Trench Warfare In 1914

Trench Warfare In 1914 World War I began in 1914 and lasted up until 1918; the war involved two sides which were entitled the Central Powers and the Allies. The Allied powers consisted of: France, the British Empire, the Russian Empire, Italy, United States, Japan, Romania, Serbia Belgium, Greece, and Portugal. The Central Powers consisted of: the German Empire, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and