the expansion of the American economy in the 1950s EXCEPT: The Baby Boom Suburban growth The end of the Korean War Increased industrial growth 16: Who was NOT a musical artist from the 1950s? John Lennon The Big Bopper Elvis Presley Buddy Holly 17: Which of the following was NOT a television show broadcast in the 1950s? The Howdy Doody Show I Love Lucy M*A*S*H* Gunsmoke 18: What was the name of the influential book written by Betty Freidan based on her experiences in the 1950s? Peyton Place On The Road Happy Days The Feminine Mystique 19: All of the following occurred during Eisenhower's two terms in office EXCEPT: The continuation of the Korean War NASA was created Alaska and Hawaii were admitted into the Union as the 49th and 50th states The government sent troops to assist the Little Rock Nine 20: Rosa Parks' decision not to give up her seat led to a Supreme Court decision outlawing segregation on city busses. Where did this occur? Memphis, Tennessee Mobile, Alabama Montgomery, Alabama Macon, Georgia 21: The decision in the landmark 1954 Supreme Court case, ____________, ruled that segregation in public schools was illegal. Plessy v. Ferguson Marbury v. Madison Brown v. Board of Education Brown v. United States 22: Known as the _______, these were the teenagers who initially needed military escort to attend their high school classes. Little Rock Seven Little Rock Eight Little Rock Nine Little Rock Ten 23: _____________ was a baptist minister from Atlanta who helped to shape the course of the national Civil Rights Movement beginning in the 1950s. Mahatmas Gandhi Malcolm X Martin Luther King, Jr. Jesse Jackson 24: Students used ______________ as a method to desegregate lunch counters in more than 200 cities. Violent protest Freedom Rides Sit-ins Protest marches 25: The ________ Amendment abolished slavery. 13th 14th 15th 16th

Will Israel accept the US offers? The Israeli leaders and military chiefs insist on the immediate strike on the Iranian´s nuclear capabilities, and the grade of insistence is so high that the strike can be delivered at any moment, with Obama´s approval or without it. Facing the stubborn unwillingness on the part of Israel to die in order to support the American policy of appeasing Muslims, Obama´s Administration is offering to Israel the unprecedented package of measures to make it desist from the strike on Iran. Advance notice came in a series of leaks to former CIA officer Bruce Riedel, who is very close to President Obama, for an article he published in the influentialThe National Interest on Aug. 25 under the caption "If Israel Attacks." Four steps for strengthening the Israeli armed forces and lending it a second-strike capability - even against an Iranian nuclear attack are going to be offered by the USA to Israel. 1. The US will spread a nuclear umbrella over Israel that would entail the installation of American nuclear depots in Israel to show Tehran that a nuclear attack on the Jewish state would meet with a US nuclear response. 2. American nuclear submarines would be supplied to the Israeli Navy as the backbone of its nuclear counter-strike capability. There are two categories - ballistic missile submarines and attack submarines. 3. The Israeli Air Force would receive US F-22 Raptor stealth jets, the most sophisticated warplane in the skies today. They would be equipped with all the systems and ordnance needed to strike the Iranian nuclear program. 4. The US would arrange for Israel's full membership of NATO, so rendering an Iranian nuclear attack on Israel subject not just to US retaliation but a declaration of war by the 26-member alliance. To qualify for these American security perks, Riedel made it clear that Israel would be required to come to terms with a nuclear-armed Iran and eschew military action against it, a provision which Jerusalem sources say the Netanyahu government is most unlikely to accept. I also think Israel must reject these offers and to strike Iran no matter if it harms the American interests in the Middle East or not, because what good would all the wonderful new military systems be to Israel for a second-strike capability when an initial Iranian nuclear attack would suffice to destroy the tiny Jewish state?

Is this okay so far? Do I sound vaguely like I know what i'm talking about? “[...] humans were a kind of "biological error," using their allotted 100,000 years to destroy themselves and, in the process, much else. The species has surely developed the capacity to do just that, and our hypothetical extraterrestrial observer might conclude that they have demonstrated that capacity throughout their history, dramatically in the past few hundred years, with an assault on the environment that sustains life, on the diversity of more complex organisms, and with cold and calculated savagery, on each other as well.” On the very first page of “Hegemony or Survival”, Chomsky examines scientist Ernst Mayr’s speculation that higher intelligence beings (humans) will not be favored by natural selection. Mayr believes that our life span as a species will be around 100,000 years long. This notion really puts the atrocities archived all throughout the rest of the book in perspective. Although this book focuses primarily on American influence, one could gather that this looming expiration date exists because of the detrimental thirst for hegemony all empires share. The title of the book becomes a decision for the reader, hegemony or survival? The foremost seems to hinder the latter in that the road to its achievement involves deadly confrontation. Trends in history seem to predict that we as a species are destined to make the wrong choice. The Cuban Missile Crisis is a perfect example of the deadly extremes empires resort to to secure dominance. Tension during the last days of the Cold War came to a boiling point when Russia placed several missiles on Cuban soil. This move was made in response to America’s placement of nuclear weapons in Eastern Europe, which was as unnerving to them as the weapons in Cuba were to us. Both empires were looking down the barrel of a gun and one wrong move by either party could pose as justification for the other to pull the trigger, thus starting a nuclear war. In his book, Chomsky quotes intelligence, Cold War, and NATO specialist Raymond Garthoff as stating that "the risk and danger to both sides could have been extreme, and catastrophe not excluded.” Nuclear weapons seem to be one of the greatest threats to our survival due to their incredible force and magnitude of destruction. However, aside from their physical potential for the extermination of thousands at a time, it is the hands that they are in which make them such a profound threat. A report of a panel of consultants on the disarmament of the Secretary of State in January 1953 recognized that “Fundamentally, and in the long run, the problem which is posed by the release of atomic energy is a problem of the ability of the human race to govern itself without war.” Over the course of our existence we’ve made it clear that we have next to no proficiency in maintaining peace. Since the 19th century alone, European nations have participated in over eighty wars and conflicts. North America has been in over thirty and South and Central America combined comes to around fifty. Three years before his assassination Kennedy asserted that “It is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war” during his election address. Over four decades later no one has proven him wrong

European Army (EU managed) - good idea? I'd say no. Britain has some of the finest armed forces in the world, something we need to maintain. in addition, the EU is a political, not a military source. If there needs to be a major multi national response then we've NATO and the UN - i know there not brilliant, but there probably better than the EU would be. In addition, i fear that UK forces would be forced to take the heaviest burden of any conflict as other EU nations lack the capabilities or political will to invest troops - afghanistan proves this. i fear that UK forces would take the casualties and the french the glory. Sarkosy is very pro an EU army knowing full well that France is in no position to send even combat 15,000 overseas. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7439104.stm

Do you think Canada should sustain its military presence in Afghanistan post-2011? I think it is completely unlike our country to back out of a challenge, and our withdrawl, and the dutch withdrawl will prove the first steps I believe to the failure of the Afghanistan mission. The country needs leadership, and when we took on Kandahar in 2006 I think we provided that leadership and we did good, people looked to us for support and we were told, "NATO's spine is made in Canada", that not being so far off. In WWI we never backed down, we were strong till the end and renowned for a formidable military force, we did things that nobody else could accomplish, and that goes as well for WWII and the Korean war. Now I just feel that about 30 years from now when we look back at the Afghanistan war (assuming it fails as everybody is losing confidence in it), the truth of the matter is that while the textbooks will say that we lost the war because of difficult situations in Afghanistan, the reality is that we lost the war at home first. Please leave your opinions, whatever they may be as answers to this question, and the best answer will be selected based on the most knowledgeable response, regardless of the opinion. *Mind you, I keep myself very updated with this war, as I think it should be a top priority when it's not. So if your answer isn't selected it's most likely because I know it's wrong....but we'll see.

please help me with history? 1. Use the following information to answer the question. Events of 1968 -began as a writers’ protest -hard-line Communist leader resigned and was replaced by one more open to democratic reform -new leader instituted reforms allowing greater freedom of speech and the press -Soviets reestablished control and restored hard-line Communists to power. -In what country did the events being described above take place? A) Hungary B) Czechoslovakia C) Poland D) Yugoslavia 2. The Soviet Union dealt with uprisings in Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia during the 1950s and 1960s by A) crushing the uprisings with military force. B) privatizing industrial enterprises. C) taking over direct rule of these countries. D) permitting greater democratic reforms in government. 3. The Arab oil embargo against the United States in 1973 was initiated because of U.S. support for A) Egypt in the Suez Crisis. B) Iraq in its conflict with Iran. C) Israel in the Yom Kippur War. D) Greece in its conflict with Turkey. 4. NATO was created in order to A) encourage diplomatic solutions to regional problems in North Africa. B) facilitate regional economic development in North America. C) develop goodwill between Eastern and Western Europe. D) create a unified military defense between the U.S. and Western Europe. 5. The Warsaw Pact was developed in 1955 as a response to the A) UN intervention in Korea. B) start of the Communist revolution in Cuba. C) U.S. development of the hydrogen bomb. D) formation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Is My Nuclear War Simulation Accurate? Ok, I made this simulation by myself. It is meant to simulate an all-out nuclear war between NATO and Russia. 1) Russia starts moving convoys into a foreign country for defence purposes, e.g. Iran. 2) Germany reports suspicious behaviour to NATO. 3) United States is angry with Russia and asks them to cease what they are doing. 4) Russia refuses and later on, a US submarine goes missing in the middle pacific. 5) US blames Russia. 6) Germany reports that the Russians have started a military base in Iran. 7) United States is furious with Russia and demands that they move out as soon as possible. 8) US fleet sunk in persian gulf. 9) US send troops into Iran in an attempt to move the Russians out. 10) The United Kingdom sends troops in to reinforce their commitment to NATO. 11) Russia has no response. 12) US destroyer collides with a Russian cruiser which sinks. 13) Russia is furious. 14) US sets and ultimatum to Russia demanding that all US and Russian forces are to be moved out of Iran. 15) US ultimatum expires: US bomber jets attack soviet base with non-nuclear weapons Russia responds with a single nuclear-tipped air defence missile Many US planes lost US respond with a single battlefield nuclear weapon on Russia's base Exchange stops 15) All NATO associated countries (and some countries of the EU) are put on red alert: In the UK the 'Protect and Survive' videos are played and booklets are distributed. In the US many air-attack drills are put into action. 16) Many anti-Russian demonstrations are held in the US and many riots take place in Germany. 17) 08.00: Russia launches first of their salvos at NATO. 18) 08.30: Missiles are detected over the North Sea, Britain and parts of NATO irrupt into panic. 19) 08.35: Single warhead explodes high above north sea Energy pulse burns out many electrical systems Massive damage to communications across Britain and north-west Europe: Europe cannot communicate with the US to warn of coming attack 08.37: First missile salvo hits NATO military targets in Britain and Europe At the same time in the US (03.37), sirens are sounding and the first missile salvos start hitting minutes after sirens are sounded. 20) Nuclear exchanges escalate and NATO launches back at Russia. 21) Second salvo from russia hits priority economic targets e.g. Communications Energy Steel Chemicals Total East-West exchange: 3000 megatons, 210 megatons fall on UK, 1000 megatons on the US, another 300 megatons spread around Europe, Russia receives 1490 megatons. 21) Fallout imminent, fire-fighting and rescue attempts unlikely. 22) Many die from instant effects and many short-term survivors die from fallout. 23) About 14 days after the attack, the risk from fallout passes and survivors go on a run for food and clean water. 24) A global nuclear winter descends on the earth and many crops fail to grow Many starved or are forced to eat rats 25) A year after the attack, daylight begins to return. 26) The sun beams that return are now heavier in ultra-violet light. Crops are scorched Cataracts widespread 27) 8 years after attack, the population of NATO and Russia may decline to medieval levels. 28) No country wins.

Why do people think are military.........? I've herd people say that we could get our ass handed to us by russia blah blah blah but aren't we one of the strongest out there and if so many people think this then why do people want to downsize our military which makes us more pron to be attacked??? Why do we want to stop production on military weapon??? i don't get it............If were on the verge of WW3 then why should we downsize our army........if people don't think we are on the verge of WW3 sky news talk about how the Secretary of defense sent out a warning to russia saying if they attacked georgia again we would put in military forces??? If you need facts here you go........... http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/US-Defence-Secretary-Gates-Warns-Armed-Response-If-Russia-Attacks-Georgia-Once-It-Has-Joined-Nato/Article/200809315102651?lpos=World_News_Carousel_Region_3&lid=ARTICLE_15102651_US_Defence_Secretary_Gates_Warns_Armed_Response_If_Russia_Attacks_Georgia_Once_It_Has_Joined_Nato I thank the one for there honest opinon (dont think i spelled that right lol) Mine is to keep production on weapons and body armor because if we become strong in that were good.......i personaly am going to join the army........but i think we need to expand our army as much as possible because of things that are to come.........

Is Palin's pretty face being used as distraction for what is really going on in the world? US-Russian naval rivalries heat up over Black, Caspian, Persian Gulf seas DEBKAfile Exclusive Report September 8, 2008, 11:21 AM (GMT+02:00) DEBKAfile’s military sources report Washington is testing the Turkish government’s response to the permanent anchoring of US warships at either of the two Georgian ports of Poti or Batumi. This would be quid pro quo for Moscow’s interest in bases in Iranian Azerbaijan and the Persian Gulf. Monday, Sept. 8, a NATO delegation was due in Georgia to evaluate damage to military structure following the five-day war with Russia last month. This is a further irritant for Moscow after the highly sophisticated American command vessel USS Mount Whitney docked in Poti Saturday. Our sources report that the US anticipates a protracted period of tension with Russia for the following reasons: 1. US and NATO vessels will need safe coastal berths when the approaching winter storms strike the Black Sea. As time goes by, Turkey, which under international conventions controls the passage of naval vessels through the Dardanelles, will be under increasing pressure from Russia to block the waterway to NATO. Already, Turkey fears it may lose its top trading partner, Russia. Since the outbreak of the Georgian crisis a month ago, Moscow has introduced new customs regulations which have backed up at checkpoints dozens of Turkish trucks carrying export goods. The predicted loss to Turkish firms is some $1 billion so far, a figure that would treble if Moscow continued its unacknowledged sanction up to the end of the year. 2. A permanent base in a Georgian port is seen by US strategists as the quickest way to show the flag for Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili without a frontal clash with Russia. Washington sources argue that if Russia can maintain a large fleet base at the Crimean port of Sevastopol and a second at Abkhazia, there is no reason why America cannot maintain a permanent presence on the Black Sea too. 3. Washington is well aware of the talk in Moscow and Tehran in recent days about establishing Russian naval bases in Iran: Iranian Azerbaijan on the Caspian Sea and an Iranian-held island in the Persian Gulf. The latter, if Moscow and Tehran reached agreement, would terminate US naval control of the Persian Gulf waters opposite Iran forces and drastically upset the balance of strength in the region. Washington’s response to this talk is its bid for a permanent Black Sea base

Palin's pretty face a distraction for what is really happening in the world such as...? US-Russian naval rivalries heat up over Black, Caspian, Persian Gulf seas DEBKAfile Exclusive Report September 8, 2008, 11:21 AM (GMT+02:00) DEBKAfile’s military sources report Washington is testing the Turkish government’s response to the permanent anchoring of US warships at either of the two Georgian ports of Poti or Batumi. This would be quid pro quo for Moscow’s interest in bases in Iranian Azerbaijan and the Persian Gulf. Monday, Sept. 8, a NATO delegation was due in Georgia to evaluate damage to military structure following the five-day war with Russia last month. This is a further irritant for Moscow after the highly sophisticated American command vessel USS Mount Whitney docked in Poti Saturday. Our sources report that the US anticipates a protracted period of tension with Russia for the following reasons: 1. US and NATO vessels will need safe coastal berths when the approaching winter storms strike the Black Sea. As time goes by, Turkey, which under international conventions controls the passage of naval vessels through the Dardanelles, will be under increasing pressure from Russia to block the waterway to NATO. Already, Turkey fears it may lose its top trading partner, Russia. Since the outbreak of the Georgian crisis a month ago, Moscow has introduced new customs regulations which have backed up at checkpoints dozens of Turkish trucks carrying export goods. The predicted loss to Turkish firms is some $1 billion so far, a figure that would treble if Moscow continued its unacknowledged sanction up to the end of the year. 2. A permanent base in a Georgian port is seen by US strategists as the quickest way to show the flag for Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili without a frontal clash with Russia. Washington sources argue that if Russia can maintain a large fleet base at the Crimean port of Sevastopol and a second at Abkhazia, there is no reason why America cannot maintain a permanent presence on the Black Sea too. 3. Washington is well aware of the talk in Moscow and Tehran in recent days about establishing Russian naval bases in Iran: Iranian Azerbaijan on the Caspian Sea and an Iranian-held island in the Persian Gulf. The latter, if Moscow and Tehran reached agreement, would terminate US naval control of the Persian Gulf waters opposite Iran forces and drastically upset the balance of strength in the region. Washington’s response to this talk is its bid for a permanent Black Sea base

i need help with us. history mulitple choice? Stalin's decision to keep Soviet troops in Eastern Europe following World War II led to (Points: 3) the Soviet War. the Warsaw War. the Cold War. the Eastern War. How did British prime minister Winston Churchill describe the imaginary wall separating communist countries from democracies? (Points: 3) Warsaw Pact Iron Curtain Red Scare unholy alliance What was the purpose of containment? (Points: 3) to oppose Soviet expansion and keep communism in check to deploy troops to surround the Soviet Union to keep Japan from forming alliances with Korea and China to prevent Eastern European nations from becoming economically independent What name was given to the U.S. policy of giving military aid to countries to restrict the spread of communism? (Points: 3) Eisenhower Initiative Truman Doctrine Marshall Plan Yalta Agreement 5. What was the name for the American and British response to the Soviet blockade of a German city? (Points: 3) Berlin Airlift Frankfurt Rollover Cologne Atomizer Bonn Chance 6. What was the purpose of NATO? (Points: 3) to defend against Soviet aggression to monitor the detonation of atomic bombs to coordinate military training for the Allies to create accurate maps in case of a future war 7. Why did the United States help Japan recover and rebuild after World War II? (Points: 3) to reduce guilt over dropping atomic bombs to develop an Asian ally against communism to impose purely American values to provide European nations with an example 8. What act signaled the beginning of the Korean War? (Points: 3) North and South Korea joined forces to invade Japan. China invaded North Korea. South Korea invaded North Korea. North Korea invaded South Korea. 9. Why did U.S. general Douglas MacArthur leave his command of troops near the end of the Korean War? (Points: 3) President Truman fired him for insubordination. He died in combat. President Truman appointed him secretary of defense. He became a five-star general. 10. What was the outcome of the Korean War? (Points: 3) North Korea and South Korea remained separate with a demilitarized zone along the 38th parallel. The two Koreas united and became a democracy. An initial truce led to a peace treaty that established North Korea as communist and South Korea as a democracy. China took over North Korea and the UN took over South Korea. 11. What describes the fear of communism that led to intense espionage investigations in the 1950s? (Points: 3) Yalu Flight Red Scare Operation Bugout Commie Phobia 12. What was McCarthyism? (Points: 3) a policy of providing economic relief to South Korea and other war-torn nations the hope that communists would be treated equitably and incorporated into American society the belief that the United States must save European economies following World War II a tactic of spreading fear with baseless accusations of communist activities in the United States 13. President Eisenhower's foreign policy stressed peace, threatened massive retaliation for attacks, and ____________. (Points: 3) built up the nuclear arsenal increased the size of the military expected other nations to do their part provided high levels of foreign aid to Europe 14. In his farewell address, what did President Eisenhower caution the nation against? (Points: 3) delaying full buildup of the military the power of the military-industrial complex the threat of communism in Asia the increased power of the United Nations 15. What covert activity did the CIA support to protect oil interests and prevent the spread of communism? (Points: 3) restoring the shah to power in Iran removing the House of Saud from power in Saudi Arabia preventing a military dictatorship from assuming power in Iraq establishing Syria as a democracy 16. What was the result of U.S. covert actions in Latin America and the Middle East? (Points: 3) The Soviet Union threatened to seize control of the Suez Canal. Since the actions were covert, few knew of their existence, so there was little impact. Anti-American sentiment in those regions increased. More nations were grateful for U.S. support and involvement. 17. What is one reason the U.S. economy grew significantly after World War II? (Points: 3) The government supported price reductions to provide benefits for returning

So what now pundits, experts? More dead US troops? We always bear the brunt don't we? The Government has given up all hope of its European Nato allies sending more troops to fight in Afghanistan, it can be revealed. By Sean Rayment, Defence Correspondent Published: 9:00PM BST 05 Sep 2009 Defence sources have said that both the US and British governments no longer expect any of Nato's main partner nations to send more troops to serve in southern Afghanistan where the Taliban insurgency is most fierce. Despite high level lobbying by Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, and senior diplomats no country has come forward to share more of the war fighting burden being felt by British and US troops in the south of the country. Sources have also indicated that both Britain and America may have to commit extra forces to the campaign if Canada withdraws all of its 2,800 troops in the next 18 months from the troubled Kandahar Province. Britain has continuously called upon its partners to commit more troops and resources to the war since the insurgency began to gain momentum in southern Afghanistan. But the only country to make a significant response was France when it sent around 1,000 extra troops to Afghanistan last year. The issue of Nato's approach to the Afghanistan crisis was highlighted by Eric Joyce MP, who last week quit his post as a junior aide to Bob Ainsworth, the defence secretary, when he called into question the alliance's commitment. In a letter to the Prime Minister, he wrote: "For many, it seems that Britain fights; Germany pays, France calculates and Italy avoids. If the United States values each of these approaches equally, they will end up shouldering the burden by themselves." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ h u h ? You say ~~ "One, you are disgracing everyone that has ever fought in a war. In WW2 we had hundreds of thousands of people die in one day. Was it Worth it then? Or should we cry about how many troops have died? etc. etc."" What the hll are you talking about? I'm not 'disgracing; anyone sillybutt!!! This was an article - got that !! an article. Oh. sorry like so many many people, you read what you want to read, and neglect the whole story. Get real. and yes, we should cry about dead troops. Darn right we should. Yourself included. Who do you think you are that you should herald the death of my uncles brothers and friends to protect your sorry behind. as for "freedom" What freedom? Freedom to abuse children and women? freedom to fornicate? freedom to commit adultery? freedom to kill and get away with it? freedom to steal, embezzle, defraud others? Freedom to abort third trimester babies? Freedom to be racist? Please Know what you're talking about, and yes, a bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and another one on Nagasaki. The only country to use nukes. Proud aren't you. but you killed innocents,hundreds of thousands of innocents like you always do. and Japan was ready to surrender, but you wanted to prove your nuclear capabilities. Don't instruct me. I am smarter than most. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ah Lee "My solution is level the hold damn country or get out.Collateral damage be damned.One soldiers live is a lot more important to me then all the rag-heads in the world." Please be careful what you wish fopr. and remember there are other 'ragheads' no matter what the 'ragheads are made of. In fact, The Pope wears something that is very familiar to an easter bonnet. as do others under his charge. and Jews they wear something on their heads also. No matter what it is called. So Please again. Be careful what you wish for. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ah Lee "My solution is level the hold damn country or get out.Collateral damage be damned.One soldiers live is a lot more important to me then all the rag-heads in the world." Please be careful what you wish fopr. and remember there are other 'ragheads' no matter what the 'ragheads are made of. In fact, The Pope wears something that is very familiar to an easter bonnet. as do others under his charge. and Jews they wear something on their heads also. No matter what it is called. So Please again. Be careful what you wish for. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ah Lee "My solution is level the hold damn country or get out.Collateral damage be damned.One soldiers live is a lot more important to me then all the rag-heads in the world." Please be careful what you wish fopr. and remember there are other 'ragheads' no matter what the 'ragheads are made of. In fact, The Pope wears something that is very familiar to an easter bonnet. as do others under his charge. and Jews they wear something on their heads also. No matter what it is called. So Please again. Be careful what you wish for. (Do you really believe that individuals from any other country give a ratzbehind about our US soldiers? do you? Because they don't.

Power Shifts Following World War II can you help me with history please? 1. At the Yalta Conference, the decision was made to A) divide Germany into occupation zones. B) begin testing nuclear weapons. C) form an alliance to defeat Hitler. D) establish the League of Nations. 2. How was the Soviet Union able to begin taking control of Eastern Europe following World War II? A) The Soviet Union offered jobs to impoverished Eastern Europeans. B) Soviet troops were already stationed in Eastern Europe during the war. C) Because U.S. President Roosevelt died before the war ended, old treaties were void. D) Eastern Europe asked the Soviet Union for economic aid. 3. After World War II, Western Europe became united in its opposition to A) investment in foreign markets. B) nuclear weapons development. C) a military alliance with the United States. D) the Soviet Union. 4. After World War II, why did the Soviet Union favor a divided Germany? A) The Soviet Union believed a divided Germany could not start another war. B) West Germany lay outside the iron curtain. C) The Soviet Union wanted exclusive access to East Germany’s natural resources. D) The Soviet Union did not want to be burdened with West Germany’s economic problems. 5. Who conducted the world’s first successful test of a nuclear bomb? A) the Soviet Union B) Great Britain C) the United States D) Germany 6. Which nation emerged as one economic superpower after World War II? A) Korea B) Great Britain C) Japan D) Austria The Cold War 7. Use the quotation to answer the next two questions. “It shall be the policy of this Nation to regard any nuclear missile launched from Cuba against any nation in the Western Hemisphere as an attack by the Soviet Union on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response upon the Soviet Union.” U.S. President John Kennedy, Address on The Cuban Crisis, October 22, 1962. According to President Kennedy, the United States would consider “any nuclear missile launched from Cuba” evidence of A) the globalization of the Cold War. B) Cuban nuclear proliferation. C) an attack on the Western Hemisphere. D) Soviet aggression. 8. What policy is reflected in President Kennedy’s phrase “a full retaliatory response”? A) nonproliferation B) brinkmanship C) isolationism D) containment 9. How did the Cold War get its name? A) During the war, U.S. and Soviet troops never fought each other directly. B) It started in the Soviet Union, which is very cold. C) After 45 years, tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union grew cold. D) It took place between the superpowers of the Northern Hemisphere. 10. Which is a result of the Cold War? A) The Soviet Union wanted to be the dominant power in the world. B) The United States became involved in the Vietnam War. C) The United States was committed to democracy and capitalism. D) The Soviet Union built forced labor camps in Siberia. 11. Why would the Soviet Union have been most interested in providing aid to the Congo in 1960? A) It is among the most populous African nations. B) It had valuable natural resources. C) It is located in the center of the African continent. D) It was a newly independent nation. The Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan 12. The Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan developed in response to A) the Cold War. B) a worldwide economic depression. C) World War II. D) the McCarthy era. 13. Under the Truman Doctrine, the United States offered aid to any country that was A) devastated by World War II. B) a member of NATO. C) a member of the United Nations. D) threatened by communist expansion. 14. The Truman Doctrine is a part of what policy? A) containment B) isolationism C) détente D) brinksmanship 15. Which statement best expresses the relationship between the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan? A) The Marshall Plan influenced the development of the Truman Doctrine. B) The Truman Doctrine was developed to implement the Marshall Plan. C) The Truman Doctrine was developed to limit the Marshall Plan. D) The Marshall Plan was an example of the Truman Doctrine. 16. Which statement about the Marshall Plan reflects bias or personal opinion? A) It provided more aid to Great Britain than to any other nation. B) It was named for U.S. Secretary of State George Marshall. C) It blocked the spread of communism in postwar Europe. D) It distributed about $12.5 billion in aid from 1948 to 1951. 17. Why did the United States support Chilean president Augusto Pinochet? A) He was not a communist. B) He brought social justice to a formerly communist country. C) He was a leader in the fight against communism. D) He was Chile’s first democratically elected leader. Transformation in China 18. The Chinese Communists under Mao Tse-Tung promised all but which of the following? A) Redistribution of land from owners to workers B) A simplified system of Chinese writing, to increase literacy C) Closer economic and po

Let me see if I've got this correct about other countries gaining nuclear technology and/or weapons? You have to get the OK from NATO - i.e. predominantly our lot, those blithering idiots across the pond and the rest of NATO to be a nuclear power then do you? When China shot down their ailing satellite, then next, Iran told the world it planned to go ahead with it's nuclear programme and just recently North Korea launched its 'supposed' satellite into space, I only had one thought - GOOD FOR THEM! Apparently, the squatters on the Kindergarten Colony, as did our lot - bellyached about these various occurrences and plans. Where pray, does any country/group of countries get off telling another one that does not have a nuclear capability - be it for generating power or making weapons to protect themselves - that they cannot have it?!!! First the Prophet Obama said he was going to talk to Iran and all the 'axis of evil' rhetoric from his predecessor Lobotomy Bush was removed and substituted with his http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks6yT6BIAJY the 'Norouz' speech with its ''direct'' address to the "people/leaders of The Islamic Republic of Iran" yadi yada! I can tell you, when we got to that bit, I was actually wondering if he was going to get his tongue out and say ''exactly how far would you like me to insert it up there''? Not surprisingly, for those that haven't heard - this was the response from Iran:- Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Saturday he sees no change in U.S. policy toward Iran despite the U.S. promise of a "new beginning." Next all the sweet talking is replaced when Prophet Obama castigates North Korea for going ahead with their much publicised launch of what was 'supposedly' a satellite via what the Kindergartenarians 'reliably' inform us was a long-range missile (only it wasn't too long-range since most of it landed in the Pacific Ocean) - but was capable of crashing down on the 'American Dream'! Why can't the powers that be - be more honest - and say something along the lines -''we don't want you to have this capability, because then you'll be on a par with us and we'll be forced to bloody well talk to you"? Why can't all these damn politicians that drone on and on about their being a 'crisis' because certain nations want to evolve just stop treating us with contempt and say it like it is - we live in a 'dog-eat-dog' world and we all want to protect ourselves from the country that borders us?!!! The various political parties in the UK are in complete disarray - for those of you around the world who are not upto speed with the shenanigans that are currently besetting our latest generation of politicians - they are currently upto their eyelids in a saga of dubious expense claims. I still want to know what the two 'pornos' Jacqui Smith's hubby viewed late one night that we the tax payer were expected to pay for, as I want to know if they're worth renting or buying - afterall, if they're good enough for the Home Secretary's husband, then they're good enough for me! And that bath plug she wants us to pay for - all I want to know, is will we be able get a discount if we want to buy a similar bath plug for our abodes pray tell?!!! Not only that, a top Metropolitan policeman had to resign, because he fogot you don't leave secret papers out in view for media cameras to pick up - but then the police were never known for being Stephen Hawking material now were they?!!! And now just hot off the press there's a new sleezy email-smear campaign going on with Chief (I don't obey the rules of the road on my bicyle) Conservative David Cameron demanding an apology from always-sleepy looking Prime Minister Gordon Brown and he's also recently been in trouble with none other than Mervyn Allister King - you know him over there in Mickey Mouse land don't you? Our very own Governor of the Bank of England - well he's been round to number 10 to give Mr. Brown a piece of his mind about the UK's Economy - or lack of it. In other words - an actual political party with a really statesmen-like leader - at the moment I do not feel we have. And this poor bastard in the square mile on his way home from the boozer to watch the footy at home and nothing whatever to do with the G20 protest, obviously just in the wrong place at the wrong time etc.; was set upon by SS PC Plod & co-police-thugs and probably simply just died of delayed shock whilst continuing to stagger home after his beating; he was probably used to the alcohol - not so used to the combination of alcohol & a thumping with a regulation length Metropolitan Police officer's truncheon, riot batton or whatever they call them these days & then being shoved on the floor by said police stormtrooper & all the while having nothing whatever to do with this bloody protest- Jason Bourne your time is nigh!!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSLpFCNLW2g Infact did Jason Bourne have something to do with this old p i s sheads demise - did the spooks chief ''asset'' think he was secretly an Islamic insurgent then or wor -orse and probably more likely a MILLWALL FAN!!!!? OR was he? Will there now be a new conspiracy theory that he may have been one of the lowlife breaking into & vandelising the RBS building? What on Earth was this man doing staggering about getting in the way of the police battering members of the public & 'kettling' them i.e. not allowing them to leave when they didn't want to protest anymore - I mean the audacity of the man - what right did he have to be there staggering home to the footy anyway - did you see any identifying football scarves? No! Well then he was obviously fair game for the English & I daresay Kindergarten Colony authorities wouldn't you say?!!! And for those of you who want to know - yes I am on medication, but I find it difficult to take the pills - have problems with the child-proof lid on top of the jar!!! Correction:- Yes Mr. Nitpicker - I spelt the word 'forgot' wrong - left out the 'r' before you tell me!!!

us histroy please help? Which of the following was a major post-war goal of the United States? (1 point) * testing the atom bomb * bringing democracy to conquered European nations * dividing Germany into four occupied zones * signing a treaty with the Soviet Union 2. How did the Soviet Union gain political control in postwar Europe? (1 point) * They signed a peace treaty with Germany. * They allowed free elections in Eastern Europe. * They established satellite nations. * They invaded Eastern Europe. 3. What did President Truman promise in the Truman Doctrine? (1 point) * to support nations trying to resist Soviet control * to fight hunger anywhere in the world * to enforce the American foreign policy of brinkmanship * to reject the former policy of containment 4. The United States promoted economic aid to Europe through (1 point) * the Berlin airlift. * the Marshall Plan. * the containment policy. * the United Nations. 5. What was the U.S. response to the Communist takeover of China? (1 point) * the development of a hydrogen bomb * the formation of NATO * greater efforts to protect the rest of Asia * massive aid to Nationalist China 6. Congress sought to root out suspected Communists in the government through (1 point) * the McCarran-Walter Act. * the House Un-American Activities Committee. * the Hollywood Ten. * the blacklist. 7. The north Korean invasion of South Korea was an attempt to (1 point) * drive out American forces. * fight Chinese forces. * remove the 38th parallel line. * unify all of Korea. 8. What was one of the effects of the Korean War? (1 point) * Improved relations with China * The military was integrated * Defense spending declined * General Douglas MacArthur was promoted 9. What impact did Joseph McCarthy have on American society? (1 point) * He encouraged a widespread fear of communism. * He strengthened the United States Army. * He encouraged Americans to stand up for their civil rights. * He created opposition to United States involvement in Latin American affairs. 10. The United States and the Soviet Union struggled for world leadership by (1 point) * confronting each other in Europe. * settling conflicts in the Middle East. * engaging in an arms race. * avoiding war at all costs. {1} OK {1} ##LOC[OK]## ##LOC[Cancel]## {1} Yes No

check my social studies? 5. What was the U.S. response to the Communist takeover of China? a. the development of a hydrogen bomb b. [the formation of NATO] c. greater efforts to protect the rest of Asia d. massive aid to Nationalist China 6. Congress sought to root out suspected Communists in the government through a. the McCarran-Walter Act. b. the House Un-American Activities Committee. c. [the Hollywood Ten.] d. the blacklist. 7. The north Korean invasion of South Korea was an attempt to a. drive out American forces. b. fight Chinese forces. c. [remove the 38th parallel line.] d. unify all of Korea. 8. What was one of the effects of the Korean War a. Improved relations with China b. The military was integrated c. Defense spending declined d. [General Douglas MacArthur was promoted]

please i relay need sum help on my history assignment? 14. After NATO was formed, it allowed West Germany to build up a military and join the organization. This created tension with the Soviets, who responded by A. building up military forces along the dividing line between East Germany and West Germany. B. sending a diplomatic team to convince West Germany to decline the invitation to join NATO. C. attacking the western part of Berlin, in hopes of making it part of East Germany. D. creating the Warsaw Pact, which formed a military alliance in Eastern Europe. 15. What event in 1950 created concern in the United States that Communism could spread to countries outside of Europe? A. The establishment of Soviet military outposts in Japan B. The Soviet invasion of Mongolia C. The alliance signed between China and the Soviet Union D. The deployment of Soviet nuclear arms to North Africa 16. Which of the following events expanded the Cold War into Asia? A. The formation of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) B. The fighting of the Korean War C. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan D. The movement of nuclear missiles from the U.S.S.R. into China. 17. What policy did President Eisenhower implement in response to continued Communist attempts to expand in the world? A. The Dulles Plan B. The ICBM Policy C. The Containment Principles D. The Eisenhower Doctrine 18. What event during Eisenhower’s administration strained relations between the United States and the Soviet Union, causing a scheduled summit meeting to be cancelled? A. The shooting down of an American spy plane flying over the U.S.S.R. B. The launch of the Soviet satellite Sputnik C. The Soviet Union’s military cooperation in a rebellion in Hungary D. The Soviet Union’s discovery of an American covert operation to overthrow the Communist-supported leader in Guatemala 19. The Red Scare after 1945 began when a clerk in the Soviet Embassy in Ottawa, Canada, defected and A. started Project Verona, in an attempt to crack the Soviet spy code. B. revealed the names of 205 employees of the U.S. State Department who were Communist agents. C. turned over government documents proving that the Soviets were trying to infiltrate the U.S. government. D. testified before the U.S. Congress that an attack was to occur on the United States by the end of the year 20. Americans’ fear of Communism caused citizens to A. uncover possible Communists in the United States. B. learn more about Communism by attending party meetings to relieve their fears. C. apply for government jobs so they would not be accused of being Communists. D. avoid using their telephones for fear of being wiretapped. 21. How did Truman’s loyalty review program affect American society? A. It required all adults living in the United States to pass a test to prove they were not Communists. B. It created a complicated employment application process that affected working-age citizens. C. It validated the fear of some citizens that Communists worked in the United States government. D. It required adults to pledge loyalty to the United States as a requirement for voter registration. 22. The McCarran Act affected American society by A. requiring all government employees to sign a loyalty oath. B. requiring Communist organizations to make their records available to the public. C. imposing the death penalty on anyone convicted of espionage. D. authorizing the use of wiretaps to uncover suspected Communists. 23. Which of the following does not describe a way that American society was affected by the fear of Communism? A. Many Americans began to home-school their children for fear of a Soviet attack on public schools. B. An increase in political participation by some Americans in order to affect government policy. C. Many people planned and prepared ways to survive a nuclear attack from the Soviet Union. D. The theme of Communism appeared in popular culture, including television, movies, and plays. 24. Fear of Communism and a possible nuclear attack from the Soviet Union led some individuals in the United States to do what to protect their families? A. Train as part of a civilian military force designed to fight Communism B. Build fallout shelters behind their homes C. Form watch groups to uncover possible Communist activity in their neighborhoods D. Create backyard gardens to ensure their own food supply after a nuclear attack 25. How did Senator Joseph McCarthy affect American society? A. He created legislation that banned any further immigration from the Soviet Union into the United States. B. He was discovered to be a spy for the Soviet Union, and was censured by Congress. C. He represented society’s fear of Communism, through the congressional hearings he headed to determine whether or not a person was a Communist. D. He uncovered an extensive C

What would be a plausible scenario for this alternative history...? I'm planning on writing a story set in the late 60's to early 70's that is alternative history. Basically, here's a scenario that I've come up with as a background to the story. It starts with President Johnson continuing to push the war in Vietnam. So much so that he goes against advice and in response to the Tet Offensive, launches an invasion into North Vietnam following the relief of Khe Sahn. They capture Dong Hoi and begin to rapidly move along the east coast, thanks to the American naval presence that was already in the area. By the end of April they are pretty much at Hanoi's doorstep. However, the Chinese presence in North Vietnam decides to go to war with the Americans, as they did in Korea. The invasion is quickly outnumbered and out gunned, supported by the Soviets who are backing the counterattack and firing missiles at the invaders despite calls from the Chinese to let the Chinese do the fighting on their own. A Chinese fleet outflanks and out guns the loosely gathered American fleet in the Gulf of Tonkin, with heavy air support from Chinese bases on Hainan. The fleet captures the Paracel Islands and uses it as a forward operating base to attack South Vietnam. The invasion is pushed back to the 17th Parallel, where it started. In order to fight the Chinese threat, increased SEATO presence in South-East Asia is ordered. By July, the American presence in Australia, South Vietnam and Thailand is tripled, despite public outcries. Heavy riots break out throughout the USA and Australia, to the point where in several bases police had to open fire to curtail the violent riots. Finally, the Soviets seize the opportunity. They launch a two fronted invasion of South Korea and West Europe. Furthermore, they use bribery and military support to get the Arab nations in the Middle East to join the war, which in turn caused Israel to go to war once again with them. By now, there are 4 major scenes of fighting - South-East Asia, Palestine, Korea and Europe. As fighting continues along the 17th Parallel and 38th Parallel, the USSR soon begins to forefront the fighting. Furthermore, disputes over control in Asian interests between the USSR and China begin to cause the Chinese to end support for the war. They refuse to continue fighting in Vietnam and Korea and unofficially pull out of the war, launching only minor border fighting between SEATO and China. The USA uses this to their advantage, sending troops in Asia to the fighting around Europe and the Middle East. The USSR soon finds themselves fighting a losing battle against NATO and the USA without the Chinese support, facing overwhelming numbers and heavy support for the fighting. Brezhnev begins to blackmail China to reinstate their support for the war, stopping all trade with the Chinese and placing missile launchers close to the border. In response, China begins to demand heavy industrial backing from the USSR, using the excuse that they would not be able to sustain a war without the industrial prowess of the USSR. Brezhnev allows this. During this time, President Johnson is assassinated at a speech by a bomb that had been placed in the area. Nixon is soon sworn in and begins to move towards a peace solution. The USSR capitalize on this lack of support by renewing their forces in Europe and decreasing numbers in North Vietnam. They move towards a peace solution. The world is reinstated to a state of Status quo ante bellum. But now, following attempted assassinations on Brezhnev, the old government flee the Soviet Union to South America. The Communist Party send Nikolai Tikhonov to take up control of the country. He doesn't take too kindly to the Chinese, which is fueled even further when he learns that the assassins were Chinese. He is ready to go to war with the Chinese and the world is on the brink of World War 4, this second round of World War against Communism. He wants the industrial interests lended to China back, as well as increased economic support to continue the USSR's military and scientific spending, using blackmail to increase pressure on the Chinese. He releases an ultimatum, with no response from China. Inner Mongolia comes under invasion. NATO and the USA in response return to war. Israel continues fighting Arab threats in the Middle East and also contributes to American military power in Europe. Soon rockets are raining into West Germany and Europe faces a second invasion. China also takes out the threat from behind of Laos and North Vietnam, with the economic benefits through the abundant resources in South East Asia to fuel it's war machine. What do you think about this scenario?

Homework Help??? 5. What was the U.S. response to the Communist takeover of China? (1 point) the development of a hydrogen bomb the formation of NATO greater efforts to protect the rest of Asia massive aid to Nationalist China 6. Congress sought to root out suspected Communists in the government through (1 point) the McCarran-Walter Act. the House Un-American Activities Committee. the Hollywood Ten. the blacklist. 7. The north Korean invasion of South Korea was an attempt to (1 point) drive out American forces. fight Chinese forces. remove the 38th parallel line. unify all of Korea. 8. What was one of the effects of the Korean War? (1 point) Improved relations with China The military was integrated Defense spending declined General Douglas MacArthur was promoted

Hello everybody!!! Can you check my history homework????? 1. Which of the following was a major post-war goal of the United States? (1 point) testing the atom bomb bringing democracy to conquered European nations <------- dividing Germany into four occupied zones signing a treaty with the Soviet Union 2. How did the Soviet Union gain political control in postwar Europe? (1 point) They signed a peace treaty with Germany. They allowed free elections in Eastern Europe. They established satellite nations. <------- They invaded Eastern Europe. 3. A major goal of the Truman Doctrine was (1 point) to support free peoples in Europe. <------- to give aid to Great Britain. to drive Communists from Eastern Europe. to raise the iron curtain. 4. The United States promoted economic aid to Europe through (1 point) the Berlin airlift. the Marshall Plan. the containment policy. the United Nations.<------- 5. What was the U.S. response to the Communist takeover of China? (1 point) the development of a hydrogen bomb the formation of NATO <------- greater efforts to protect the rest of Asia massive aid to Nationalist China 6. Congress sought to root out suspected Communists in the government through (1 point) the McCarran-Walter Act. the House Un-American Activities Committee. the Hollywood Ten. the blacklist.<------- 7. The north Korean invasion of South Korea was an attempt to (1 point) drive out American forces. fight Chinese forces. <------- remove the 38th parallel line. unify all of Korea. 8. What was one of the effects of the Korean War? (1 point) Improved relations with China <------- The military was integrated Defense spending declined General Douglas MacArthur was promoted 9. Senator Joseph McCarthy spread suspicion and fear of communism when he (1 point) denounced the Cold War. accused other senators of treason. used smear tactics and untrue accusations. found Communists in the State Department.<------- 10. The United States and the Soviet Union struggled for world leadership by (1 point) confronting each other in Europe. settling conflicts in the Middle East. engaging in an arms race. <------- avoiding war at all costs.

Need some help with homwork!!!!!!!? 1. Which of the following was a major post-war goal of the United States? (1 point) testing the atom bomb bringing democracy to conquered European nations dividing Germany into four occupied zones signing a treaty with the Soviet Union 2. How did the Soviet Union gain political control in postwar Europe? (1 point) They signed a peace treaty with Germany. They allowed free elections in Eastern Europe. They established satellite nations. They invaded Eastern Europe. 3. A major goal of the Truman Doctrine was (1 point) to support free peoples in Europe. to give aid to Great Britain. to drive Communists from Eastern Europe. to raise the iron curtain. 4. The United States promoted economic aid to Europe through (1 point) the Berlin airlift. the Marshall Plan. the containment policy. the United Nations. 5. What was the U.S. response to the Communist takeover of China? (1 point) the development of a hydrogen bomb the formation of NATO greater efforts to protect the rest of Asia massive aid to Nationalist China 6. Congress sought to root out suspected Communists in the government through (1 point) the McCarran-Walter Act. the House Un-American Activities Committee. the Hollywood Ten. the blacklist. 7. The north Korean invasion of South Korea was an attempt to (1 point) drive out American forces. fight Chinese forces. remove the 38th parallel line. unify all of Korea. 8. What was one of the effects of the Korean War? (1 point) Improved relations with China The military was integrated Defense spending declined General Douglas MacArthur was promoted 9. Senator Joseph McCarthy spread suspicion and fear of communism when he (1 point) denounced the Cold War. accused other senators of treason. used smear tactics and untrue accusations. found Communists in the State Department. 10. The United States and the Soviet Union struggled for world leadership by (1 point) confronting each other in Europe. settling conflicts in the Middle East. engaging in an arms race. avoiding war at all costs.

i need help in history...Which of the following was a major post-war goal of the United States? (1 point)? 1. Which of the following was a major post-war goal of the United States? (1 point) testing the atom bomb bringing democracy to conquered European nations dividing Germany into four occupied zones signing a treaty with the Soviet Union 2. How did the Soviet Union gain political control in postwar Europe? (1 point) They signed a peace treaty with Germany. They allowed free elections in Eastern Europe. They established satellite nations. They invaded Eastern Europe. 3. A major goal of the Truman Doctrine was (1 point) to support free peoples in Europe. to give aid to Great Britain. to drive Communists from Eastern Europe. to raise the iron curtain. 4. The United States promoted economic aid to Europe through (1 point) the Berlin airlift. the Marshall Plan. the containment policy. the United Nations. 5. What was the U.S. response to the Communist takeover of China? (1 point) the development of a hydrogen bomb the formation of NATO greater efforts to protect the rest of Asia massive aid to Nationalist China 6. Congress sought to root out suspected Communists in the government through (1 point) the McCarran-Walter Act. the House Un-American Activities Committee. the Hollywood Ten. the blacklist. 7. The north Korean invasion of South Korea was an attempt to (1 point) drive out American forces. fight Chinese forces. remove the 38th parallel line. unify all of Korea. 8. What was one of the effects of the Korean War? (1 point) Improved relations with China The military was integrated Defense spending declined General Douglas MacArthur was promoted 9. Senator Joseph McCarthy spread suspicion and fear of communism when he (1 point) denounced the Cold War. accused other senators of treason. used smear tactics and untrue accusations. found Communists in the State Department. 10. The United States and the Soviet Union struggled for world leadership by (1 point) confronting each other in Europe. settling conflicts in the Middle East. engaging in an arms race. avoiding war at all costs.

Can you believe how THE GREAT ONE has used Afghanistan as just one more scam on us? Friday, October 09, 2009 Young Hamlet's Agony by Charles Krauthammer WASHINGTON -- The genius of democracy is the rotation of power, which forces the opposition to be serious -- particularly about things like war, about which until Jan. 20 of this year Democrats were decidedly unserious. When the Iraq War (which a majority of Senate Democrats voted for) ran into trouble and casualties began to mount, Democrats followed the shifting winds of public opinion and turned decidedly anti-war. But needing political cover because of their post-Vietnam reputation for weakness on national defense, they adopted Afghanistan as their pet war. "I was part of the 2004 Kerry campaign, which elevated the idea of Afghanistan as 'the right war' to conventional Democratic wisdom," wrote Democratic consultant Bob Shrum shortly after President Obama was elected. "This was accurate as criticism of the Bush administration, but it was also reflexive and perhaps by now even misleading as policy." Which is a clever way to say that championing victory in Afghanistan was a contrived and disingenuous policy in which Democrats never seriously believed, a convenient two-by-four with which to bash George Bush over Iraq -- while still appearing warlike enough to fend off the soft-on-defense stereotype. Brilliantly crafted and perfectly cynical, the "Iraq War bad, Afghan War good" posture worked. Democrats first won Congress, then the White House. But now, unfortunately, they must govern. No more games. No more pretense. So what does their commander in chief do now with the war he once declared had to be won but had been almost criminally under-resourced by Bush? Perhaps provide the resources to win it? You would think so. And that's exactly what Obama's handpicked commander requested on Aug. 30 -- a surge of 30,000 to 40,000 troops to stabilize a downward spiral and save Afghanistan the way a similar surge saved Iraq. That was more than five weeks ago. Still no response. Obama agonizes publicly as the world watches. Why? Because, explains national security adviser James Jones, you don't commit troops before you decide on a strategy. No strategy? On March 27, flanked by his secretaries of defense and state, the president said this: "Today I'm announcing a comprehensive new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan." He then outlined a civilian-military counterinsurgency campaign to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan. And to emphasize his seriousness, the president made clear that he had not arrived casually at this decision. The new strategy, he declared, "marks the conclusion of a careful policy review." Conclusion, mind you. Not the beginning. Not a process. The conclusion of an extensive review, the president assured the nation, that included consultation with military commanders and diplomats, with the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan, with our NATO allies and members of Congress. The general in charge was then relieved and replaced with Obama's own choice, Stanley McChrystal. And it's McChrystal who submitted the request for the 40,000 troops, a request upon which the commander in chief promptly gagged. The White House began leaking an alternate strategy, apparently proposed (invented?) by Vice President Biden, for achieving immaculate victory with arm's-length use of cruise missiles, predator drones and special ops. The irony is that no one knows more about this kind of warfare than Gen. McChrystal. He was in charge of exactly this kind of "counterterrorism" in Iraq for nearly five years, killing thousands of bad guys in hugely successful under-the-radar operations. When the world's expert on this type of counterterrorism warfare recommends precisely the opposite strategy -- "counterinsurgency," meaning a heavy-footprint, population-protecting troop surge -- you have the most convincing of cases against counterterrorism by the man who most knows its potential and its limits. And McChrystal was emphatic in his recommendation: To go any other way than counterinsurgency would lose the war. Yet his commander in chief, young Hamlet, frets, demurs, agonizes. His domestic advisers, led by Rahm Emanuel, tell him if he goes for victory, he'll become LBJ, the domestic visionary destroyed by a foreign war. His vice president holds out the chimera of painless counterterrorism success. Against Emanuel and Biden stand David Petraeus, the world's foremost expert on counterinsurgency (he saved Iraq with it), and Stanley McChrystal, the world's foremost expert on counterterrorism. Whose recommendation on how to fight would you rely on? Less than two months ago -- Aug. 17 in front of an audience of veterans -- the president declared Afghanistan to be "a war of necessity." Does anything he says remain operative beyond the fading of the audience applause? http://townhall.com/columnists/CharlesKrauthammer/2009/10/09/young_hamlets_agony?page=full&comments=true

I don’t understand why Putin would be forced to aim nuclear missiles at Ukraine. This is an excerpt from NYT MOSCOW — The presidents of Russia and Ukraine averted a threatened cutoff of natural gas supplies to Ukraine on Tuesday, at the same time that Russia’s president said his country might aim nuclear missiles at Ukraine if it followed through on its intention to join NATO. “It’s horrible to say and even horrible to think,” President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia said about the prospect of possibly aiming missiles at Ukraine. Mr. Putin made the remarks in response to a question at a Kremlin news conference. After speaking for a time about Ukraine’s long cultural ties to Russia, he said that NATO might deploy antimissile systems in Ukraine, and that Russia would have to respond. “Russia could target its missile systems at Ukraine,” he said. “Imagine that for a second.”

can you answers theses S.S ?s (short answers) Thankyou!!? 11. What was the Stamp Act? 12.What country was the first to recognize America as a country? 13.What was the Treaty of Paris? 18.What was the Estates-General? 19.What and were did the 3rd Estate meet?What were their goals? 20.What were the National Convention's goals and concerns? 21.What was the Reign of Terror?Who?What happened?Why? 22.What was the Republic of Virtue?Why?What happened? 23.What was The Directory?Who?What happened?Why? 24.What power did Napoleon have? 25.What was Napoleon's first goal after coming to powe?Why? 26.What were the dependant states? 27.What were the allied forces? 28.What was the European responses to Napoleon? 29.Why did Napoleon's Empire fall? 30.What was the Continental System? 31.What was the disaster in Russia?Who?What happened?Why? 32.What was Napoleon's last defeat?What person did he lose against? 33.What was one of the first industries to be affected by the Industrial Revolution? 34.What did the factory labor system create? 35.What was the social change brought about by the Industrial Revolution? 36.List the Allied powers 37.List the Central Powers 38.What is conscription?What role did militarism play in the early 1900's? 39.When and what happened to Archduke Ferdinand? 40.What was the Austrian-Hungary and German respnses? 41.What was the Schlieffen Plan? 42.How long did people think the WWI was going to last? 43.What is propaganda and why was it used during WWI/ 44.What is trench warfare?What types of weapons were used? 45/What was the sinking of Lusitania?When?Where? 46.What caused the U.S. entry to WWI? 47.What was the Zimmerman Note? 48.What is total war? 49.What is armstice? 50.What were the costs of war? 51.What are the reparations?Who had to pay it? 52.Name the governments that collapsed after WWI? 53.What were the BIG THREE?Why and where did they meet? 54.What was the LEague of Nations?Who started it? 55.What was the Treaty of Versailles?Who started it? 56.What new countries were created/ 57.Why did the U.S. not join the League of NAtions? 58.What is imperialism? 59.What is conscription? 60.Why did many Europeans nations set up colonies? 61.What was the open door policy/ 62.What was the Boxer rebellion? 63.Waht is indirect rule?What is direct rule? 64.What government was is power before Lenin took over? 65.What started WWII? 66.Waht is blitzkrieg? 67.When was Peral HArbor?Who were the key players? 68.What was the Battle of Midway?Who was the commanders in the PAcific? 69.Who was the leader of the Battle of Normandy?Whatwas the result? 70.What was Nazism?Why was it appealing? 71.Discuss the ABttle of Britain? 72.What did Hitler violate in the Treaty of Versailes? 73.Discuss rationing and war bond? 74.What was the Manhattan project?What were the 2 cities affected by the bomb?What was the name of the plane?What was the result? 75.What was the result of the Potsdam Conference? 76.When was D-Day? 77.List the Allied powers.List the Axis powers.During WWII. 78.What were the Nuremburg Trials? 79.Discuss the BAttle of Coral Sea? 80.What was the non-aggression pact? 81.Discuss the Yalta Conference 82.Who said an "iron curtain' had descended across the continent? 83.What was the containment policy used for? 84.What was the Berlin Airlift?Who was involved/ 85.What was the Marshal Plan? 86.What was NATO?Who were the original members? 87.Why did Americans fear the Russian satellite Sputnik I? 88.Who was the U.S. senator responsible for an anti-communists movement known as the "Red Scare"? 89.What did the Truman Doctrine states? 90.WHy was the Ber lin Wall built? 91.What was the U.S. policy to stop the spread of communism toward the Soviet Union? 92.What President signed the Civil Rights Act? 93.Who was the President during the Cuban Missile Crisis? 94.Who was Leonardo Davinci? 95.Define Secular? 96.Who was the leader of the Protestant Reformation?What was the first Protestant faith?What did the Ninety-five theses state? 97.What was the Renaissance? 98.What is mercantilism? 99.What was the Middle passage? 100.Who was Columbus?What did he go to to his grave thinking he discovered?

Is this okay so far? Do I sound vaguely like I know what i'm talking about? “[...] humans were a kind of "biological error," using their allotted 100,000 years to destroy themselves and, in the process, much else. The species has surely developed the capacity to do just that, and our hypothetical extraterrestrial observer might conclude that they have demonstrated that capacity throughout their history, dramatically in the past few hundred years, with an assault on the environment that sustains life, on the diversity of more complex organisms, and with cold and calculated savagery, on each other as well.” On the very first page of “Hegemony or Survival”, Chomsky examines scientist Ernst Mayr’s speculation that higher intelligence beings (humans) will not be favored by natural selection. Mayr believes that our life span as a species will be around 100,000 years long. This notion really puts the atrocities archived all throughout the rest of the book in perspective. Although this book focuses primarily on American influence, one could gather that this looming expiration date exists because of the detrimental thirst for hegemony all empires share. The title of the book becomes a decision for the reader, hegemony or survival? The foremost seems to hinder the latter in that the road to its achievement involves deadly confrontation. Trends in history seem to predict that we as a species are destined to make the wrong choice. The Cuban Missile Crisis is a perfect example of the deadly extremes empires resort to to secure dominance. Tension during the last days of the Cold War came to a boiling point when Russia placed several missiles on Cuban soil. This move was made in response to America’s placement of nuclear weapons in Eastern Europe, which was as unnerving to them as the weapons in Cuba were to us. Both empires were looking down the barrel of a gun and one wrong move by either party could pose as justification for the other to pull the trigger, thus starting a nuclear war. In his book, Chomsky quotes intelligence, Cold War, and NATO specialist Raymond Garthoff as stating that "the risk and danger to both sides could have been extreme, and catastrophe not excluded.” Nuclear weapons seem to be one of the greatest threats to our survival due to their incredible force and magnitude of destruction. However, aside from their physical potential for the extermination of thousands at a time, it is the hands that they are in which make them such a profound threat. A report of a panel of consultants on the disarmament of the Secretary of State in January 1953 recognized that “Fundamentally, and in the long run, the problem which is posed by the release of atomic energy is a problem of the ability of the human race to govern itself without war.” Over the course of our existence we’ve made it clear that we have next to no proficiency in maintaining peace. Since the 19th century alone, European nations have participated in over eighty wars and conflicts. North America has been in over thirty and South and Central America combined comes to around fifty. Three years before his assassination Kennedy asserted that “It is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war” during his election address. Over four decades later no one has proven him wrong. 


Is My Nuclear War Simulation Accurate? Ok, I made this simulation by myself. It is meant to simulate an all-out nuclear war between NATO and Russia. To stop anyone from telling me this again, I did base some of this on Threads. 1) Russia starts moving convoys into a foreign country for defence purposes, e.g. Iran. 2) Germany reports suspicious behaviour to NATO. 3) United States is angry with Russia and asks them to cease what they are doing. 4) Russia refuses and later on, a US submarine goes missing in the middle pacific. 5) US blames Russia. 6) Germany reports that the Russians have started a military base in Iran. 7) United States is furious with Russia and demands that they move out as soon as possible. 8) US carrier sunk in persian gulf. 9) US send troops into Iran in an attempt to move the Russians out. 10) The United Kingdom sends troops in to reinforce their commitment to NATO. 11) Russia has no response. 12) Serious damage caused to a Russian cruiser when it collides with a US destroyer. 13) Russia is furious. 14) US sets and ultimatum to Russia demanding that all US and Russian forces are to be moved out of Iran. 15) US ultimatum expires: US bomber jets attack russian base with non-nuclear weapons Russia responds with a single nuclear-tipped air defence missile Many US planes lost US respond with a single battlefield nuclear weapon on Russia's base Exchange stops 15) All NATO associated countries (and some countries of the EU) are put on red alert: In the UK the 'Protect and Survive' videos are played and booklets are distributed. In the US many air-attack drills are put into action. 16) Many anti-Russian demonstrations are held in the US and many riots take place in Germany. 17) 08.00: Russia launches at NATO. 18) 08.30: Missiles are detected over Europe, Britain and parts of NATO irrupt into panic. 19) 08.35: Single warhead explodes high above North Sea Energy pulse burns out many electrical systems Massive damage to communications across Britain and north-west Europe 08.37: First missile salvo hits NATO military targets in Britain and Europe In the UK blast casualties between two and a half and nine-million. At the same time in the US (03.37), sirens are sounding and the first missile salvos start hitting minutes after sirens are sounded. First salvo blast casualties in the US are five to thirteen million. 20) Nuclear exchanges escalate and NATO launches back at Russia. 21) Second salvo from Russia hits priority economic targets: Communications Energy Steel Chemicals East-West exchange: 3000 megatons, 210 megatons total fall on UK, 1000 megatons on the US, another 300 megatons spread around Europe, Russia receives 1490 megatons. Two-thirds of houses in US and Britain within possible fire zones. 21) Fallout imminent, fire-fighting and rescue attempts unlikely. 22) Many die from instant effects and many short-term survivors die from fallout. 23) About 14 days after the attack, the risk from fallout passes and survivors go on a run for food and clean water. 24) A global nuclear winter descends on the earth and many crops fail to grow Many starved or are forced to eat rats 25) First and subsequent harvests poor: Running out of fertilisers Low on agrochemicals Crops survive but lack of sunlight means poor growth. 26) One year after attack. Skies become clearer Returning sunlight now heavier with ultra-violet light. 27) Cataracts widespread: Higher risk of cancers leukaemias 28) Second and subsequent harvests: No fertilisers No agrochemicals Crops susceptible to viruses, diseases and insects. 29) 3-8 years after attack: Population reaches minimum. UK numbers may decline to mediaeval levels Possibly between 4 and 11 million Numbers around the world decline drastically 30) 16 years after attack: NATO and Russia have made very little recovery. Some efforts are made to re-build towns and villages but most fail. 30) No country wins.

Response to the US Vs UK military questions? Just read this article. It came out of the most anti-American newspaper in the world. The Guardian... That being said, even these idiots can not deny the scope of American power. Oh yeah...There is no way Britain could even begin to dream about winning a (hypothetical) war against America. Read up on the US Military - no one even comes close. This isn't opinion...its fact. -------- American power -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Armed to the teeth Is Bush's awesome increase in military spending a reasonable response to the afermath of September 11, or is he creating a force almost too powerful for its own good? Peter Beaumont and Ed Vulliamy report Is America too powerful for its own good? You can have your say online here. Observer Worldview Sunday February 10, 2002 The Observer There is a United States special forces dog-handler who meets journalists, diplomats and aid workers off the UN flight to Kabul. His job is to search luggage and ensure the security of US troops in Afghanistan. He is short, gingery and aggressive. His skills at persuasion are limited to shouting at the milling crowd: 'Stand back! Stand back! My dog will bite!' Last week that phrase had become the defining motto and operating credo for the military and foreign policy of the Bush administration. Already President George W. Bush has put Iran, Iraq and North Korea on notice as terrorist-sponsoring nations at the centre of an international 'axis of evil', despite the CIA's recent evidence that none of them was in the business of threatening the United States at present. Article continues -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last Monday, to back that explicit threat, he announced an increase in US military spending of 15 per cent, the biggest in 20 years, more than double the military spending in all of the European Union. The rise will be $36 billion (£26.5bn) this year, $48 billion next year and $120 billion over the next five years, rising to a staggering two trillion over the next five years. Even this is not enough for General Richard Myers, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. They want the US defence budget to increase at an even faster rate. What all this means is clear. Troubled by the 11 September attacks and buoyed by the ease of the war against Afghanistan, Bush's message to the 'evil doers' of the world is that he has a dog; that it is very big, getting bigger, and certainly it will bite. The puzzle about the latest rise in defence spending is that America at the beginning of the 21st century is already not so much a superpower as a behemoth on the world stage. Economically dominant, it enjoys military and cultural power unrivalled since the days of the Roman emperors, as the American author Robert D. Kaplan reminds us in his new book, Warrior Politics. Typically, it has been left to the French, traditionally suspicious of US global hegemony, to find the best words to describe it. Gigantisme militaire they call it, in a phrase that describes both the scale of America's ambitions and also a pathological condition: an organism grown so large it is sick. The question the rest of the world is asking itself is: Who is the enemy America is arming itself so against? And why? 'Ostensibly,' says one European diplomat, 'this is about security. But quite how a massive increase in defence spending is supposed to prevent another terrorist attack remains unclear. Instead this seems to be about repairing the bruised American psyche after 11 September. America's powerlessness in the face of this attack requires big gestures and reassurances, even if they are counter-productive and meaningless.' Indeed, some analysts say, if it is security that America seeks it is better sought in dialogue with potentially threatening states, rather than in reinforcing the idea already held by many anti-US groups that it is an evil empire bent on world domination. Cynics have identified more overtly self-serving strands in the Republican obsession with America's defence. The 'war' rhetoric, as some US liberal commentators have pointed out, serves a purely domestic Republican agenda in the post-11 September mood of national paranoia: to win Bush a second presidential term and, in the shorter term, regain Congress. The reality - even before the latest proposed increases in military spending - is that America could beat the rest of the world at war with one hand tied behind its back. The requirement that US armed forces be able to fight two fully fledged wars with two separate adversaries simultaneously may recently have been dropped, but only because it would be hard pushed to find two such equal foes to fight. A single US nuclear-powered carrier group - which forms around the USS Enterprise, for example, with a flight deck almost a mile in length and a superstructure 20 storeys high - concentrates more military power in one naval group than most states can manage with all their armed forces. America has seven of these battle groups. It is not just the scale and power of these weapons systems. The reach of US arms, too, is awesome. When the USS Kitty Hawk was sent with its accompanying warships from Yokohama to the Gulf for the war against Afghanistan, it covered 6,000 miles in just 12 days to be transformed into a vast floating forward attack station for thousands of US special forces. Its B-52 bombers can fly and refuel across the world armed with cruise missiles that can be fired hundreds of miles away from hostile skies, the missiles themselves directed to their targets by satellites in orbit. And America's supremacy in bombs, planes, satellites, tanks and real-time intelligence have made the prospect of US casualties remote, except in the event of cock-up or disaster. And, significantly, as the world's only economic hyper-power, it can afford this level of militarisation. But against all this even the manufacturers of America's arms - like the aviation giant Lockheed-Martin - have been struggling for a decade or so to define the threat its top-shelf jets will be battling in the skies, being forced in one memorable presentation to show the European Eurofighter as a potential adversary. So why the need for more and better military power? Even military analysts are baffled. 'The rise in US military spending,' says Dan Plesch, senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, 'ought to be compared to the decision in the First World War to order up more cavalry when the first wave had been mown down by machine-guns. 'The US has no competitor in high-tech military equipment. And what it is spending its money on is mostly irrelevant against the knives used to carry out 11 September. The bombing of Afghanistan has created the illusion of victory.' Professor Paul Kennedy at Yale University calculates that the US now spends more each year than the next nine largest national defence budgets combined. Indeed America is responsible for about 40 per cent of the world's military spending. The new defence expenditure will be paid for by a freshly dug deficit and cuts to every other federal spending programme - including social security, Medicare and urban renewal - apart from tax breaks loaded heavily in favour of the upper-income brackets. Amid all this, military might has emerged as the central tenet of America's new power, the defining feature of the Bush administration. Already it is causing alarm, even among America's closest allies in Nato, where Lord Robertson, the usually unflappable secretary-general, has been moved to warn some members that unless the declining European defence expenditure is reversed then Europe - and the Europeans in Nato - are in danger of becoming military pygmies. It is not a prospect likely to worry the military hawks in the Bush administration, who favour unilateralism over alliance. Indeed the Nato alliance, built to counter the rival superpower conflict of the Cold War, is already almost redundant, some diplomats claim. 'Will the Americans ever fight a war through Nato again?' asks Carl Bildt, former Swedish Prime Minister. 'It's doubtful. The United States reserves the right to itself to wage war, and dumps on others the messy, expensive business of nation-building and peace keeping'. And the Afghan war has not only put the US in sole command of the world, but fundamentally reshaped the architecture of international alliances. Central Asia is splattered with new American fortresses; the Pacific and Indian oceans are patrolled by aircraft carriers and accompanying fleets of awesome size.

A lot of military action? SOUTH DAKOTA 1890 (-?) Troops 300 Lakota Indians massacred at Wounded Knee. ARGENTINA 1890 Troops Buenos Aires interests protected. CHILE 1891 Troops Marines clash with nationalist rebels. HAITI 1891 Troops Black revolt on Navassa defeated. IDAHO 1892 Troops Army suppresses silver miners' strike. HAWAII 1893 (-?) Naval, troops Independent kingdom overthrown, annexed. CHICAGO 1894 Troops Breaking of rail strike, 34 killed. NICARAGUA 1894 Troops Month-long occupation of Bluefields. CHINA 1894-95 Naval, troops Marines land in Sino-Japanese War KOREA 1894-96 Troops Marines kept in Seoul during war. PANAMA 1895 Troops, naval Marines land in Colombian province. NICARAGUA 1896 Troops Marines land in port of Corinto. CHINA 1898-1900 Troops Boxer Rebellion fought by foreign armies. PHILIPPINES 1898-1910 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, killed 600,000 Filipinos CUBA 1898-1902 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, still hold Navy base. PUERTO RICO 1898 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, occupation continues. GUAM 1898 (-?) Naval, troops Seized from Spain, still use as base. MINNESOTA 1898 (-?) Troops Army battles Chippewa at Leech Lake. NICARAGUA 1898 Troops Marines land at port of San Juan del Sur. SAMOA 1899 (-?) Troops Battle over succession to throne. NICARAGUA 1899 Troops Marines land at port of Bluefields. IDAHO 1899-1901 Troops Army occupies Coeur d'Alene mining region. OKLAHOMA 1901 Troops Army battles Creek Indian revolt. PANAMA 1901-14 Naval, troops Broke off from Colombia 1903, annexed Canal Zone 1914. HONDURAS 1903 Troops Marines intervene in revolution. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1903-04 Troops U.S. interests protected in Revolution. KOREA 1904-05 Troops Marines land in Russo-Japanese War. CUBA 1906-09 Troops Marines land in democratic election. NICARAGUA 1907 Troops "Dollar Diplomacy" protectorate set up. HONDURAS 1907 Troops Marines land during war with Nicaragua PANAMA 1908 Troops Marines intervene in election contest. NICARAGUA 1910 Troops Marines land in Bluefields and Corinto. HONDURAS 1911 Troops U.S. interests protected in civil war. CHINA 1911-41 Naval, troops Continuous occupation with flare-ups. CUBA 1912 Troops U.S. interests protected in civil war. PANAMA 1912 Troops Marines land during heated election. HONDURAS 1912 Troops Marines protect U.S. economic interests. NICARAGUA 1912-33 Troops, bombing 10-year occupation, fought guerillas MEXICO 1913 Naval Americans evacuated during revolution. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1914 Naval Fight with rebels over Santo Domingo. COLORADO 1914 Troops Breaking of miners' strike by Army. MEXICO 1914-18 Naval, troops Series of interventions against nationalists. HAITI 1914-34 Troops, bombing 19-year occupation after revolts. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1916-24 Troops 8-year Marine occupation. CUBA 1917-33 Troops Military occupation, economic protectorate. WORLD WAR I 1917-18 naval, troops Ships sunk, fought Germany for 1 1/2 years. RUSSIA 1918-22 Naval, troops Five landings to fight Bolsheviks PANAMA 1918-20 Troops "Police duty" during unrest after elections. HONDURAS 1919 Troops Marines land during election campaign. YUGOSLAVIA 1919 Troops/Marines intervene for Italy against Serbs in Dalmatia. GUATEMALA 1920 Troops 2-week intervention against unionists. WEST VIRGINIA 1920-21 Troops, bombing Army intervenes against mineworkers. TURKEY 1922 Troops Fought nationalists in Smyrna. CHINA 1922-27 Naval, troops Deployment during nationalist revolt. HONDURAS 1924-25 Troops Landed twice during election strife. PANAMA 1925 Troops Marines suppress general strike. CHINA 1927-34 Troops Marines stationed throughout the country. EL SALVADOR 1932 Naval Warships send during Marti revolt. WASHINGTON DC 1932 Troops Army stops WWI vet bonus protest. WORLD WAR II 1941-45 Naval, troops, bombing, nuclear Hawaii bombed, fought Japan, Italy and Germay for 3 years; first nuclear war. DETROIT 1943 Troops Army put down Black rebellion. IRAN 1946 Nuclear threat Soviet troops told to leave north. YUGOSLAVIA 1946 Nuclear threat, naval Response to shoot-down of US plane. URUGUAY 1947 Nuclear threat Bombers deployed as show of strength. GREECE 1947-49 Command operation U.S. directs extreme-right in civil war. GERMANY 1948 Nuclear Threat Atomic-capable bombers guard Berlin Airlift. CHINA 1948-49 Troops/Marines evacuate Americans before Communist victory. PHILIPPINES 1948-54 Command operation CIA directs war against Huk Rebellion. PUERTO RICO 1950 Command operation Independence rebellion crushed in Ponce. KOREA 1951-53 (-?) Troops, naval, bombing , nuclear threats U.S./So. Korea fights China/No. Korea to stalemate; A-bomb threat in 1950, and against China in 1953. Still have bases. IRAN 1953 Command Operation CIA overthrows democracy, installs Shah. VIETNAM 1954 Nuclear threat French offered bombs to use against seige. GUATEMALA 1954 Command operation, bombing, nuclear threat CIA directs exile invasion after new gov't nationalized U.S. company lands; bombers based in Nicaragua. EGYPT 1956 Nuclear threat, troops Soviets told to keep out of Suez crisis; Marines evacuate foreigners. LEBANON l958 Troops, naval Marine occupation against rebels. IRAQ 1958 Nuclear threat Iraq warned against invading Kuwait. CHINA l958 Nuclear threat China told not to move on Taiwan isles. PANAMA 1958 Troops Flag protests erupt into confrontation. VIETNAM l960-75 Troops, naval, bombing, nuclear threats Fought South Vietnam revolt & North Vietnam; one million killed in longest U.S. war; atomic bomb threats in l968 and l969. LAOS 1962 Command operation Military buildup during guerrilla war. CUBA l961 Command operation CIA-directed exile invasion fails. GERMANY l961 Nuclear threat Alert during Berlin Wall crisis. CUBA l962 Nuclear threat, naval Blockade during missile crisis; near-war with Soviet Union. PANAMA l964 Troops Panamanians shot for urging canal's return. INDONESIA l965 Command operation Million killed in CIA-assisted army coup. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1965-66 Troops, bombing Marines land during election campaign. GUATEMALA l966-67 Command operation Green Berets intervene against rebels. DETROIT l967 Troops Army battles Blacks, 43 killed. UNITED STATES l968 Troops After King is shot; over 21,000 soldiers in cities. CAMBODIA l969-75 Bombing, troops, naval Up to 2 million killed in decade of bombing, starvation, and political chaos. OMAN l970 Command operation U.S. directs Iranian marine invasion. LAOS l971-73 Command operation, bombing U.S. directs South Vietnamese invasion; "carpet-bombs" countryside. SOUTH DAKOTA l973 Command operation Army directs Wounded Knee siege of Lakotas. MIDEAST 1973 Nuclear threat World-wide alert during Mideast War. CHILE 1973 Command operation CIA-backed coup ousts elected marxist president. CAMBODIA l975 Troops, bombing Gas captured ship, 28 die in copter crash. ANGOLA l976-92 Command operation CIA assists South African-backed rebels. IRAN l980 Troops, nuclear threat, aborted bombing Raid to rescue Embassy hostages; 8 troops die in copter-plane crash. Soviets warned not to get involved in revolution. LIBYA l981 Naval jets Two Libyan jets shot down in maneuvers. EL SALVADOR l981-92 Command operation, troops Advisors, overflights aid anti-rebel war, soldiers briefly involved in hostage clash. NICARAGUA l981-90 Command operation, naval CIA directs exile (Contra) invasions, plants harbor mines against revolution. LEBANON l982-84 Naval, bombing, troops Marines expel PLO and back Phalangists, Navy bombs and shells Muslim positions. GRENADA l983-84 Troops, bombing Invasion four years after revolution. HONDURAS l983-89 Troops Maneuvers help build bases near borders. IRAN l984 Jets Two Iranian jets shot down over Persian Gulf. LIBYA l986 Bombing, naval Air strikes to topple nationalist gov't. BOLIVIA 1986 Troops Army assists raids on cocaine region. IRAN l987-88 Naval, bombing US intervenes on side of Iraq in war. LIBYA 1989 Naval jets Two Libyan jets shot down. VIRGIN ISLANDS 1989 Troops St. Croix Black unrest after storm. PHILIPPINES 1989 Jets Air cover provided for government against coup. PANAMA 1989 (-?) Troops, bombing Nationalist government ousted by 27,000 soldiers, leaders arrested, 2000+ killed. LIBERIA 1990 Troops Foreigners evacuated during civil war. SAUDI ARABIA 1990-91 Troops, jets Iraq countered after invading Kuwait. 540,000 troops also stationed in Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Israel. IRAQ 1990-? Bombing, troops, naval Blockade of Iraqi and Jordanian ports, air strikes; 200,000+ killed in invasion of Iraq and Kuwait; no-fly zone over Kurdish north, Shiite south, large-scale destruction of Iraqi military. KUWAIT 1991 Naval, bombing, troops Kuwait royal family returned to throne. LOS ANGELES 1992 Troops Army, Marines deployed against anti-police uprising. SOMALIA 1992-94 Troops, naval, bombing U.S.-led United Nations occupation during civil war; raids against one Mogadishu faction. YUGOSLAVIA 1992-94 Naval NATO blockade of Serbia and Montenegro. BOSNIA 1993-? Jets, bombing No-fly zone patrolled in civil war; downed jets, bombed Serbs. HAITI 1994-? Troops, naval Blockade against military government; troops restore President Aristide to office three years after coup. ZAIRE (CONGO) 1996-97 Troops Marines at Rwandan Hutu refugee camps, in area where Congo revolution begins. LIBERIA 1997 Troops Soldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners. ALBANIA 1997 Troops Soldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners. SUDAN 1998 Missiles Attack on pharmaceutical plant alleged to be "terrorist" nerve gas plant. AFGHANISTAN 1998 Missiles Attack on former CIA training camps used by Islamic fundamentalist groups alleged to have attacked embassies. IRAQ 1998-? Bombing, Missiles Four days of intensive air strikes after weapons inspectors allege Iraqi obstructions. YUGOSLAVIA 1999 Bombing, Missiles Heavy NATO air strikes after Serbia declines to withdraw from Kosovo. NATO occupation of Kosovo. YEMEN 2000 Naval USS Cole bombed. MACEDONIA 2001 Troops NATO forces deployed to move and disarm Albanian rebels. UNITED STATES 2001 Jets, naval Reaction to hijacker attacks on New York, DC AFGHANISTAN 2001-? Troops, bombing, missiles Massive U.S. mobilization to overthrow Taliban, hunt Al Qaeda fighters, install Karzai regime. Forces also engaged in neighboring Pakistan. YEMEN 2002 Missiles Predator drone missile attack on Al Qaeda, including a US citizen. PHILIPPINES 2002 Troops, naval Training mission for Philippine military fighting Muslim Abu Sayyaf rebels evolves into US combat missions in Sulu Archipelago next to Mindanao. COLOMBIA 2003-? Troops US special forces sent to rebel zone to back up Colombian military protecting oil pipeline. IRAQ 2003-? Troops, naval, bombing, missiles Second Gulf War launched for "regime change" in Baghdad. US, joined by UK and Australia, attacks from Kuwait, other Gulf states, and European and US bases. WHERE NEXT? NO MORE! The question is relatively straight forward.

If the World was so Safe before Bush took Office,How do you Explain this List??????? American Victims of Mideast Terrorist Attacks -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following is a listing of incidents in which Americans are known to have been killed by Middle East-based terrorists. The list will be updated as more information becomes available. The exact number of American casualties is difficult to calculate because of incomplete news reports regarding numbers and nationalities of those injured. The toll from the September 11, 2001, attack on the World Trade Center is also uncertain, but current figures place the number of dead above 3,000. The number of dead at the Pentagon and on the hijacked airliners numbered approximately 385. Since Yasser Arafat "renounced" violence in the Oslo Peace Accords on September 13, 1993, at least 53 Americans have been murdered and at least another 83 Americans have been injured by Palestinian terrorism. Excluding the September 11 attacks, approximately 700 Americans have been killed and 1,600 wounded in terrorist attacks since 1970. This list also includes injured Americans since Oslo 1993. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- February 23, 1970, Halhoul, West Bank. Palestinian Liberation Organization terrorists open fire on a busload of pilgrims killing Barbara Ertle of Michigan and wounding two other Americans. March 28-29, 1970, Beirut, Lebanon. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) fired seven rockets at the U.S. Embassy, the American Insurance Company, Bank of America and the John F. Kennedy library. September 14, 1970, En route to Amman, Jordan. The PFLP hijacked a TWA flight from Zurich, Switzerland and forced it to land in Amman. Four American citizens were injured. May 30, 1972, Ben Gurion Airport, Israel. Three members of the Japanese Red Army, acting on the PFLP's bbehalf, carried out a machine-gun and grenade attack at Israel's main airport, killing 26 and wounding 78 people. Many of the casualties were American citizens, mostly from Puerto Rico. September 5, 1972, Munich, Germany. During the Olympic Games in Munich, Black September, a front for Fatah, took hostage 11 members of the Israeli Olympic team. Nine athletes were killed including weightlifter David Berger, an American-Israeli from Cleveland, Ohio. March 2, 1973, Khartoum, Sudan. Cleo A. Noel, Jr., U.S. ambassador to Sudan, and George C. Moore, also a U.S. diplomat, were held hostage and then killed by terrorists at the U.S. Embassy in Khartoum. It seems likely that Fatah was responsible for the attack. September 8, 1974, Athens, Greece. TWA Flight 841, flying from Tel Aviv to New York, made a scheduled stop in Athens. Shortly after takeoff, it crashed into the Ionian Sea and all 88 passengers were killed, including 32-year-old Steven R. Lowe, husband Jeremiah Michel and wife, Kathrine Hadley Michel of Poughkeepsie, NY, Frederick and Margaret Hare of Bernardsville, NJ, Ralph H. Bosh of Madison, CT, Seldon and Etan Bard of Tuckahoe, NY, Dr. and Mrs. Frederick Stohlman of Newton, MA, Don H. Holiday of Mahwah, NJ, and Jon L. Chesire of Old Lyme, Ct; all of which were Almerican citizens. An investigation of the crash conclusively established that it was caused by explosives set in the rear cargo department of the plane. June 29, 1975, Beirut, Lebanon. The PFLP kidnapped the U.S. military attaché to Lebanon, Ernest Morgan, and demanded food, clothing and building materials for indigent residents living near Beirut harbor. The American diplomat was released after an anonymous benefactor provided food to the neighborhood. November 14, 1975, Jerusalem, Israel. Lola Nunberg, 53, of New York, was injured during a bombing attack in downtown Jerusalem. Fatah claimed responsibility for the bombing, which killed six people and wounded 38. November 21, 1975, Ramat Hamagshimim, Israel. Michael Nadler, an American-Israeli from Miami Beach, Florida, was killed when axe-wielding terrorists from the Democrat Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a PLO faction, attacked students in the Golan Heights. August 11, 1976, Istanbul, Turkey. The PFLP launched an attack on the terminal of Israel's major airline, El Al, at the Istanbul airport. Four civilians, including Harold Rosenthal of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, were killed and 20 injured. January 1, 1977, Beirut, Lebanon. Frances E. Meloy, U.S. ambassador to Lebanon, and Robert O.Waring, the U.S. economic counselor, were kidnapped by PFLP members as they crossed a militia checkpoint separating the Christian from the Muslim parts of Beirut. They were later shot to death. March 11, 1978, Tel Aviv, Israel. Gail Rubin, niece of U.S. Senator Abraham Ribicoff, was among 38 people shot to death by PLO terrorists on an Israeli beach. June 2, 1978, Jerusalem, Israel. Richard Fishman, a medical student from Maryland, was among six killed in a PLO bus bombing in Jerusalem. Chava Sprecher, another American citizen from Seattle, Washington, was injured. May 4, 1979, Tiberias, Israel. Haim Mark and his wife, Haya, of New Haven, Connecticut were injured in a PLO bombing attack in northern Israel. November 4, 1979, Teheran, Iran. After President Carter agreed to admit the Shah of Iran into the U.S., Iranian radicals seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and took 66 American diplomats hostage. Thirteen hostages were soon freed, but the remaining 53 were held until their release on January 20, 1981. May 2, 1980, Hebron, West Bank. Eli Haze'ev, an American-Israeli from Alexandria, Virginia, was killed in a PLO attack on Jewish worshippers walking home from a synagogue in Hebron. July 19, 1982, Beirut, Lebanon. Hizballah members kidnapped David Dodge, acting president of the American University in Beirut. After a year in captivity, Dodge was released. Rifat Assad, head of Syrian Intelligence, helped in the negotiation with the terrorists. August 19, 1982, Paris, France. Two American citizens, Anne Van Zanten and Grace Cutler, were killed when the PLO bombed a Jewish restaurant in Paris. March 16, 1983, Beirut, Lebanon. Five American Marines were wounded in a hand grenade attack while on patrol north of Beirut International Airport. The Islamic Jihad and Al-Amal, a Shi'ite militia, claimed responsibility for the attack. April 18, 1983, Beirut, Lebanon. A truck-bomb detonated by a remote control exploded in front of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, killing 63 employees, including the CIA's Middle East director, and wounding 120. Hizballah, with financial backing from Iran, was responsible for the attack. July 1, 1983, Hebron, Israel. Aharon Gross, 19, an American-Israeli from New York, was stabbed to death by PLO terrorists in the Hebron marketplace. September 29, 1983, Beirut, Lebanon. Two American marines were kidnapped by Amal members. They were released after intervention by a Lebanese army officer. October 23, 1983, Beirut, Lebanon. A truck loaded with a bomb crashed into the lobby of the U.S. Marines headquarters in Beirut, killing 241 soldiers and wounding 81. The attack was carried out by Hizballah with the help of Syrian intelligence and financed by Iran. December 19, 1983, Jerusalem, Israel. Serena Sussman, a 60-year-old tourist from Anderson, South Carolina, died from injuries from the PLO bombing of a bus in Jerusalem 13 days earlier. January 18, 1984, Beirut, Lebanon. Malcolm Kerr, a Lebanese born American who was president of the American University of Beirut, was killed by two gunmen outside his office. Hizballah said the assassination was part of the organization's plan to "drive all Americans out from Lebanon." March 7, 1984, Beirut, Lebanon. Hizballah members kidnapped Jeremy Levin, Beirut bureau chief of Cable News Network (CNN). Levin managed to escape and reach Syrian army barracks. He was later transferred to American hands. March 8, 1984, Beirut, Lebanon. Three Hizballah members kidnapped Reverend Benjamin T. Weir, while he was walking with his wife in Beirut's Manara neighborhood. Weir was released after 16 months of captivity with Syrian and Iranian assistance. March 16, 1984, Beirut, Lebanon. Hizballah kidnapped William Buckley, a political officer at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut. Buckley was supposed to be exchanged for prisoners. However when the transaction failed to take place, he was reportedly transported to Iran. Although his body was never found, the U.S. administration declared the American diplomat dead. April 12, 1984, Torrejon, Spain. Hizballah bombed a restaurant near an U.S. Air Force base in Torrejon, Spain, wounding 83 people. September 20, 1984, Beirut, Lebanon. A suicide bomb attack on the U.S. Embassy in East Beirut killed 23 people and injured 21. The American and British ambassadors were slightly injured in the attack, attributed to the Iranian backed Hizballah group. September 20, 1984, Aukar, Lebanon. Islamic Jihad detonate a van full of explosives 30 feet in front of the U.S. Embassy annex severely damaging the building, killing two U.S. servicemen and seven Lebanese employees, as well as 5 to 15 non-employees. Twenty Americans were injured, including U.S. Ambassador Reginald Bartholomew and visiting British Ambassador David Miers. An estimated 40 to 50 Lebanese were hurt. The attack came in response to the U.S. veto September 6 of a U.N. Security Council resolution. December 4, 1984, Tehran, Iran. Hizballah terrorists hijacked a Kuwait Airlines plane en route from Dubai, United Emirates, to Karachi, Pakistan. They demanded the release from Kuwaiti jails of members of Da'Wa, a group of Shiite extremists serving sentences for attacks on French and American targets on Kuwaiti territory. The terrorists forced the pilot to fly to Tehran where the terrorists murdered two passengers--American Agency for International Development employees, Charles Hegna and William Stanford. Although an Iranian special unit ended the incident by storming the plane and arresting the terrorists, the Iranian government might also have been involved in the hijacking. June 14, 1985, Between Athens and Rome. Two Hizballah members hijacked a TWA flight en route to Rome from Athens and forced the pilot to fly to Beirut. The terrorists, believed to belong to Hizballah, asked for the release of members of the group Kuwait 17 and 700 Shi'ite prisoners held in Israeli and South Lebanese prisons. The eight crewmembers and 145 passengers were held for 17 days during which one of the hostages, Robert Stethem, a U.S. Navy diver, was murdered. After being flown twice to Algiers, the aircraft returned to Beirut and the hostages were released. Later on, four Hizballah members were secretly indicted. One of them, the Hizballah senior officer Imad Mughniyah, was indicted in absentia. October 7, 1985, Between Alexandria, Egypt and Haifa, Israel. A four-member PFLP squad took over the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro, as it was sailing from Alexandria, Egypt, to Israel. The squad murdered a disabled U.S. citizen, Leon Klinghoffer, by throwing him in the ocean. The rest of the passengers were held hostage for two days and later released after the terrorists turned themselves in to Egyptian authorities in return for safe passage. But U.S. Navy fighters intercepted the Egyptian aircraft flying the terrorists to Tunis and forced it to land at the NATO airbase in Italy, where the terrorists were arrested. Two of the terrorists were tried in Italy and sentenced to prison. The Italian authorities however let the two others escape on diplomatic passports. Abu Abbas, who masterminded the hijacking, was later convicted to life imprisonment in absentia. December 27, 1985, Rome, Italy. Four terrorists from Abu Nidal's organization attacked El Al offices at the Leonardo di Vinci Airport in Rome. Thirteen people, including five Americans, were killed and 74 wounded, among them two Americans. The terrorists had come from Damascus and were supported by the Syrian regime. March 30, 1986, Athens, Greece. A bomb exploded on a TWA flight from Rome as it approached Athens airport. The attack killed four U.S. citizens who were sucked through a hole made by the blast, although the plane safely landed. The bombing was attributed to the Fatah Special Operations Group's intelligence and security apparatus, headed by Abdullah Abd al-Hamid Labib, alias Colonel Hawari. April 5, 1986, West Berlin, Germany. An explosion at the "La Belle" nightclub in Berlin, frequented by American soldiers, killed three--2 U.S. soldiers and a Turkish woman-and wounded 191 including 41 U.S. soldiers. Given evidence of Libyan involvement, the U.S. Air Force made a retaliatory attack against Libyan targets on April 17. Libya refused to hand over to Germany five suspects believed to be there. Others, however, were tried including Yassir Shraidi and Musbah Eter, arrested in Rome in August 1997 and extradited; and also Ali Chanaa, his wife, Verena Chanaa, and her sister, Andrea Haeusler. Shraidi, accused of masterminding the attack, was sentenced to 14 years in jail. The Libyan diplomat Musbah Eter and Ali Chanaa were both sentenced to 12 years in jail. Verena Chanaa was sentenced to 14 years in prison. Andrea Haeusler was acquitted. September 5, 1986, Karachi, Pakistan. Abu Nidal members hijacked a Pan Am flight leaving Karachi, Pakistan bound for Frankfurt, Germany and New York with 379 passengers, including 89 Americans. The terrorists forced the plane to land in Larnaca, Cyprus, where they demanded the release of two Palestinians and a Briton jailed for the murder of three Israelis there in 1985. The terrorists killed 22 of the passengers, including two American citizens and wounded many others. They were caught and indicted by a Washington grand jury in 1991. September 9, 1986, Beirut, Lebanon. Continuing its anti-American attacks, Hizballah kidnapped Frank Reed, director of the American University in Beirut, whom they accused of being "a CIA agent." He was released 44 months later. September 12, 1986, Beirut, Lebanon. Hizballah kidnapped Joseph Cicippio, the acting comptroller at the American University in Beirut. Cicippio was released five years later on December 1991. October 15, 1986, Jerusalem, Israel. Gali Klein, an American citizen, was killed in a grenade attack by Fatah at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. October 21, 1986, Beirut, Lebanon. Hizballah kidnapped Edward A. Tracy, an American citizen in Beirut. He was released five years later, on August 1991. February 17, 1988, Ras-Al-Ein Tyre, Lebanon. Col. William Higgins, the American chief of the United Nations Truce Supervisory Organization, was abducted by Hizballah while driving from Tyre to Nakura. The hostages demanded the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon and the release of all Palestinian and Lebanese held prisoners in Israel. The U.S. government refused to answer the request. Hizballah later claimed they killed Higgins. December 21, 1988, Lockerbie, Scotland. Pan Am Flight 103 departing from Frankfurt to New York was blown up in midair, killing all 259 passengers and another 11 people on the ground in Scotland. Two Libyan agents were found responsible for planting a sophisticated suitcase bomb onboard the plane. On 14 November 1991, arrest warrants were issued for Al-Amin Khalifa Fahima and Abdel Baset Ali Mohamed al-Megrahi. After Libya refused to extradite the suspects to stand trial, the United Nations leveled sanctions against the country in April 1992, including the freezing of Libyan assets abroad. In 1999, Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi agreed to hand over the two suspects, but only if their trial was held in a neutral country and presided over by a Scottish judge. With the help of Saudi Arabia's King Fahd and Crown Prince Abdullah, Al-Megrahi and Fahima were finally extradited and tried in Camp Zeist in the Netherlands. Megrahi was found guilty and jailed for life, while Fahima was acquitted due to a "lack of evidence" of his involvement. After the extradition, UN sanctions against Libya were automatically lifted. January 27, 1989, Istanbul and Ankara, Turkey. Three simultaneous bombings were carried out against U.S. business targets--the Turkish American Businessmen Association and the Economic Development Foundation in Istanbul, and the Metal Employees Union in Ankara. The Dev Sol (Revolutionary Left) was held responsible for the attacks. March 6, 1989, Cairo, Egypt. Two explosive devices were safely removed from the grounds of the American and British Cultural centers in Cairo. Three organizations were believed to be responsible for the attack: The January 15 organization, which had sent a letter bomb to the Israeli ambassador to London in January; the Egyptian Revolutionary Organization that from out 1984-1986 carried out attacks against U.S. and Israeli targets; and the Nasserite Organization, which had attacked British and American targets in 1988. June 12, 1989, Bosphorus Straits, Turkey. A bomb exploded aboard an unoccupied boat used by U.S. consular staff. The explosion caused extensive damage but no casualties. An organization previously unknown, the Warriors of the June 16th Movement, claimed responsibility for the attack. October 11, 1989, Izmir, Turkey. An explosive charge went off outside a U.S. military PX. Dev Sol was held responsible for the attack. February 7, 1991, Incirlik Air Base, Turkey. Dev Sol members shot and killed a U.S. civilian contractor as he was getting into his car at the Incirlik Air Base in Adana, Turkey. February 28, 1991, Izmir, Turkey. Two Dev Sol gunmen shot and wounded a U.S. Air Force officer as he entered his residence in Izmir. March 28, 1991, Jubial, Saudi Arabia. Three U.S. marines were shot at and injured by an unknown terrorist while driving near Camp Three, Jubial. No organization claimed responsibility for the attack. October 28, 1991, Ankara, Turkey. Victor Marwick, an American soldier serving at the Turkish-American base, Tuslog, was killed and his wife wounded in a car bomb attack. The Turkish Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack. October 28, 1991, Istanbul, Turkey. Two car bombings killed a U.S. Air Force sergeant and severely wounded an Egyptian diplomat in Istanbul. Turkish Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility. November 8, 1991, Beirut, Lebanon. A 100-kg car bomb destroyed the administration building of the American University in Beirut, killing one person and wounding at least a dozen. October 12, 1992, Umm Qasr, Iraq. A U.S. soldier serving with the United Nations was stabbed and wounded near the port of Umm Qasr. No organization claimed responsibility for the attack. January 25, 1993, Virginia, United States. A Pakistani gunman opened fire on Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employees standing outside of the building. Two agents, Frank Darling and Bennett Lansing, were killed and three others wounded. The assailant was never caught and reportedly fled to Pakistan. February 26, 1993, Cairo, Egypt. A bomb exploded inside a café in downtown Cairo killing three. Among the 18 wounded were two U.S. citizens. No one claimed responsibility for the attack. February 26, 1993, New York, United States. A massive van bomb exploded in an underground parking garage below the World Trade Center in New York City, killing six and wounding 1,042. Four Islamist activists were responsible for the attack. Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, the operation's alleged mastermind, escaped but was later arrested in Pakistan and extradited to the United States. Abd al-Hakim Murad, another suspected conspirator, was arrested by local authorities in the Philippines and handed over to the United States. The two, along with two other terrorists, were tried in the U.S. and sentenced to 240 years. April 14, 1993, Kuwait. The Iraqi intelligence service attempted to assassinate former U.S. President George Bush during a visit to Kuwait. In retaliation, the U.S. launched a cruise missile attack two months later on the Iraqi capital, Baghdad. July 5, 1993, Southeast Turkey. In eight separate incidents, the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) kidnapped a total of 19 Western tourists traveling in southeastern Turkey. The hostages, including U.S. citizen Colin Patrick Starger, were released unharmed after spending several weeks in captivity. December 1, 1993, north of Jerusalem, West Bank. Yitzhak Weinstock, 19, whose family came from Los Angeles, CA, was killed in a drive-by shooting. Hamas took responsibility for the attack Sometime in 1994: near Atzmona, Gaza. U.S. citizen Mrs. Sheila Deutsch of Brooklyn, NY injured in a shooting attack. October 9, 1994. Nachshon Wachsman, 19, whose family came from New York, was kidnapped and then murdered by Hamas. October 9, 1994: Jerusalem, Israel. Shooting attack on cafe-goers in Jerusalem. U.S. citizens Scot Doberstein and Eric Goldberg were injured. March 8, 1995, Karachi, Pakistan. Two unidentified gunmen armed with AK-47 assault rifles opened fire on a U.S. Consulate van in Karachi, killing two U.S. diplomats, Jacqueline Keys Van Landingham and Gary C. Durell, and wounding a third, Mark McCloy. April 9, 1995, Kfar Darom and Netzarim, Gaza Strip. Two suicide attacks were carried out within a few hours of each other in Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip. In the first attack a suicide bomber crashed an explosive-rigged van into an Israeli bus in Netzarim, killing eight including U.S. citizen Alisa Flatow, 20, of West Orange, NJ. More than 30 others were injured. In the second attack, a suicide bomber detonated a car bomb in the midst of a convoy of cars in Kfar Darom, injuring 12. The Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ) Shaqaqi Faction claimed responsibility for the attacks. U.S. citizens Chava Levine and Seth Klein were injured. June 15, 1995: Jerusalem, Israel. U.S. citizen Howard Tavens of Cleveland, OH was injured in a stabbing attack. July 4, 1995, Kashmir, India. In Kashmir, a previously unknown militant group, Al-Faran, with suspected links to a Kashmiri separatist group in Pakistan, took hostage six tourists, including two U.S. citizens. They demanded the release of Muslim militants held in Indian prisons. One of the U.S. citizens escaped on July 8, while on August 13 the decapitated body of the Norwegian hostage was found along with a note stating that the other hostages also would be killed if the group's demands were not met. The Indian Government refused. Both Indian and American authorities believe the rest of the hostages were most likely killed in 1996 by their jailers. August 1995, Istanbul, Turkey. A bombing of Istanbul's popular Taksim Square injured two U.S. citizens. This attack was part of a three-year-old attempt by the PKK to drive foreign tourists away from Turkey by striking at tourist sites. August 21, 1995, Jerusalem, Israel. A bus bombing in Jerusalem by the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) killed four, including American Joan Davenny of New Haven, CT, and wounded more than 100. U.S. citizens injured: Chanoch Bleier, Judith Shulewitz, Bernard Batta. September 9, 1995. Ma'ale Michmash. American killed: Unborn child of Mrs. Mara Frey of Chicago. Mara Frey was injured. November 9, 1995, Algiers, Algeria. Islamic extremists set fire to a warehouse belonging to the U.S. Embassy, threatened the Algerian security guard because he was working for the United States, and demanded to know whether any U.S. citizens were present. The Armed Islamic Group (GIA) probably carried out the attacks. The group had threatened to strike other foreign targets and especially U.S. objectives in Algeria, and the attack's style was similar to past GIA operations against foreign facilities. November 13, 1995, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. A car bomb exploded in the parking lot outside of the Riyadh headquarters of the Office of the Program Manager/Saudi Arabian National Guard, killing seven persons, five of them U.S. citizens, and wounding 42. The blast severely damaged the three-story building, which houses a U.S. military advisory group, and several neighboring office buildings. Three groups -- the Islamic Movement for Change, the Tigers of the Gulf, and the Combatant Partisans of God -- claimed responsibility for the attack. February 25, 1996, Jerusalem, Israel. A suicide bomber blew up a commuter bus in Jerusalem, killing 26, including three U.S. citizens, and injuring 80 others, among them three other U.S. citizens. Hamas claimed responsibility for the bombing. U. S. citizens killed: Sara Duker, of Teaneck, NJ, Matthew Eisenfeld of West Hartford, CT, Ira Weinstein of Bronx, NY. U.S. citizens injured: Beatrice Kramer, Steven Lapides, and Leah Stein Mousa. March 4, 1996, Tel Aviv, Israel. A suicide bomber detonated an explosive device outside the Dizengoff Center, Tel Aviv's largest shopping mall, killing 20 persons and injuring 75 others, including two U.S. citizens. Both Hamas and the Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the bombing. U.S. citizens injured included Julie K. Negrin of Seattle, WA. May 13, 1996, Beit-El, West Bank. Arab gunmen opened fire on a hitchhiking stand near Beit El, wounding three Israelis and killing David Boim, 17, an American-Israeli from New York. No one claimed responsibility for the attack, although either the Islamic Jihad or Hamas are suspected. U.S. citizens injured: Moshe Greenbaum, 17. June 9, 1996, outside Zekharya. Yaron Ungar, an American-Israeli, and his Israeli wife were killed in a drive-by shooting near their West Bank home. The PFLP is suspected. June 25, 1996, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. A fuel truck carrying a bomb exploded outside the U.S. military's Khobar Towers housing facility in Dhahran, killing 19 U.S. military personnel and wounding 515 persons, including 240 U.S. personnel. Several groups claimed responsibility for the attack. In June 2001, a U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virginia, identified Saudi Hizballah as the party responsible for the attack. The court indicated that the members of the organization, banned from Saudi Arabia, "frequently met and were trained in Lebanon, Syria, or Iran" with Libyan help. August 17, 1996, Mapourdit, Sudan. Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) rebels kidnapped six missionaries in Mapourdit, including a U.S citizen. The SPLA released the hostages on August 28. November 1, 1996, Sudan. A breakaway group of the Sudanese People's Liberation Army (SPLA) kidnapped three workers of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), including one U.S citizen. The rebels released the hostages on December 9 in exchange for ICRC supplies and a health survey of their camp. December 3, 1996, Paris, France. A bomb exploded aboard a Paris subway train, killing four and injuring 86 persons, including a U.S. citizen. No one claimed responsibility for the attack, but Algerian extremists are suspected. January 2, 1997, Major cities worldwide, United States. A series of letter bombs with Alexandria, Egypt postmarks were discovered at Al-Hayat newspaper bureaus in Washington, DC, New York, London, and Riyadh. Three similar devices, also postmarked in Egypt, were found at a prison facility in Leavenworth, Kansas. Bomb disposal experts defused all the devices, but one detonated at the Al-Hayat newspaper office in London, injuring two security guards and causing minor damage. February 23, 1997, New York, United States. A Palestinian gunman opened fire on tourists at an observation deck atop the Empire State building in New York, killing a Danish national and wounding visitors from the United States, Argentina, Switzerland and France before turning the gun on himself. A handwritten note carried by the gunman claimed this was a punishment attack against the "enemies of Palestine." July 30, 1997, Jerusalem, Israel. Two bombs detonated in Jerusalem's Mahane Yehuda market, killing 15 persons, including a U.S. citizen and wounding 168 others, among them two U.S. citizens. The Izz-el-Din al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas' military wing, claimed responsibility for the attack. U.S. citizens killed: Mrs. Leah Stern of Passaic, NJ. U.S. citizens injured: Dov Dalin. September 4, 1997: Jerusalem, Israel. Bombing on Ben-Yehuda Street, Jerusalem. U.S. citizens killed: Yael Botwin, 14, of Los Angeles and Jerusalem. U.S. citizens injured: Diana Campuzano of New York, Abraham Mendelson of Los Angeles, CA, Greg Salzman of New Jersey, Stuart E. Hersh of Kiryat Arba, Israel, Michael Alzer, Abraham Elias, David Keinan, Daniel Miller of Boca Raton, FL, Noam Rozenman of Jerusalem, Jenny (Yocheved) Rubin of Los Angeles, CA. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack. October 30, 1997, Sanaa, Yemen. Al-Sha'if tribesmen kidnapped a U.S. businessman near Sanaa. The tribesmen sought the release of two fellow tribesmen who were arrested on smuggling charges and several public works projects they claim the government promised them. The hostage was released on November 27. November 12, 1997, Karachi, Pakistan. Two unidentified gunmen shot to death four U.S. auditors from Union Texas Petroleum and their Pakistani driver as they drove away from the Sheraton Hotel in Karachi. Two groups claimed responsibility -- the Islamic Inqilabi Council, or Islamic Revolutionary Council and the Aimal Secret Committee, also known as the Aimal Khufia Action Committee. November 25, 1997, Aden, Yemen. Yemenite tribesmen kidnapped a U.S citizen, two Italians, and two unspecified Westerners near Aden to protest the eviction of a tribe member from his home. The kidnappers released the five hostages on November 27. February 6, 1998, Jerusalem, Israel. Stabbing in Jerusalem. U.S. Citizen Yosef Lepon, 17 injured. April 19, 1998, Maon, Israel. Dov Driben, a 28-year-old American-Israeli farmer was killed by terrorists near the West Bank town of Maon. One of his assailants, Issa Debavseh, a member of Fatah Tanzim, was killed on November 7, 2001, by the IDF after being on their wanted list for the murder. June 21, 1998, Beirut, Lebanon. Two hand-grenades were thrown at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut. No casualties were reported. June 21, 1998, Beirut, Lebanon. Three rocket-propelled grenades attached to a crude detonator exploded near the U.S. Embassy compound in Beirut, causing no casualties and little damage. August 7, 1998, Nairobi, Kenya. A car bomb exploded at the rear entrance of the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi. The attack killed a total of 292, including 12 U.S. citizens, and injured over 5,000, among them six Americans. The perpetrators belonged to al-Qaida, Usama bin Ladin's network. August 7, 1998, Dar es Sala'am, Tanzania. A car bomb exploded outside the U.S. Embassy in Dar es Sala'am, killing 11 and injuring 86. Osama bin Laden's organization al-Qaida claimed responsibility for the attack. Two suspects were arrested. November 21, 1998, Teheran, Iran. Members of Fedayeen Islam, shouting anti-American slogans and wielding stones and iron rods, attacked a group of American tourists in Tehran. Some of the tourists suffered minor injuries from flying glass. December 28, 1998, Mawdiyah, Yemen. Sixteen tourists--12 Britons, two Americans and two Australians--were taken hostage in the largest kidnapping in Yemen's recent history. The tourists were seized in the Abyan province (some 175 miles south of Sanaa the capital). One Briton and a Yemeni guide escaped, while the rest were taken to city of Mawdiyah. Four hostages were killed when troops closed in and two were wounded, including an American woman. The kidnappers, members of the Islamic Army of Aden-Abyan, an offshoot of Al-Jihad, had demanded the release from jail of their leader, Saleh Haidara al-Atwi. October 31, 1999, Nantucket, Massachusetts, United States. EgyptAir Flight 990 crashed off the U.S. coast killing all 217 people on board, including 100 Americans. Although it is not precisely clear what happened, evidence indicated that an Egyptian pilot crashed the plane for personal or political reasons. November 4, 1999, Athens, Greece. A group protesting President Clinton's visit to Greece hid a gas bomb at an American car dealership in Athens. Two cars were destroyed and several others damaged. Anti-State Action claimed responsibility for the attack, but the November 17 group was also suspected. November 12, 1999, Islamabad, Pakistan. Six rockets were fired at the U.S. Information Services cultural center and United Nations offices in Islamabad, injuring a Pakistani guard. September 29, 2000. near Jerusalem Israel. Attack on motorists. U.S. citizens injured: Avi Herman of Teaneck, NJ, Naomi Herman of Teaneck, NJ. September 29, 2000, Jerusalem, Israel. Attack on taxi passengers. U.S. citizens injured: Tuvia Grossman of Chicago, Todd Pollack of Norfolk, VA, Andrew Feibusch of New York. October 4, 2000, near Bethlehem, West Bank. U.S. citizens injured: An unidentified American tourist. October 5, 2000: near Jerusalem, Israel. Attack on a motorist. U.S. citizens injured: Rabbi Chaim Brovender of Brooklyn. October 8, 2000, Nablus, West Bank. The bullet-ridden body of Rabbi Hillel Lieberman, a U.S. citizen from Brooklyn living in the Jewish settlement of Elon Moreh, was found at the entrance to the West Bank town of Nablus. Lieberman had headed there after hearing that Palestinians had desecrated the religious site, Joseph's Tomb. No organization claimed responsibility for the murder. October 12, 2000, Aden Harbor, Yemen. A suicide squad rammed the warship the U.S.S. Cole with an explosives-laden boat killing 13 American sailors and injuring 33. The attack was likely by Osama bin Ladin's al-Qaida organization. October 30, 2000, Jerusalem, Israel. Gunmen killed Eish Kodesh Gilmor, a 25-year-old American-Israeli on duty as a security guard at the National Insurance Institute in Jerusalem. The "Martyrs of the Al-Aqsa Intifada," a group linked to Fatah, claimed responsibility for the attack. Gilmor's family filed a suit in the U.S. District Court in Washington against the Palestinian Authority, the PLO, Chairman Yasser Arafat and members of Force 17, as being responsible for the attack. December 31, 2000, Ofra, Israel. Rabbi Binyamin Kahane, 34, and his wife, Talia Hertzlich Kahane, both formerly of Brooklyn, NY were killed in a drive-by shooting. Their children, Yehudit Leah Kahane, Bitya Kahane, Tzivya Kahane, Rivka Kahane, and Shlomtsion Kahane, were injured in the attack. March 28, 2001, Neve Yamin. Bombing at bus stop. U.S. citizens injured: Netanel Herskovitz, 15, formerly of Hempstead, NY. May 9, 2001, Tekoa, West Bank. Kobi Mandell, 13, of Silver Spring, MD, an American-Israeli, was found stoned to death along with a friend in a cave near the Jewish settlement of Tekoa. Two organizations, the Islamic Jihad and Hizballah-Palestine, claimed responsibility for the attack. May 29, 2001, Gush Etzion, West Bank. The Fatah Tanzim claimed responsibility for a drive-by shooting of six in the West Bank that killed two American-Israeli citizens, Samuel Berg, and his mother, Sarah Blaustein. U.S. citizens injured: Norman Blaustein of Lawrence, NY. July 19, 2001, Hebron, West Bank. Shooting attack. U.S. citizens injured: An unidentified woman from Brooklyn, NY. August 9, 2001, Jerusalem, Israel. A suicide bombing at Sbarro's, a pizzeria situated in one of the busiest areas of downtown Jerusalem, killed 15 people and wounded more than 90. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack. U.S. citizens killed: Judith L. Greenbaum, 31, of New Jersey and California, Malka Roth, 15, whose family was from New York. U.S. citizens injured: David Danzig, 21, of Wynnewood, PA, Matthew P. Gordon, 25, of New York, Joanne (Chana) Nachenberg, 31, Sara Shifra Nachenberg, 2. August 18, 2001, Jerusalem, Israel. Shooting at a bus. U.S. citizen injured: Andrew Feibusch of New York. August 27, 2001, near Roglit, Israel. Shooting attack. U.S. citizen injured: Ben Dansker. September 11, 2001, New York, Washington D.C., and Pennsylvania, United States. During a carefully coordinated attack, 19 Islamist extremists hijacked four U.S. jetliners and forced them to crash into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. In all, 266 people perished in the four planes, and more than 3,000 people were killed on the ground. U.S. investigators determined on the basis of extensive evidence that Usama bin Ladin's al-Qaida group was responsible for the attack. The first plane, American Airlines Flight 11 en route from Boston to Los Angeles, crashed into the World Trade Center's north tower at 8:48 a.m. Eighteen minutes later, United Airlines Flight 175, also headed from Boston to Los Angeles, smashed into the World Trade Center's south tower. At 9:40 a.m. a third airplane, an American Airlines Boeing 757 that left Washington's Dulles International Airport for Los Angeles, crashed into the western part of the Pentagon where 24,000 people worked. The fourth plane, a United Airlines Flight 93 flying from Newark to San Francisco, crashed near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, most likely before it could hit its target. Hundreds of firefighters, police officers and other rescue workers who arrived in the site after the first plane crash were killed or injured. November 4, 2001, Jerusalem, Israel. Shoshana Ben-Yishai, 16, of Queens, NY was killed in a shooting at a bus station. U.S. citizen injured: Shlomo Kaye. December 2, 2001, Jerusalem, Israel. Bombing on Ben-Yehuda Street, Jerusalem. U.S. citizens injured: Ziv Brill, 17, of West Hempstead, Long Island, NY, Temima Spetner, 19, of St. Louis, MI, Jason Kirshenbaum of New Rochelle, NY, Israel Hirschfield, 18, Joseph Leifer, 29, of Borough Park (Brooklyn), NY. December 18, 2001, shooting on the Jerusalem-Shilo road. U.S. citizens injured: David Rubin, 44, of Brooklyn, NY, Asher "Ruby" Rubin, 3. January 15, 2002, Bethlehem, West Bank. Avraham Boaz, 71, of New York, a dual Israeli-American citizen, was kidnapped at a PA security checkpoint in Beit Jala and murdered. January 18, 2002: Shooting in Hadera. U.S. citizen killed: Aaron Elis, 32, son of Chicago family. January 22, 2002: Shooting in Jerusalem, Israel. U.S. citizen injured: Shayna Gould, 19, of Chicago, IL January 27, 2002, Jerusalem, Israel. A Palestinian woman triggered a massive explosion in downtown Jerusalem killing one elderly Israeli and injuring more than 150, including American Mark Sokolow, his wife, and 16 and 12-year-old daughters. Sokolow had earlier survived the September 11 attack on the World Trade Center, escaping from his law office on the 38th floor of the South Tower before it collapsed. February 8, 2002, Jerusalem, Israel. Stabbing in Abu Tor Peace Forest Jerusalem. U.S. citizen killed: Moranne Amit, 25 February 15, 2002, near Ramallah, West Bank. Lee Akunis was shot to death. February 16, 2002: Bombing in Karnei Shomron. U.S. citizens killed: Keren Shatsky, 14, of Brooklyn, NY and Maine, Rachel Thaler, 16, of Baltimore, MD. U.S. citizens injured: Lior Thaler, 14, of Baltimore, MD, Hillel Trattner of Chicago, IL, Ronit Yucht Trattner of Chicago, IL, Chani Friedman of New York. February 19, 2002: Shooting near Neve Dekalim. U.S. citizens injured: Moshe Saperstein of New York. February 25, 2002, Jerusalem, Israel. Moran Amit, 25, was stabbed to death in Abu Tor Peace Forest in Jerusalem. March 7, 2002, Eshel Hashomron Hotel, Ariel, Israel. A Christian tourist from Arkansas lost her right eye in an attack by a suicide bomber. March 21, 2002, Jerusalem, Israel. Bombing on a Jerusalem street. U.S. citizens injured: Alan Joseph Bauer, 37, of Chicago, Yonathon Bauer, 7 (dual U.S.-Israeli citizenship). March 24, 2002, Ofra, Israel. Shooting near Ofra. U.S. citizens killed: Esther Kleinman, 23, formerly of Chicago, IL. March 27, 2002, Netanya, Israel. U.S. citizen Hannah Rogen, 90, was killed in a suicide attack at a Passover Seder. March 31, 2002, Efrat, Israel. Bombing in Efrat. U.S. citizens injured: An unidentified American citizen. June 18, 2002, Jerusalem, Israel. Moshe Gottlieb, 70, of Los Angeles, CA was killed in a bus bombing in Jerusalem. June 19, 2002, Jerusalem, Israel. Gila Sara Kessler, 19, whose family came from New York, was killed in a bombing at a bus stop. July 31, 2002, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel. Nine people were killed when a bomb exploded in the main cafeteria at the Hebrew University's Mount Scopus campus in Jerusalem. Five were U.S. citizens: Janis Ruth Coulter, 36, of MA; Marla Bennet, 24, of San Diego, CA; David Gritz (also a French citizen), 24, of Peru, MA; Benjamin Blutstein, 25, of Susquehanna Township, PA; and Dina Carter, 37, of NC. Israelis David Ladovsky, 29, and Levina Shapira, 53 also died in the bombing. U.S. citizens injured: Spencer Dew, 26, of Owensboro, Kentucky; Zeev Spencer; Harris Gershon; Jamie Harris. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack. March 5, 2003: Bus bombing in Haifa. U.S. citizens killed: Abigail Leitel, 14, who was born in Lebanon, New Hampshire. March 7, 2003: Shooting in the victims’ home. U.S. citizens killed: Rabbi Eli Horowitz, 52, who grew up in Chicago; Dina Horowitz, 50, who grew up in Florida April 30, 2003: Bombing at a Tel Aviv pub. U.S. citizens injured: Jack Baxter, 50, of New York City. June 11, 2003: Bus bombing in Jerusalem. U.S. citizens killed: Alan Beer, 47, who grew up in Cleveland. U.S. citizens injured: Sarri Singer, 27, daughter of New Jersey State Senator Robert Singer. June 20, 2003: Shooting attack on a car driving through the West Bank. U.S. citizens killed: Tzvi Goldstein, 47, who grew up in New York; U.S. citizens injured: Eugene Goldstein, Tzvi’s father, of Long Island, New York; Lorraine Goldstein, Tzvi’s mother, of Long Island, New York; Michal Goldstein, Tzvi’s wife, who grew up in New York. August 19, 2003: Homicide bombing on a bus in Jerusalem. U.S. citizens killed: Goldie Taubenfeld, 43, of New Square, New York; Shmuel Taubenfeld, 3 months, of New Square, New York; Mordechai Reinitz, 49; Yitzhak Reinitz, 9. Tehilla Nathanson, 3, of Monsey, New York; U.S. citizens injured: Mendel Reinitz, 11. September 9, 2003: Homicide bombing at a cafe in Jerusalem. David Applebaum, 51, and his daughter Nava, 20, originally of Cleveland were killed. October 15, 2003: Bombing of American convoy in the Gaza Strip: John Branchizio, 37, Mark Parson, 31, and John Martin Linde, 30, were on contract to the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv through the defense contracting company Dyncorp.U.S. citizens injured: One as-yet-unnamed U.S. citizen (reportedly a diplomat). September 24, 2004: Mortar strike on a housing community: Tiferet Tratner, 24, (dual U.S.-Israeli citizenship). April 17, 2006: Homicide bombing at the Rosh Ha'ir restaurant in Tel Aviv: Daniel Wultz, 16, of Weston, Florida, died one month after receiving his wounds in this bombing. Compiled by Caroline Taillandier, a research assistant at the GLORIA center and student at Tel Aviv University, Dr. Mitchell Bard, and Alden Oreck, Avi Hein, and Elihai Braun, research assistants at the American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise, and Paul Teller, Deputy Director, House Republican Study Committee. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sources: Chronology on Terrorist Incidents 1961-2001, State Department; "Patterns of Terrorism" reports 1995-2000; State Department Institute for Counter-Terrorism Database; Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya; Peacewatch, The Washington Institute for New East Policy; AIPAC; Ha'aretz, Republican Study Committee

US HISTORY need to know for test tmrw! PLEASE HELP? 46. Why did the United States finally enter World War II? (Points: 5) Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. Germany invaded Poland. Italy took territory in Ethiopia. The Soviet Union refused to pay back debts it owed. 47. What U.S. policies violated the constitutional rights of some citizens during World War II? (Points: 5) preventing Movietone News from showing casualties being returned home tapping the phones of suspected communists without warrants internment and detention of Japanese citizens in camps arresting protesters who wanted to voice concerns about the cost of the war 48. Which was not a role that women played in World War II? (Points: 5) enlisting in the military working in civilian jobs, some typically held by men taking care of their families while men served in the military campaigning for female congressional candidates who promised to end the war 49. Following World War II, Stalin refused to remove Soviet troops from Eastern Europe. This unofficially signaled (Points: 5) the first challenge for the United Nations. the power of the Soviet Union over the other Allies. the strength of the German military forcing additional Soviet attention. the beginning of the Cold War. 50. What policy toward communism did diplomat George F. Kennan recommend? (Points: 5) collective action massive retaliation appeasement containment 51. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) still exists today. Why was it originally formed in 1949? (Points: 5) to create an agency that could prepare and develop treaties to avoid future wars to provide a unified defense against Soviet aggression to prepare for future wars to develop a force to protect the open waters of the North Atlantic 52. What June 1950 action caused the United Nations to respond with military action? (Points: 5) North Korea invaded South Korea. China invaded North Korea. Japan invaded South Korea. The Soviet Union invaded North Korea. 53. What was the result of the Korean War? (Points: 5) The two nations formed the Republic of Korea which functions as a democracy. A peace treaty established one unified, democratic nation. A cease-fire agreement created a demilitarized zone along the 38th parallel. China took over communist North Korea, and the United Nations took over democratic South Korea. 54. Who was Senator Joseph McCarthy? (Points: 5) a Supreme Court nominee who never received Senate confirmation a presidential candidate who lost to Dwight Eisenhower in the 1952 election a popular radio and TV commentator who appealed to right wing extremists a U.S. senator who accused hundreds of Americans of being communists 55. What was a key element of President Dwight Eisenhower's foreign policy? (Points: 5) reducing the nuclear arsenal providing significant foreign aid to Eastern Europe dramatically increasing the size of the military emphasizing peace 56. Which president cautioned the United States about the importance of monitoring the power of the military-industrial complex? (Points: 5) Harry Truman Dwight Eisenhower Richard Nixon John Kennedy 57. What was one result of U.S. participation in covert actions in Latin America and the Middle East during the 1950s? (Points: 5) The United States gained strong allies in the region. Because the actions were secret, there was little effect. Sympathy for communism increased, and anti-American sentiment grew. Most nations were grateful for U.S. operations and support. 58. What helped the U.S. economy grow significantly following World War II? (Points: 5) Following the Depression, the government had carefully regulated the economy. Private funding sources went into research and development after the war. Once rationing and restrictions were lifted, consumers eagerly spent money. Savings bonds rates increased significantly. 59. What was the baby boom? (Points: 5) an epidemic that caused the death of many babies the tax reduction experienced by parents with the birth of each child the drop in birth rates following World War II the significant population growth following World War II 60. The congressional decision to pass legislation funding an interstate highway system in the 1950s indicated (Points: 5) congressional interest in providing jobs. the necessity of developing a system for military transport. a response to the growing car culture. that states w I HAVE WHAT I THINK ARE THE ANSWERS ON MY PAPER BUT I WANNA DOUBLE CHECK!!!!!!! PLEASE HELP! PLEASE HELP I HAVE MORE QUESTIONS HERE: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090611211633AAP6bIC

Is anti-Americanism a new phenomenon. Or did the WOT just bring out the haters that were always there? I have read much on the issue and I am convinced that the people who hate America today also hated America 20 years ago. Obviously younger generations will learn their hatred of America from their parents, teachers and the spiteful media. - I posted an interesting article on the subject below. The Falseness of Anti-Americanism Pollsters report rising anti-Americanism worldwide. The United States, they imply, squandered global sympathy after the September 11 terrorist attacks through its arrogant unilateralism. In truth, there was never any sympathy to squander. Anti-Americanism was already entrenched in the world's psyche—a backlash against a nation that comes bearing modernism to those who want it but who also fear and despise it. By Fouad Ajami Want to Know More? Suggested Readings “America is everywhere," Italian novelist Ignazio Silone once observed. It is in Karachi and Paris, in Jakarta and Brussels. An idea of it, a fantasy of it, hovers over distant lands. And everywhere there is also an obligatory anti-Americanism, a cover and an apology for the spell the United States casts over distant peoples and places. In the burning grounds of the Muslim world and on its periphery, U.S. embassies and their fate in recent years bear witness to a duality of the United States as Satan and redeemer. The embassies targeted by the masters of terror and by the diehards are besieged by visa-seekers dreaming of the golden, seductive country. If only the crowd in Tehran offering its tired rhythmic chant "marg bar amrika" ("death to America") really meant it! It is of visas and green cards and houses with lawns and of the glamorous world of Los Angeles, far away from the mullahs and their cultural tyranny, that the crowd really dreams. The frenzy with which radical Islamists battle against deportation orders from U.S. soil— dreading the prospect of returning to Amman and Beirut and Cairo— reveals the lie of anti-Americanism that blows through Muslim lands. The world rails against the United States, yet embraces its protection, its gossip, and its hipness. Tune into a talk show on the stridently anti-American satellite channel Al-Jazeera, and you'll behold a parody of American ways and techniques unfolding on the television screen. That reporter in the flak jacket, irreverent and cool against the Kabul or Baghdad background, borrows a form perfected in the country whose sins and follies that reporter has come to chronicle. In Doha, Qatar, Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi, arguably Sunni Islam's most influential cleric, at Omar ibn al-Khattab Mosque, a short distance away from the headquarters of the U.S. Central Command, delivers a khutba, a Friday sermon. The date is June 13, 2003. The cleric's big theme of the day is the arrogance of the United States and the cruelty of the war it unleashed on Iraq. This cleric, Egyptian born, political to his fingertips, and in full mastery of his craft and of the sensibility of his followers, is particularly agitated in his sermon. Surgery and a period of recovery have kept him away from his pulpit for three months, during which time there has been a big war in the Arab world that toppled Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq with stunning speed and effectiveness. The United States was "acting like a god on earth," al-Qaradawi told the faithful. In Iraq, the United States had appointed itself judge and jury. The invading power may have used the language of liberation and enlightenment, but this invasion of Iraq was a 21st-century version of what had befallen Baghdad in the middle years of the 13th century, in 1258 to be exact, when Baghdad, the city of learning and culture, was sacked by the Mongols. The preacher had his themes, but a great deal of the United States had gone into the preacher's art: Consider his Web site, Qaradawi.net, where the faithful can click and read his fatwas (religious edicts)— the Arabic interwoven with html text— about all matters of modern life, from living in non-Islamic lands to the permissibility of buying houses on mortgage to the follies of Arab rulers who have surrendered to U.S. power. Or what about his way with television? He is a star of the medium, and Al-Jazeera carried an immensely popular program of his. That art form owes a debt, no doubt, to the American "televangelists," as nothing in the sheik's traditional education at Al Azhar University in Cairo prepared him for this wired, portable religion. And then there are the preacher's children: One of his daughters had made her way to the University of Texas where she received a master's degree in biology, a son had earned a Ph.D. from the University of Central Florida in Orlando, and yet another son had embarked on that quintessential American degree, an MBA at the American University in Cairo. Al-Qaradawi embodies anti-Americanism as the flip side of Americanization. A NEW ORTHODOXY Of late, pollsters have come bearing news and numbers of anti-Americanism the world over. The reports are one dimensional and filled with panic. This past June, the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press published a survey of public opinion in 20 countries and the Palestinian territories that indicated a growing animus toward the United States. In the same month, the BBC came forth with a similar survey that included 10 countries and the United States. On the surface of it, anti-Americanism is a river overflowing its banks. In Indonesia, the United States is deemed more dangerous than al Qaeda. In Jordan, Russia, South Korea, and Brazil, the United States is thought to be more dangerous than Iran, the "rogue state" of the mullahs. There is no need to go so far away from home only to count the cats in Zanzibar. These responses to the United States are neither surprising nor profound. The pollsters, and those who have been brandishing their findings, see in these results some verdict on the United States itself— and on the performance abroad of the Bush presidency— but the findings could be read as a crude, admittedly limited, measure of the foul temper in some unsettled places. The pollsters have flaunted spreadsheets to legitimize a popular legend: It is not Americans that people abroad hate, but the United States! Yet it was Americans who fell to terrorism on September 11, 2001, and it is of Americans and their deeds, and the kind of social and political order they maintain, that sordid tales are told in Karachi and Athens and Cairo and Paris. You can't profess kindness toward Americans while attributing the darkest of motives to their homeland. The Pew pollsters ignored Greece, where hatred of the United States is now a defining feature of political life. The United States offended Greece by rescuing Bosnians and Kosovars. Then, the same Greeks who hailed the Serbian conquest of Srebrenica in 1995 and the mass slaughter of the Muslims there were quick to summon up outrage over the U.S. military campaign in Iraq. In one Greek public opinion survey, Americans were ranked among Albanians, Gypsies, and Turks as the most despised peoples. Takis Michas, a courageous Greek writer with an eye for his country's temperament, traces this new anti-Americanism to the Orthodox Church itself. A narrative of virtuous and embattled solitude and alienation from Western Christendom has always been integral to the Greek psyche; a fusion of church and nation is natural to the Greek worldview. In the 1990s, the Yugoslav wars gave this sentiment a free run. The church sanctioned and fed the belief that the United States was Satan, bent on destroying the "True Faith," Michas explains, and shoring up Turkey and the Muslims in the Balkans. A neo-Orthodox ideology took hold, slicing through faith and simplifying history. Where the Balkan churches— be they the Bulgars or the Serbs— had been formed in rebellion against the hegemony of the Greek priesthood, the new history made a fetish of the fidelity of Greece to its Orthodox "brethren." Greek paramilitary units fought alongside Bosnian Serbs as part of the Drina Corps under the command of indicted war criminal Gen. Ratko Mladic. The Greek flag was hoisted over the ruins of Srebenica's Orthodox church when the doomed city fell. Serbian war crimes elicited no sense of outrage in Greece; quite to the contrary, sympathy for Serbia and the identification with its war aims and methods were limitless. Beyond the Yugoslav wars, the neo-Orthodox worldview sanctified the ethnonationalism of Greece, spinning a narrative of Hellenic persecution at the hands of the United States as the standard-bearer of the West. Greece is part of NATO and of the European Union (EU), but an old schism— that of Eastern Orthodoxy's claim against the Latin world— has greater power and a deeper resonance. In the banal narrative of Greek anti-Americanism, this animosity emerges from U.S. support for the junta that reigned over the country from 1967 to 1974. This deeper fury enables the aggrieved to glide over the role the United States played in the defense and rehabilitation of Greece after World War II. Furthermore, it enables them to overlook the lifeline that migration offered to untold numbers of Greeks who are among the United States' most prosperous communities. Greece loves the idea of its "Westernness"— a place and a culture where the West ends, and some other alien world (Islam) begins. But the political culture of religious nationalism has isolated Greece from the wider currents of Western liberalism. What little modern veneer is used to dress up Greece's anti-Americanism is a pretense. The malady here is, paradoxically, a Greek variant of what plays out in the world of Islam: a belligerent political culture sharpening faith as a political weapon, an abdication of political responsibility for one's own world, and a search for foreign "devils." Lest they be trumped by their hated Greek rivals, the Turks now give voice to the same anti-Americanism. It is a peculiar sentiment among the Turks, given their pragmatism. They are not prone to the cluster of grievances that empower anti-Americanism in France or among the intelligentsia of the developing world. In the 1920s, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk gave Turkey a dream of modernity and self-help by pointing his country westward, distancing it from the Arab-Muslim lands to its south and east. But the secular, modernist dream in Turkey has fractured, and oddly, anti-Americanism blows through the cracks from the Arab lands and from Brussels and Berlin. The fury of the Turkish protests against the United States in the months prior to the war in Iraq exhibited a pathology all its own. It was, at times, nature imitating art: The protesters in the streets burned American flags in the apparent hope that Europeans (real Europeans, that is) would finally take Turkey and the Turks into the fold. The U.S. presence had been benign in Turkish lands, and Americans had been Turkey's staunchest advocates for coveted membership in the EU. But suddenly this relationship that served Turkey so well was no longer good enough. As the "soft" Islamists (there is no such thing, we ought to understand by now) revolted against Pax Americana, the secularists averted their gaze and let stand this new anti-Americanism. The pollsters calling on the Turks found a people in distress, their economy on the ropes, and their polity in an unfamiliar world beyond the simple certainties of Kemalism, yet without new political tools and compass. No dosage of anti-Americanism, the Turks will soon realize, will take Turkey past the gatekeepers of Europe. WE WERE ALL AMERICANS The introduction of the Pew report sets the tone for the entire study. The war in Iraq, it argues,"has widened the rift between Americans and Western Europeans" and "further inflamed the Muslim world." The implications are clear: The United States was better off before Bush's "unilateralism." The United States, in its hubris, summoned up this anti-Americanism. Those are the political usages of this new survey. But these sentiments have long prevailed in Jordan, Egypt, and France. During the 1990s, no one said good things about the United States in Egypt. It was then that the Islamist children of Egypt took to the road, to Hamburg and Kandahar, to hatch a horrific conspiracy against the United States. And it was in the 1990s, during the fabled stock market run, when the prophets of globalization preached the triumph of the U.S. economic model over the protected versions of the market in places such as France, when anti-Americanism became the uncontested ideology of French public life. Americans were barbarous, a threat to French cuisine and their beloved language. U.S. pension funds were acquiring their assets and Wall Street speculators were raiding their savings. The United States incarcerated far too many people and executed too many criminals. All these views thrived during a decade when Americans are now told they were loved and uncontested on foreign shores. Much has been made of the sympathy that the French expressed for the United States immediately after the September 11 attacks, as embodied by the famous editorial of Le Monde's publisher Jean-Marie Colombani, "Nous Sommes Tous Américains" ("We are all Americans"). And much has been made of the speed with which the United States presumably squandered that sympathy in the months that followed. But even Colombani's column, written on so searing a day, was not the unalloyed message of sympathy suggested by the title. Even on that very day, Colombani wrote of the United States reaping the whirlwind of its "cynicism"; he recycled the hackneyed charge that Osama bin Laden had been created and nurtured by U.S. intelligence agencies. Colombani quickly retracted what little sympathy he had expressed when, in December of 2001, he was back with an open letter to "our American friends" and soon thereafter with a short book, Tous Américains? le monde après le 11 septembre 2001 (All Americans? The World After September 11, 2001). By now the sympathy had drained, and the tone was one of belligerent judgment and disapproval. There was nothing to admire in Colombani's United States, which had run roughshod in the world and had been indifferent to the rule of law. Colombani described the U.S. republic as a fundamentalist Christian enterprise, its magistrates too deeply attached to the death penalty, its police cruel to its black population. A republic of this sort could not in good conscience undertake a campaign against Islamism. One can't, Colombani writes, battle the Taliban while trying to introduce prayers in one's own schools; one can't strive to reform Saudi Arabia while refusing to teach Darwinism in the schools of the Bible Belt; and one can't denounce the demands of the sharia (Islamic law) while refusing to outlaw the death penalty. Doubtless, he adds, the United States can't do battle with the Taliban before doing battle against the bigotry that ravages the depths of the United States itself. The United States had not squandered Colombani's sympathy; he never had that sympathy in the first place. Colombani was hardly alone in the French intellectual class in his enmity toward the United States. On November 3, 2001, in Le Monde, the writer and pundit Jean Baudrillard permitted himself a thought of stunning cynicism. He saw the perpetrators of September 11 acting out his own dreams and the dreams of others like him. He gave those attacks a sort of universal warrant: "How we have dreamt of this event," he wrote, "how all the world without exception dreamt of this event, for no one can avoid dreaming of the destruction of a power that has become hegemonic . . . . It is they who acted, but we who wanted the deed." Casting caution and false sympathy aside, Baudrillard saw the terrible attacks on the United States as an "object of desire." The terrorists had been able to draw on a "deep complicity," knowing perfectly well that they were acting out the hidden yearnings of others oppressed by the United States' order and power. To him, morality of the U.S. variety is a sham, and the terrorism directed against it is a legitimate response to the inequities of "globalization." In his country's intellectual landscape, Baudrillard was no loner. A struggle had raged throughout the 1990s, pitting U.S.-led globalization (with its low government expenditures, a "cheap" and merciless Wall Street-Treasury Department axis keen on greater discipline in the market, and relatively long working hours on the part of labor) against France's protectionist political economy. The primacy the United States assigned to liberty waged a pitched battle against the French commitment to equity. To maintain France's sympathy, and that of Le Monde, the United States would have had to turn the other cheek to the murderers of al Qaeda, spare the Taliban, and engage the Muslim world in some high civilizational dialogue. But who needs high approval ratings in Marseille? Envy of U.S. power, and of the United States' universalism, is the ruling passion of French intellectual life. It is not "mostly Bush" that turned France against the United States. The former Socialist foreign minister, Hubert Védrine, was given to the same anti-Americanism that moves his successor, the bombastic and vain Dominique de Villepin. It was Védrine, it should be recalled, who in the late 1990s had dubbed the United States a "hyperpower." He had done so before the war on terrorism, before the war on Iraq. He had done it against the background of an international order more concerned with economics and markets than with military power. In contrast to his successor, Védrine at least had the honesty to acknowledge that there was nothing unusual about the way the United States wielded its power abroad, or about France's response to that primacy. France, too, he observed, might have been equally overbearing if it possessed the United States' weight and assets. His successor gave France's resentment highly moral claims. Villepin appeared evasive, at one point, on whether he wished to see a U.S. or an Iraqi victory in the standoff between Saddam Hussein's regime and the United States. Anti-Americanism indulges France's fantasy of past greatness and splendor and gives France's unwanted Muslim children a claim on the political life of a country that knows not what to do with them. THE BURDEN OF MODERNITY To come bearing modernism to those who want it but who rail against it at the same time, to represent and embody so much of what the world yearns for and fears— that is the American burden. The United States lends itself to contradictory interpretations. To the Europeans, and to the French in particular, who are enamored of their laïcisme (secularism), the United States is unduly religious, almost embarrassingly so, its culture suffused with sacred symbolism. In the Islamic world, the burden is precisely the opposite: There, the United States scandalizes the devout, its message represents nothing short of an affront to the pious and a temptation to the gullible and the impressionable young. According to the June BBC survey, 78 percent of French polled identified the United States as a "religious" country, while only 10 percent of Jordanians endowed it with that label. Religious to the secularists, faithless to the devout— such is the way the United States is seen in foreign lands. So many populations have the United States under their skin. Their rage is oddly derived from that very same attraction. Consider the Saudi realm, a place where anti-Americanism is fierce. The United States helped invent the modern Saudi world. The Arabian American Oil Company— for all practical purposes a state within a state— pulled the desert enclave out of its insularity, gave it skills, and ushered it into the 20th century. Deep inside the anti-Americanism of today's Saudi Arabia, an observer can easily discern the dependence of the Saudi elite on their U.S. connection. It is in the image of the United States' suburbs and urban sprawl that Saudi cities are designed. It is on the campuses of Harvard, Princeton, and Stanford that the ruling elite are formed and educated. After September 11, 2001, the Saudi elite panicked that their ties to the United States might be shattered and that their world would be consigned to what they have at home. Fragments of the United States have been eagerly embraced by an influential segment of Saudi society. For many, the United States was what they encountered when they were free from home and family and age-old prohibitions. Today, an outing in Riyadh is less a journey to the desert than to the mall and to Starbucks. An academic in Riyadh, in the midst of an anti-American tirade about all policies American, was keen to let me know that his young son, born in the United States, had suddenly declared he no longer wanted to patronize McDonald's because of the United States' support of Israel. The message was plaintive and unpersuasive; the resolve behind that "boycott" was sure to crack. A culture that casts so long a shadow is fated to be emulated and resented at the same time. The United States is destined to be in the politics— and imagination— of strangers even when the country (accurately) believes it is not implicated in the affairs of other lands. In a hauntingly astute set of remarks made to the New Yorker in the days that followed the terrorism of September 11, the Egyptian playwright Ali Salem— a free spirit at odds with the intellectual class in his country and a maverick who journeyed to Israel and wrote of his time there and of his acceptance of that country— went to the heart of the anti-American phenomenon. He was thinking of his own country's reaction to the United States, no doubt, but what he says clearly goes beyond Egypt: People say that Americans are arrogant, but it's not true. Americans enjoy life and they are proud of their lives, and they are boastful of their wonderful inventions that have made life so much easier and more convenient. It's very difficult to understand the machinery of hatred, because you wind up resorting to logic, but trying to understand this with logic is like measuring distance in kilograms….These are people who are envious. To them, life is an unbearable burden. Modernism is the only way out. But modernism is frightening. It means we have to compete. It means we can't explain everything away with conspiracy theories. Bernard Shaw said it best, you know. In the preface to 'St. Joan,' he said Joan of Arc was burned not for any reason except that she was talented. Talent gives rise to jealousy in the hearts of the untalented. This kind of envy cannot be attenuated. Jordanians, for instance, cannot be talked out of their anti-Americanism. In the BBC survey, 71 percent of Jordanians thought the United States was more dangerous to the world than al Qaeda. But Jordan has been the rare political and economic recipient of a U.S. free trade agreement, a privilege the United States shares only with a handful of nations. A new monarch, King Abdullah II, came to power, and the free trade agreement was an investment that Pax Americana made in his reign and in the moderation of his regime. But this bargain with the Hashemite dynasty has not swayed the intellectual class, nor has it made headway among the Jordanian masses. On Iraq and on matters Palestinian, for more than a generation now, Jordanians have not had a kind thing to say about the United States. In the scheme of Jordan's neighborhood, the realm is benign and forgiving, but the political life is restrictive and tight. When talking about the United States, Jordanians have often been talking to their rulers, expressing their dissatisfaction with the quality of the country's public life and economic performance. A pollster venturing to Jordan must understand the country's temper, hemmed in by poverty and overshadowed by more resourceful powers all around it: Iraq to the east, Israel to the west, and Syria and Saudi Arabia over the horizon. A sense of disinheritance has always hung over Jordan. The trinity of God, country, and king puts much of the political life of the land beyond scrutiny and discussion. The anti-Americanism emanates from, and merges with, this political condition. With modernism come the Jews. They have been its bearers and beneficiaries, and they have paid dearly for it. They have been taxed with cosmopolitanism: The historian Isaac Deutscher had it right when he said that other people have roots, but the Jews have legs. Today the Jews have a singular role in U.S. public life and culture, and anti-Americanism is tethered to anti-Semitism. In the Islamic world, and in some European circles as well, U.S. power is seen as the handmaiden of Jewish influence. Witness, for instance, the London-based Arab media's obsession with the presumed ascendancy of the neoconservatives— such as former chairman of the Defense Policy Board Richard Perle and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz— in the making of U.S. foreign policy. The neocons had been there for the rescue of the (Muslim) Bosnians and Kosovars, but the reactionaries in Muslim lands had not taken notice of that. Left to itself, the United States would be fair-minded, this Arab commentary maintains, and it would arrive at a balanced approach to the Arab-Islamic world. This narrative is nothing less than a modernized version of the worldview of that infamous forgery, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. But it is put forth by men and women who insist on their oneness with the modern world. A century ago, in a short-story called "Youth," the great British author Joseph Conrad captured in his incomparable way the disturbance that is heard when a modern world pushes against older cultures and disturbs their peace. In the telling, Marlowe, Conrad's literary double and voice, speaks of the frenzy of coming upon and disturbing the East. "And then, before I could open my lips, the East spoke to me, but it was in a Western voice. A torrent of words was poured into the enigmatical, the fateful silence; outlandish, angry words mixed with words and even whole sentences of good English, less strange but even more surprising. The voice swore and cursed violently; it riddled the solemn peace of the bay by a volley of abuse. It began by calling me Pig . . . ." Today, the United States carries the disturbance of the modern to older places— to the east and to the intermediate zones in Europe. There is energy in the United States, and there is force. And there is resistance and resentment— and emulation— in older places affixed on the delicate balancing act of a younger United States not yet content to make its peace with traditional pains and limitations and tyrannies. That sensitive French interpreter of his country, Dominique Moïsi, recently told of a simple countryman of his who was wistful when Saddam Hussein's statue fell on April 9 in Baghdad's Firdos Square. France opposed this war, but this Frenchman expressed a sense of diminishment that his country had sat out this stirring story of political liberation. A society like France with a revolutionary history should have had a hand in toppling the tyranny in Baghdad, but it didn't. Instead, a cable attached to a U.S. tank had pulled down the statue, to the delirium of the crowd. The new history being made was a distinctly American (and British) creation. It was soldiers from Burlington, Vermont, and Linden, New Jersey, and Bon Aqua, Tennessee— I single out those towns because they are the hometowns of three soldiers who were killed in the Iraq war— who raced through the desert making this new history and paying for it. The United States need not worry about hearts and minds in foreign lands. If Germans wish to use anti-Americanism to absolve themselves and their parents of the great crimes of World War II, they will do it regardless of what the United States says and does. If Muslims truly believe that their long winter of decline is the fault of the United States, no campaign of public diplomacy shall deliver them from that incoherence. In the age of Pax Americana, it is written, fated, or maktoob (as the Arabs would say) that the plotters and preachers shall rail against the United States— in whole sentences of good American slang. Fouad Ajami is the Majid Khadduri professor at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies and a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report. http://www.travelbrochuregraphics.com/extra/the_falseness_of_antiamericanism.htm

What do you think of the 1000 characters limit? Global impact McDonald's has become emblematic of globalization, sometimes referred as the "McDonaldization" of society. The Economist magazine uses the "Big Mac Index": the comparison of a Big Mac's cost in various world currencies can be used to informally judge these currencies' purchasing power parity. Because McDonald's is closely identified with American culture and lifestyle, its international business expansion has been termed[by who?] part of Americanization and American cultural imperialism. McDonald's is a perpetual target of various and often conflicting anti-globalization protests worldwide. The brand is known informally as "Mickey D's" (in the US and Canada), "Macky D's" (in the UK), "McDo" (in France, Quebec, the Philippines, and the Kansai region of Japan), "Maccer's" (in Ireland), "Maccas" (in New Zealand and Australia) or "de Mac" (in the Netherlands). Thomas Friedman once said that no country with a McDonald's had gone to war with another.[8] However, the "Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention" is not strictly true. Careful historians point to the 1989 United States invasion of Panama, when NATO bombed Serbia in 1999, and the 2006 Lebanon War as exceptions. Some observers have suggested that the company should be given credit for increasing the standard of service in markets that it enters. A group of anthropologists in a study entitled Golden Arches East (Stanford University Press, 1998, edited by James L. Watson) looked at the impact McDonald's had on East Asia, and Hong Kong in particular. When it opened in Hong Kong in 1975, McDonald's was the first restaurant to consistently offer clean restrooms, driving customers to demand the same of other restaurants and institutions. In East Asia in particular, McDonald's have become a symbol for the desire to embrace Western cultural norms. McDonald's have recently taken to partnering up with Sinopec, China's second largest oil company, in the People's Republic of China, as it begins to take advantage of China's growing use of personal vehicles by opening numerous drive-thru restaurants. [9] In addition to its effect on business standards, McDonald's has also been instrumental in changing local customs. By popularizing the idea of a quick restaurant meal, Watson's study suggests, McDonald's led to the easing or elimination of various taboos, such as eating while walking in Japan.[dubious – discuss] CriticismPotted plants at a McDonald's. The company has been a target of criticism practically since its inception. Since the mid-1990s this protest has taken the form of an anti-globalization movement as documented in Naomi Klein's manifesto No Logo. McDonald's restaurants have been the targets of protests, peaceful and otherwise, by environmental, anti-globalization and animal rights activists. The company has used a litigious approach to protecting its business interests. This conflict, and the company's approach to resolving it, was epitomized in the early 1990s by what came to be known as the McLibel case. Two British activists, David Morris and Helen Steel, distributed leaflets entitled What's wrong with McDonald's? on the streets of London. McDonald's wrote to Steel and Morris demanding they desist and apologize, and, when they refused, sued them for libel. The trial lasted more than two years. The company's advertising techniques and business practices were scrutinized in the High Court of Justice in London and reported extensively in the press, who saw the case as a David and Goliath battle (under UK law, legal aid could not be granted for a defamation suit, so Steel and Morris did most of their own legal casework while McDonald's was represented by an extensive legal team). In June 1997, the judge ruled in favor of McDonald's, awarding the company £60,000 damages, which was later reduced to £40,000 by the Court of Appeal. The amount was low because the judge ruled that some of the claims made by Morris and Steel had been proved, including that McDonald's exploited children in its advertising, was anti-trade union and indirectly exploited and caused suffering to animals. Steel and Morris announced they had no intention of ever paying, and the company later confirmed it would not be pursuing the money. Steel and Morris later successfully challenged UK libel law in the European Court, arguing that it was an infringement of the right to free speech. The British Government was forced to re-write the legislation as a result. In 2005, a film by Ken Loach was made about the court case. In 2001, Eric Schlosser's book Fast Food Nation included criticism of McDonald's' business practices. Among the critiques are allegations that McDonald's (along with other companies within the fast-food industry) uses its political influence to increase their own profits at the expense of people's health and the social conditions of its workers. The book also brings into question McDonald's advertisement techniques where it targets children. While the book does mention other fast-food chains, it focuses primarily on McDonald's. In 2002, vegetarian groups, largely Hindu, successfully sued McDonald's for misrepresenting their French fries as vegetarian.[10] Even after the discontinuation of frying the French fries in beef tallow in 1990, the French fries still had beef extract added to them. The French fries sold in the U.S. still contain beef and animal flavoring. McDonald's biscuits also contain beef flavoring along with animal flavoring. Also in 2004, Morgan Spurlock's documentary film Super Size Me said that McDonald's food was contributing to the epidemic of obesity in society, and failing to provide nutritional information about its food for its customers. For 30 days Spurlock ate nothing but McDonald's (supersizing whenever asked). He ate everything on the menu at least once and continued to eat after he was full. At the same time he consciously attempted to get little or no exercise. By the end of the month he had gained 24.5 pounds (11.11 kg), was moody and had less interest in sex. Others have disputed Spurlock's claims (see below). After the film was shown at the Sundance Film Festival, but before its cinematic release, McDonald's stated it was phasing out its Supersize meal option and would begin offering several healthier menu items, though no link to the film was cited in this decision. However, while the healthier menu items have appeared, the Supersize meal option still remains available at some locations. The company also began a practice of putting nutritional information for all menu items in light grey small print on the reverse of their tray liners. It is currently phasing in nutritional labeling in clear black print on the actual packaging of its food items. Anthony Bourdain on his show, No Reservations, has criticised McDonald's among other fast-food restaurants for its culinary blandness. Legal challenge over trans fats In September 2002, McDonald’s announced it was voluntarily reducing the trans fat content of its cooking oil by February 2003. Because of operational problems, the oil was not changed on time. In the ensuing lawsuits, plaintiffs claimed that McDonald’s didn't do enough to inform the public that the oil was not changed. The bantransfat.com website contains testimonials from people, one claims she thought the oil was low in trans fat, and she said, "that is why I have been eating there every week..." In a settlement agreement, bantransfat.com said "While there is a difference of opinion regarding whether McDonald’s gave effective notice to its customers that the oil was not changed, McDonald’s deserves recognition and credit for having achieved a reduction in the trans fat levels ... and for working diligently over the last two years to test additional cooking oils." Nevertheless, bantransfat.com demanded monetary damages. Settlement of the lawsuit brought by BanTransFats.com and one private party requires McDonald’s spend up to $1.5 million to publish notices on the status of its trans fat initiative. McDonald’s will also donate $7 million to the American Heart Association for public education about trans fat. [3]. The settlement also requires some money be paid directly to bantransfat.com. The California Superior Court for Marin County has entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement. Supporters of McDonald's point out that the company is successful because it meets the needs of customers and adapts to its customers wants. In response to public pressure, McDonald's has sought to include more healthy choices in its menu and has introduced a new slogan to its recruitment posters: "Not bad for a McJob". (The word McJob, first attested in the mid-1980s[11] and later popularized by Canadian novelist Douglas Coupland in his book Generation X, has become a buzz word for low-paid, unskilled work with few prospects or benefits and little security.) McDonald's disputes the idea that its restaurant jobs have no prospects, noting that its CEO, Jim Skinner, started working at the company as a regular restaurant employee, and that 20 of its top 50 managers began work as regular crew members. [12] In 2007, the company launched an advertising campaign with the slogan "Would you like a career with that?" on Irish television, outlining that their jobs have many prospects. In a bid to tap into growing consumer interest in the provenance of food, the fast-food chain recently switched its supply of both coffee beans and milk. UK chief executive Steve Easterbrook said: “British consumers are increasingly interested in the quality, sourcing and ethics of the food and drink they buy". McDonald's coffee is now brewed from beans taken from stocks that have been certified by the conservation group the Rainforest Alliance. Similarly, milk supplies used for its hot drinks and milkshakes have been switched to organic sources which could account for 5% of the UK's organic milk output[13]. In other cases, the firm has shown itself ready to adjust its business practices. When the public became concerned that product packaging was environmentally damaging, McDonald's started a joint project with Friends of the Earth to eliminate the use of polystyrene containers, only in the United States, and to reduce the amount of waste produced. Throughout the McLibel trial, senior representatives of the firm said they were merely trying to protect its image from undue and unfounded attack. With regard to its numerous and often controversial copyright and trademark actions, McDonald's lawyers say they are simply protecting the company's intellectual property. Super Size Me has been characterized as a non-scientific publicity stunt. The subject of the film consumes massive quantities of McDonald's food, to the point of being sickened by it. Eating on an hourly schedule and, as part of his rules, eating additional quantities each time a McDonald's worker says the word "supersize," the subject gains weight. Following the release of the film Super Size Me, some people reported they had experienced no weight gain and suffered no ill effect by eating only at McDonald's for a month, but choosing menu items more judiciously and exercising frequently.Minimize Me Merab Morgan, a North Carolina woman, was even able to lose weight.Woman loses 33 lb on McDonald's diet She claimed that the transparency of nutritional information made it easy to control her daily caloric intake. Global impact McDonald's has become emblematic of globalization, sometimes referred as the "McDonaldization" of society. The Economist magazine uses the "Big Mac Index": the comparison of a Big Mac's cost in various world currencies can be used to informally judge these currencies' purchasing power parity. Because McDonald's is closely identified with American culture and lifestyle, its international business expansion has been termed[by who?] part of Americanization and American cultural imperialism. McDonald's is a perpetual target of various and often conflicting anti-globalization protests worldwide. The brand is known informally as "Mickey D's" (in the US and Canada), "Macky D's" (in the UK), "McDo" (in France, Quebec, the Philippines, and the Kansai region of Japan), "Maccer's" (in Ireland), "Maccas" (in New Zealand and Australia) or "de Mac" (in the Netherlands). Thomas Friedman once said that no country with a McDonald's had gone to war with another.[8] However, the "Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention" is not strictly true. Careful historians point to the 1989 United States invasion of Panama, when NATO bombed Serbia in 1999, and the 2006 Lebanon War as exceptions. Some observers have suggested that the company should be given credit for increasing the standard of service in markets that it enters. A group of anthropologists in a study entitled Golden Arches East (Stanford University Press, 1998, edited by James L. Watson) looked at the impact McDonald's had on East Asia, and Hong Kong in particular. When it opened in Hong Kong in 1975, McDonald's was the first restaurant to consistently offer clean restrooms, driving customers to demand the same of other restaurants and institutions. In East Asia in particular, McDonald's have become a symbol for the desire to embrace Western cultural norms. McDonald's have recently taken to partnering up with Sinopec, China's second largest oil company, in the People's Republic of China, as it begins to take advantage of China's growing use of personal vehicles by opening numerous drive-thru restaurants. [9] In addition to its effect on business standards, McDonald's has also been instrumental in changing local customs. By popularizing the idea of a quick restaurant meal, Watson's study suggests, McDonald's led to the easing or elimination of various taboos, such as eating while walking in Japan.[dubious – discuss] CriticismPotted plants at a McDonald's. The company has been a target of criticism practically since its inception. Since the mid-1990s this protest has taken the form of an anti-globalization movement as documented in Naomi Klein's manifesto No Logo. McDonald's restaurants have been the targets of protests, peaceful and otherwise, by environmental, anti-globalization and animal rights activists. The company has used a litigious approach to protecting its business interests. This conflict, and the company's approach to resolving it, was epitomized in the early 1990s by what came to be known as the McLibel case. Two British activists, David Morris and Helen Steel, distributed leaflets entitled What's wrong with McDonald's? on the streets of London. McDonald's wrote to Steel and Morris demanding they desist and apologize, and, when they refused, sued them for libel. The trial lasted more than two years. The company's advertising techniques and business practices were scrutinized in the High Court of Justice in London and reported extensively in the press, who saw the case as a David and Goliath battle (under UK law, legal aid could not be granted for a defamation suit, so Steel and Morris did most of their own legal casework while McDonald's was represented by an extensive legal team). In June 1997, the judge ruled in favor of McDonald's, awarding the company £60,000 damages, which was later reduced to £40,000 by the Court of Appeal. The amount was low because the judge ruled that some of the claims made by Morris and Steel had been proved, including that McDonald's exploited children in its advertising, was anti-trade union and indirectly exploited and caused suffering to animals. Steel and Morris announced they had no intention of ever paying, and the company later confirmed it would not be pursuing the money. Steel and Morris later successfully challenged UK libel law in the European Court, arguing that it was an infringement of the right to free speech. The British Government was forced to re-write the legislation as a result. In 2005, a film by Ken Loach was made about the court case. In 2001, Eric Schlosser's book Fast Food Nation included criticism of McDonald's' business practices. Among the critiques are allegations that McDonald's (along with other companies within the fast-food industry) uses its political influence to increase their own profits at the expense of people's health and the social conditions of its workers. The book also brings into question McDonald's advertisement techniques where it targets children. While the book does mention other fast-food chains, it focuses primarily on McDonald's. In 2002, vegetarian groups, largely Hindu, successfully sued McDonald's for misrepresenting their French fries as vegetarian.[10] Even after the discontinuation of frying the French fries in beef tallow in 1990, the French fries still had beef extract added to them. The French fries sold in the U.S. still contain beef and animal flavoring. McDonald's biscuits also contain beef flavoring along with animal flavoring. Also in 2004, Morgan Spurlock's documentary film Super Size Me said that McDonald's food was contributing to the epidemic of obesity in society, and failing to provide nutritional information about its food for its customers. For 30 days Spurlock ate nothing but McDonald's (supersizing whenever asked). He ate everything on the menu at least once and continued to eat after he was full. At the same time he consciously attempted to get little or no exercise. By the end of the month he had gained 24.5 pounds (11.11 kg), was moody and had less interest in sex. Others have disputed Spurlock's claims (see below). After the film was shown at the Sundance Film Festival, but before its cinematic release, McDonald's stated it was phasing out its Supersize meal option and would begin offering several healthier menu items, though no link to the film was cited in this decision. However, while the healthier menu items have appeared, the Supersize meal option still remains available at some locations. The company also began a practice of putting nutritional information for all menu items in light grey small print on the reverse of their tray liners. It is currently phasing in nutritional labeling in clear black print on the actual packaging of its food items. Anthony Bourdain on his show, No Reservations, has criticised McDonald's among other fast-food restaurants for its culinary blandness. Legal challenge over trans fats In September 2002, McDonald’s announced it was voluntarily reducing the trans fat content of its cooking oil by February 2003. Because of operational problems, the oil was not changed on time. In the ensuing lawsuits, plaintiffs claimed that McDonald’s didn't do enough to inform the public that the oil was not changed. The bantransfat.com website contains testimonials from people, one claims she thought the oil was low in trans fat, and she said, "that is why I have been eating there every week..." In a settlement agreement, bantransfat.com said "While there is a difference of opinion regarding whether McDonald’s gave effective notice to its customers that the oil was not changed, McDonald’s deserves recognition and credit for having achieved a reduction in the trans fat levels ... and for working diligently over the last two years to test additional cooking oils." Nevertheless, bantransfat.com demanded monetary damages. Settlement of the lawsuit brought by BanTransFats.com and one private party requires McDonald’s spend up to $1.5 million to publish notices on the status of its trans fat initiative. McDonald’s will also donate $7 million to the American Heart Association for public education about trans fat. [3]. The settlement also requires some money be paid directly to bantransfat.com. The California Superior Court for Marin County has entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement. Supporters of McDonald's point out that the company is successful because it meets the needs of customers and adapts to its customers wants. In response to public pressure, McDonald's has sought to include more healthy choices in its menu and has introduced a new slogan to its recruitment posters: "Not bad for a McJob". (The word McJob, first attested in the mid-1980s[11] and later popularized by Canadian novelist Douglas Coupland in his book Generation X, has become a buzz word for low-paid, unskilled work with few prospects or benefits and little security.) McDonald's disputes the idea that its restaurant jobs have no prospects, noting that its CEO, Jim Skinner, started working at the company as a regular restaurant employee, and that 20 of its top 50 managers began work as regular crew members. [12] In 2007, the company launched an advertising campaign with the slogan "Would you like a career with that?" on Irish television, outlining that their jobs have many prospects. In a bid to tap into growing consumer interest in the provenance of food, the fast-food chain recently switched its supply of both coffee beans and milk. UK chief executive Steve Easterbrook said: “British consumers are increasingly interested in the quality, sourcing and ethics of the food and drink they buy". McDonald's coffee is now brewed from beans taken from stocks that have been certified by the conservation group the Rainforest Alliance. Similarly, milk supplies used for its hot drinks and milkshakes have been switched to organic sources which could account for 5% of the UK's organic milk output[13]. In other cases, the firm has shown itself ready to adjust its business practices. When the public became concerned that product packaging was environmentally damaging, McDonald's started a joint project with Friends of the Earth to eliminate the use of polystyrene containers, only in the United States, and to reduce the amount of waste produced. Throughout the McLibel trial, senior representatives of the firm said they were merely trying to protect its image from undue and unfounded attack. With regard to its numerous and often controversial copyright and trademark actions, McDonald's lawyers say they are simply protecting the company's intellectual property. Super Size Me has been characterized as a non-scientific publicity stunt. The subject of the film consumes massive quantities of McDonald's food, to the point of being sickened by it. Eating on an hourly schedule and, as part of his rules, eating additional quantities each time a McDonald's worker says the word "supersize," the subject gains weight. Following the release of the film Super Size Me, some people reported they had experienced no weight gain and suffered no ill effect by eating only at McDonald's for a month, but choosing menu items more judiciously and exercising frequently.Minimize Me Merab Morgan, a North Carolina woman, was even able to lose weight.Woman loses 33 lb on McDonald's diet She claimed that the transparency of nutritional information made it easy to control her daily caloric intake. Global impact McDonald's has become emblematic of globalization, sometimes referred as the "McDonaldization" of society. The Economist magazine uses the "Big Mac Index": the comparison of a Big Mac's cost in various world currencies can be used to informally judge these currencies' purchasing power parity. Because McDonald's is closely identified with American culture and lifestyle, its international business expansion has been termed[by who?] part of Americanization and American cultural imperialism. McDonald's is a perpetual target of various and often conflicting anti-globalization protests worldwide. The brand is known informally as "Mickey D's" (in the US and Canada), "Macky D's" (in the UK), "McDo" (in France, Quebec, the Philippines, and the Kansai region of Japan), "Maccer's" (in Ireland), "Maccas" (in New Zealand and Australia) or "de Mac" (in the Netherlands). Thomas Friedman once said that no country with a McDonald's had gone to war with another.[8] However, the "Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention" is not strictly true. Careful historians point to the 1989 United States invasion of Panama, when NATO bombed Serbia in 1999, and the 2006 Lebanon War as exceptions. Some observers have suggested that the company should be given credit for increasing the standard of service in markets that it enters. A group of anthropologists in a study entitled Golden Arches East (Stanford University Press, 1998, edited by James L. Watson) looked at the impact McDonald's had on East Asia, and Hong Kong in particular. When it opened in Hong Kong in 1975, McDonald's was the first restaurant to consistently offer clean restrooms, driving customers to demand the same of other restaurants and institutions. In East Asia in particular, McDonald's have become a symbol for the desire to embrace Western cultural norms. McDonald's have recently taken to partnering up with Sinopec, China's second largest oil company, in the People's Republic of China, as it begins to take advantage of China's growing use of personal vehicles by opening numerous drive-thru restaurants. [9] In addition to its effect on business standards, McDonald's has also been instrumental in changing local customs. By popularizing the idea of a quick restaurant meal, Watson's study suggests, McDonald's led to the easing or elimination of various taboos, such as eating while walking in Japan.[dubious – discuss] CriticismPotted plants at a McDonald's. The company has been a target of criticism practically since its inception. Since the mid-1990s this protest has taken the form of an anti-globalization movement as documented in Naomi Klein's manifesto No Logo. McDonald's restaurants have been the targets of protests, peaceful and otherwise, by environmental, anti-globalization and animal rights activists. The company has used a litigious approach to protecting its business interests. This conflict, and the company's approach to resolving it, was epitomized in the early 1990s by what came to be known as the McLibel case. Two British activists, David Morris and Helen Steel, distributed leaflets entitled What's wrong with McDonald's? on the streets of London. McDonald's wrote to Steel and Morris demanding they desist and apologize, and, when they refused, sued them for libel. The trial lasted more than two years. The company's advertising techniques and business practices were scrutinized in the High Court of Justice in London and reported extensively in the press, who saw the case as a David and Goliath battle (under UK law, legal aid could not be granted for a defamation suit, so Steel and Morris did most of their own legal casework while McDonald's was represented by an extensive legal team). In June 1997, the judge ruled in favor of McDonald's, awarding the company £60,000 damages, which was later reduced to £40,000 by the Court of Appeal. The amount was low because the judge ruled that some of the claims made by Morris and Steel had been proved, including that McDonald's exploited children in its advertising, was anti-trade union and indirectly exploited and caused suffering to animals. Steel and Morris announced they had no intention of ever paying, and the company later confirmed it would not be pursuing the money. Steel and Morris later successfully challenged UK libel law in the European Court, arguing that it was an infringement of the right to free speech. The British Government was forced to re-write the legislation as a result. In 2005, a film by Ken Loach was made about the court case. In 2001, Eric Schlosser's book Fast Food Nation included criticism of McDonald's' business practices. Among the critiques are allegations that McDonald's (along with other companies within the fast-food industry) uses its political influence to increase their own profits at the expense of people's health and the social conditions of its workers. The book also brings into question McDonald's advertisement techniques where it targets children. While the book does mention other fast-food chains, it focuses primarily on McDonald's. In 2002, vegetarian groups, largely Hindu, successfully sued McDonald's for misrepresenting their French fries as vegetarian.[10] Even after the discontinuation of frying the French fries in beef tallow in 1990, the French fries still had beef extract added to them. The French fries sold in the U.S. still contain beef and animal flavoring. McDonald's biscuits also contain beef flavoring along with animal flavoring. Also in 2004, Morgan Spurlock's documentary film Super Size Me said that McDonald's food was contributing to the epidemic of obesity in society, and failing to provide nutritional information about its food for its customers. For 30 days Spurlock ate nothing but McDonald's (supersizing whenever asked). He ate everything on the menu at least once and continued to eat after he was full. At the same time he consciously attempted to get little or no exercise. By the end of the month he had gained 24.5 pounds (11.11 kg), was moody and had less interest in sex. Others have disputed Spurlock's claims (see below). After the film was shown at the Sundance Film Festival, but before its cinematic release, McDonald's stated it was phasing out its Supersize meal option and would begin offering several healthier menu items, though no link to the film was cited in this decision. However, while the healthier menu items have appeared, the Supersize meal option still remains available at some locations. The company also began a practice of putting nutritional information for all menu items in light grey small print on the reverse of their tray liners. It is currently phasing in nutritional labeling in clear black print on the actual packaging of its food items. Anthony Bourdain on his show, No Reservations, has criticised McDonald's among other fast-food restaurants for its culinary blandness. Legal challenge over trans fats In September 2002, McDonald’s announced it was voluntarily reducing the trans fat content of its cooking oil by February 2003. Because of operational problems, the oil was not changed on time. In the ensuing lawsuits, plaintiffs claimed that McDonald’s didn't do enough to inform the public that the oil was not changed. The bantransfat.com website contains testimonials from people, one claims she thought the oil was low in trans fat, and she said, "that is why I have been eating there every week..." In a settlement agreement, bantransfat.com said "While there is a difference of opinion regarding whether McDonald’s gave effective notice to its customers that the oil was not changed, McDonald’s deserves recognition and credit for having achieved a reduction in the trans fat levels ... and for working diligently over the last two years to test additional cooking oils." Nevertheless, bantransfat.com demanded monetary damages. Settlement of the lawsuit brought by BanTransFats.com and one private party requires McDonald’s spend up to $1.5 million to publish notices on the status of its trans fat initiative. McDonald’s will also donate $7 million to the American Heart Association for public education about trans fat. [3]. The settlement also requires some money be paid directly to bantransfat.com. The California Superior Court for Marin County has entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement. Supporters of McDonald's point out that the company is successful because it meets the needs of customers and adapts to its customers wants. In response to public pressure, McDonald's has sought to include more healthy choices in its menu and has introduced a new slogan to its recruitment posters: "Not bad for a McJob". (The word McJob, first attested in the mid-1980s[11] and later popularized by Canadian novelist Douglas Coupland in his book Generation X, has become a buzz word for low-paid, unskilled work with few prospects or benefits and little security.) McDonald's disputes the idea that its restaurant jobs have no prospects, noting that its CEO, Jim Skinner, started working at the company as a regular restaurant employee, and that 20 of its top 50 managers began work as regular crew members. [12] In 2007, the company launched an advertising campaign with the slogan "Would you like a career with that?" on Irish television, outlining that their jobs have many prospects. In a bid to tap into growing consumer interest in the provenance of food, the fast-food chain recently switched its supply of both coffee beans and milk. UK chief executive Steve Easterbrook said: “British consumers are increasingly interested in the quality, sourcing and ethics of the food and drink they buy". McDonald's coffee is now brewed from beans taken from stocks that have been certified by the conservation group the Rainforest Alliance. Similarly, milk supplies used for its hot drinks and milkshakes have been switched to organic sources which could account for 5% of the UK's organic milk output[13]. In other cases, the firm has shown itself ready to adjust its business practices. When the public became concerned that product packaging was environmentally damaging, McDonald's started a joint project with Friends of the Earth to eliminate the use of polystyrene containers, only in the United States, and to reduce the amount of waste produced. Throughout the McLibel trial, senior representatives of the firm said they were merely trying to protect its image from undue and unfounded attack. With regard to its numerous and often controversial copyright and trademark actions, McDonald's lawyers say they are simply protecting the company's intellectual property. Super Size Me has been characterized as a non-scientific publicity stunt. The subject of the film consumes massive quantities of McDonald's food, to the point of being sickened by it. Eating on an hourly schedule and, as part of his rules, eating additional quantities each time a McDonald's worker says the word "supersize," the subject gains weight. Following the release of the film Super Size Me, some people reported they had experienced no weight gain and suffered no ill effect by eating only at McDonald's for a month, but choosing menu items more judiciously and exercising frequently.Minimize Me Merab Morgan, a North Carolina woman, was even able to lose weight.Woman loses 33 lb on McDonald's diet She claimed that the transparency of nutritional information made it easy to control her daily caloric intake. Global impact McDonald's has become emblematic of globalization, sometimes referred as the "McDonaldization" of society. The Economist magazine uses the "Big Mac Index": the comparison of a Big Mac's cost in various world currencies can be used to informally judge these currencies' purchasing power parity. Because McDonald's is closely identified with American culture and lifestyle, its international business expansion has been termed[by who?] part of Americanization and American cultural imperialism. McDonald's is a perpetual target of various and often conflicting anti-globalization protests worldwide. The brand is known informally as "Mickey D's" (in the US and Canada), "Macky D's" (in the UK), "McDo" (in France, Quebec, the Philippines, and the Kansai region of Japan), "Maccer's" (in Ireland), "Maccas" (in New Zealand and Australia) or "de Mac" (in the Netherlands). Thomas Friedman once said that no country with a McDonald's had gone to war with another.[8] However, the "Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention" is not strictly true. Careful historians point to the 1989 United States invasion of Panama, when NATO bombed Serbia in 1999, and the 2006 Lebanon War as exceptions. Some observers have suggested that the company should be given credit for increasing the standard of service in markets that it enters. A group of anthropologists in a study entitled Golden Arches East (Stanford University Press, 1998, edited by James L. Watson) looked at the impact McDonald's had on East Asia, and Hong Kong in particular. When it opened in Hong Kong in 1975, McDonald's was the first restaurant to consistently offer clean restrooms, driving customers to demand the same of other restaurants and institutions. In East Asia in particular, McDonald's have become a symbol for the desire to embrace Western cultural norms. McDonald's have recently taken to partnering up with Sinopec, China's second largest oil company, in the People's Republic of China, as it begins to take advantage of China's growing use of personal vehicles by opening numerous drive-thru restaurants. [9] In addition to its effect on business standards, McDonald's has also been instrumental in changing local customs. By popularizing the idea of a quick restaurant meal, Watson's study suggests, McDonald's led to the easing or elimination of various taboos, such as eating while walking in Japan.[dubious – discuss] CriticismPotted plants at a McDonald's. The company has been a target of criticism practically since its inception. Since the mid-1990s this protest has taken the form of an anti-globalization movement as documented in Naomi Klein's manifesto No Logo. McDonald's restaurants have been the targets of protests, peaceful and otherwise, by environmental, anti-globalization and animal rights activists. The company has used a litigious approach to protecting its business interests. This conflict, and the company's approach to resolving it, was epitomized in the early 1990s by what came to be known as the McLibel case. Two British activists, David Morris and Helen Steel, distributed leaflets entitled What's wrong with McDonald's? on the streets of London. McDonald's wrote to Steel and Morris demanding they desist and apologize, and, when they refused, sued them for libel. The trial lasted more than two years. The company's advertising techniques and business practices were scrutinized in the High Court of Justice in London and reported extensively in the press, who saw the case as a David and Goliath battle (under UK law, legal aid could not be granted for a defamation suit, so Steel and Morris did most of their own legal casework while McDonald's was represented by an extensive legal team). In June 1997, the judge ruled in favor of McDonald's, awarding the company £60,000 damages, which was later reduced to £40,000 by the Court of Appeal. The amount was low because the judge ruled that some of the claims made by Morris and Steel had been proved, including that McDonald's exploited children in its advertising, was anti-trade union and indirectly exploited and caused suffering to animals. Steel and Morris announced they had no intention of ever paying, and the company later confirmed it would not be pursuing the money. Steel and Morris later successfully challenged UK libel law in the European Court, arguing that it was an infringement of the right to free speech. The British Government was forced to re-write the legislation as a result. In 2005, a film by Ken Loach was made about the court case. In 2001, Eric Schlosser's book Fast Food Nation included criticism of McDonald's' business practices. Among the critiques are allegations that McDonald's (along with other companies within the fast-food industry) uses its political influence to increase their own profits at the expense of people's health and the social conditions of its workers. The book also brings into question McDonald's advertisement techniques where it targets children. While the book does mention other fast-food chains, it focuses primarily on McDonald's. In 2002, vegetarian groups, largely Hindu, successfully sued McDonald's for misrepresenting their French fries as vegetarian.[10] Even after the discontinuation of frying the French fries in beef tallow in 1990, the French fries still had beef extract added to them. The French fries sold in the U.S. still contain beef and animal flavoring. McDonald's biscuits also contain beef flavoring along with animal flavoring. Also in 2004, Morgan Spurlock's documentary film Super Size Me said that McDonald's food was contributing to the epidemic of obesity in society, and failing to provide nutritional information about its food for its customers. For 30 days Spurlock ate nothing but McDonald's (supersizing whenever asked). He ate everything on the menu at least once and continued to eat after he was full. At the same time he consciously attempted to get little or no exercise. By the end of the month he had gained 24.5 pounds (11.11 kg), was moody and had less interest in sex. Others have disputed Spurlock's claims (see below). After the film was shown at the Sundance Film Festival, but before its cinematic release, McDonald's stated it was phasing out its Supersize meal option and would begin offering several healthier menu items, though no link to the film was cited in this decision. However, while the healthier menu items have appeared, the Supersize meal option still remains available at some locations. The company also began a practice of putting nutritional information for all menu items in light grey small print on the reverse of their tray liners. It is currently phasing in nutritional labeling in clear black print on the actual packaging of its food items. Anthony Bourdain on his show, No Reservations, has criticised McDonald's among other fast-food restaurants for its culinary blandness. Legal challenge over trans fats In September 2002, McDonald’s announced it was voluntarily reducing the trans fat content of its cooking oil by February 2003. Because of operational problems, the oil was not changed on time. In the ensuing lawsuits, plaintiffs claimed that McDonald’s didn't do enough to inform the public that the oil was not changed. The bantransfat.com website contains testimonials from people, one claims she thought the oil was low in trans fat, and she said, "that is why I have been eating there every week..." In a settlement agreement, bantransfat.com said "While there is a difference of opinion regarding whether McDonald’s gave effective notice to its customers that the oil was not changed, McDonald’s deserves recognition and credit for having achieved a reduction in the trans fat levels ... and for working diligently over the last two years to test additional cooking oils." Nevertheless, bantransfat.com demanded monetary damages. Settlement of the lawsuit brought by BanTransFats.com and one private party requires McDonald’s spend up to $1.5 million to publish notices on the status of its trans fat initiative. McDonald’s will also donate $7 million to the American Heart Association for public education about trans fat. [3]. The settlement also requires some money be paid directly to bantransfat.com. The California Superior Court for Marin County has entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement. Supporters of McDonald's point out that the company is successful because it meets the needs of customers and adapts to its customers wants. In response to public pressure, McDonald's has sought to include more healthy choices in its menu and has introduced a new slogan to its recruitment posters: "Not bad for a McJob". (The word McJob, first attested in the mid-1980s[11] and later popularized by Canadian novelist Douglas Coupland in his book Generation X, has become a buzz word for low-paid, unskilled work with few prospects or benefits and little security.) McDonald's disputes the idea that its restaurant jobs have no prospects, noting that its CEO, Jim Skinner, started working at the company as a regular restaurant employee, and that 20 of its top 50 managers began work as regular crew members. [12] In 2007, the company launched an advertising campaign with the slogan "Would you like a career with that?" on Irish television, outlining that their jobs have many prospects. In a bid to tap into growing consumer interest in the provenance of food, the fast-food chain recently switched its supply of both coffee beans and milk. UK chief executive Steve Easterbrook said: “British consumers are increasingly interested in the quality, sourcing and ethics of the food and drink they buy". McDonald's coffee is now brewed from beans taken from stocks that have been certified by the conservation group the Rainforest Alliance. Similarly, milk supplies used for its hot drinks and milkshakes have been switched to organic sources which could account for 5% of the UK's organic milk output[13]. In other cases, the firm has shown itself ready to adjust its business practices. When the public became concerned that product packaging was environmentally damaging, McDonald's started a joint project with Friends of the Earth to eliminate the use of polystyrene containers, only in the United States, and to reduce the amount of waste produced. Throughout the McLibel trial, senior representatives of the firm said they were merely trying to protect its image from undue and unfounded attack. With regard to its numerous and often controversial copyright and trademark actions, McDonald's lawyers say they are simply protecting the company's intellectual property. Super Size Me has been characterized as a non-scientific publicity stunt. The subject of the film consumes massive quantities of McDonald's food, to the point of being sickened by it. Eating on an hourly schedule and, as part of his rules, eating additional quantities each time a McDonald's worker says the word "supersize," the subject gains weight. Following the release of the film Super Size Me, some people reported they had experienced no weight gain and suffered no ill effect by eating only at McDonald's for a month, but choosing menu items more judiciously and exercising frequently.Minimize Me Merab Morgan, a North Carolina woman, was even able to lose weight.Woman loses 33 lb on McDonald's diet She claimed that the transparency of nutritional information made it easy to control her daily caloric intake. Global impact McDonald's has become emblematic of globalization, sometimes referred as the "McDonaldization" of society. The Economist magazine uses the "Big Mac Index": the comparison of a Big Mac's cost in various world currencies can be used to informally judge these currencies' purchasing power parity. Because McDonald's is closely identified with American culture and lifestyle, its international business expansion has been termed[by who?] part of Americanization and American cultural imperialism. McDonald's is a perpetual target of various and often conflicting anti-globalization protests worldwide. The brand is known informally as "Mickey D's" (in the US and Canada), "Macky D's" (in the UK), "McDo" (in France, Quebec, the Philippines, and the Kansai region of Japan), "Maccer's" (in Ireland), "Maccas" (in New Zealand and Australia) or "de Mac" (in the Netherlands). Thomas Friedman once said that no country with a McDonald's had gone to war with another.[8] However, the "Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention" is not strictly true. Careful historians point to the 1989 United States invasion of Panama, when NATO bombed Serbia in 1999, and the 2006 Lebanon War as exceptions. Some observers have suggested that the company should be given credit for increasing the standard of service in markets that it enters. A group of anthropologists in a study entitled Golden Arches East (Stanford University Press, 1998, edited by James L. Watson) looked at the impact McDonald's had on East Asia, and Hong Kong in particular. When it opened in Hong Kong in 1975, McDonald's was the first restaurant to consistently offer clean restrooms, driving customers to demand the same of other restaurants and institutions. In East Asia in particular, McDonald's have become a symbol for the desire to embrace Western cultural norms. McDonald's have recently taken to partnering up with Sinopec, China's second largest oil company, in the People's Republic of China, as it begins to take advantage of China's growing use of personal vehicles by opening numerous drive-thru restaurants. [9] In addition to its effect on business standards, McDonald's has also been instrumental in changing local customs. By popularizing the idea of a quick restaurant meal, Watson's study suggests, McDonald's led to the easing or elimination of various taboos, such as eating while walking in Japan.[dubious – discuss] CriticismPotted plants at a McDonald's. The company has been a target of criticism practically since its inception. Since the mid-1990s this protest has taken the form of an anti-globalization movement as documented in Naomi Klein's manifesto No Logo. McDonald's restaurants have been the targets of protests, peaceful and otherwise, by environmental, anti-globalization and animal rights activists. The company has used a litigious approach to protecting its business interests. This conflict, and the company's approach to resolving it, was epitomized in the early 1990s by what came to be known as the McLibel case. Two British activists, David Morris and Helen Steel, distributed leaflets entitled What's wrong with McDonald's? on the streets of London. McDonald's wrote to Steel and Morris demanding they desist and apologize, and, when they refused, sued them for libel. The trial lasted more than two years. The company's advertising techniques and business practices were scrutinized in the High Court of Justice in London and reported extensively in the press, who saw the case as a David and Goliath battle (under UK law, legal aid could not be granted for a defamation suit, so Steel and Morris did most of their own legal casework while McDonald's was represented by an extensive legal team). In June 1997, the judge ruled in favor of McDonald's, awarding the company £60,000 damages, which was later reduced to £40,000 by the Court of Appeal. The amount was low because the judge ruled that some of the claims made by Morris and Steel had been proved, including that McDonald's exploited children in its advertising, was anti-trade union and indirectly exploited and caused suffering to animals. Steel and Morris announced they had no intention of ever paying, and the company later confirmed it would not be pursuing the money. Steel and Morris later successfully challenged UK libel law in the European Court, arguing that it was an infringement of the right to free speech. The British Government was forced to re-write the legislation as a result. In 2005, a film by Ken Loach was made about the court case. In 2001, Eric Schlosser's book Fast Food Nation included criticism of McDonald's' business practices. Among the critiques are allegations that McDonald's (along with other companies within the fast-food industry) uses its political influence to increase their own profits at the expense of people's health and the social conditions of its workers. The book also brings into question McDonald's advertisement techniques where it targets children. While the book does mention other fast-food chains, it focuses primarily on McDonald's. In 2002, vegetarian groups, largely Hindu, successfully sued McDonald's for misrepresenting their French fries as vegetarian.[10] Even after the discontinuation of frying the French fries in beef tallow in 1990, the French fries still had beef extract added to them. The French fries sold in the U.S. still contain beef and animal flavoring. McDonald's biscuits also contain beef flavoring along with animal flavoring. Also in 2004, Morgan Spurlock's documentary film Super Size Me said that McDonald's food was contributing to the epidemic of obesity in society, and failing to provide nutritional information about its food for its customers. For 30 days Spurlock ate nothing but McDonald's (supersizing whenever asked). He ate everything on the menu at least once and continued to eat after he was full. At the same time he consciously attempted to get little or no exercise. By the end of the month he had gained 24.5 pounds (11.11 kg), was moody and had less interest in sex. Others have disputed Spurlock's claims (see below). After the film was shown at the Sundance Film Festival, but before its cinematic release, McDonald's stated it was phasing out its Supersize meal option and would begin offering several healthier menu items, though no link to the film was cited in this decision. However, while the healthier menu items have appeared, the Supersize meal option still remains available at some locations. The company also began a practice of putting nutritional information for all menu items in light grey small print on the reverse of their tray liners. It is currently phasing in nutritional labeling in clear black print on the actual packaging of its food items. Anthony Bourdain on his show, No Reservations, has criticised McDonald's among other fast-food restaurants for its culinary blandness. Legal challenge over trans fats In September 2002, McDonald’s announced it was voluntarily reducing the trans fat content of its cooking oil by February 2003. Because of operational problems, the oil was not changed on time. In the ensuing lawsuits, plaintiffs claimed that McDonald’s didn't do enough to inform the public that the oil was not changed. The bantransfat.com website contains testimonials from people, one claims she thought the oil was low in trans fat, and she said, "that is why I have been eating there every week..." In a settlement agreement, bantransfat.com said "While there is a difference of opinion regarding whether McDonald’s gave effective notice to its customers that the oil was not changed, McDonald’s deserves recognition and credit for having achieved a reduction in the trans fat levels ... and for working diligently over the last two years to test additional cooking oils." Nevertheless, bantransfat.com demanded monetary damages. Settlement of the lawsuit brought by BanTransFats.com and one private party requires McDonald’s spend up to $1.5 million to publish notices on the status of its trans fat initiative. McDonald’s will also donate $7 million to the American Heart Association for public education about trans fat. [3]. The settlement also requires some money be paid directly to bantransfat.com. The California Superior Court for Marin County has entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement. Supporters of McDonald's point out that the company is successful because it meets the needs of customers and adapts to its customers wants. In response to public pressure, McDonald's has sought to include more healthy choices in its menu and has introduced a new slogan to its recruitment posters: "Not bad for a McJob". (The word McJob, first attested in the mid-1980s[11] and later popularized by Canadian novelist Douglas Coupland in his book Generation X, has become a buzz word for low-paid, unskilled work with few prospects or benefits and little security.) McDonald's disputes the idea that its restaurant jobs have no prospects, noting that its CEO, Jim Skinner, started working at the company as a regular restaurant employee, and that 20 of its top 50 managers began work as regular crew members. [12] In 2007, the company launched an advertising campaign with the slogan "Would you like a career with that?" on Irish television, outlining that their jobs have many prospects. In a bid to tap into growing consumer interest in the provenance of food, the fast-food chain recently switched its supply of both coffee beans and milk. UK chief executive Steve Easterbrook said: “British consumers are increasingly interested in the quality, sourcing and ethics of the food and drink they buy". McDonald's coffee is now brewed from beans taken from stocks that have been certified by the conservation group the Rainforest Alliance. Similarly, milk supplies used for its hot drinks and milkshakes have been switched to organic sources which could account for 5% of the UK's organic milk output[13]. In other cases, the firm has shown itself ready to adjust its business practices. When the public became concerned that product packaging was environmentally damaging, McDonald's started a joint project with Friends of the Earth to eliminate the use of polystyrene containers, only in the United States, and to reduce the amount of waste produced. Throughout the McLibel trial, senior representatives of the firm said they were merely trying to protect its image from undue and unfounded attack. With regard to its numerous and often controversial copyright and trademark actions, McDonald's lawyers say they are simply protecting the company's intellectual property. Super Size Me has been characterized as a non-scientific publicity stunt. The subject of the film consumes massive quantities of McDonald's food, to the point of being sickened by it. Eating on an hourly schedule and, as part of his rules, eating additional quantities each time a McDonald's worker says the word "supersize," the subject gains weight. Following the release of the film Super Size Me, some people reported they had experienced no weight gain and suffered no ill effect by eating only at McDonald's for a month, but choosing menu items more judiciously and exercising frequently.Minimize Me Merab Morgan, a North Carolina woman, was even able to lose weight.Woman loses 33 lb on McDonald's diet She claimed that the transparency of nutritional information made it easy to control her daily caloric intake.

5 history questions! Anyone who can help? 5. What was the U.S. response to the Communist takeover of China? (1 point) the development of a hydrogen bomb the formation of NATO greater efforts to protect the rest of Asia massive aid to Nationalist China 6. Congress sought to root out suspected Communists in the government through (1 point) the McCarran-Walter Act. the House Un-American Activities Committee. the Hollywood Ten. the blacklist. 7. The north Korean invasion of South Korea was an attempt to (1 point) drive out American forces. fight Chinese forces. remove the 38th parallel line. unify all of Korea. 8. What was one of the effects of the Korean War? (1 point) Improved relations with China The military was integrated Defense spending declined General Douglas MacArthur was promoted 9. Senator Joseph McCarthy spread suspicion and fear of communism when he (1 point) denounced the Cold War. accused other senators of treason. used smear tactics and untrue accusations. found Communists in the State Department. 10. The United States and the Soviet Union struggled for world leadership by (1 point) confronting each other in Europe. settling conflicts in the Middle East. engaging in an arms race. avoiding war at all costs.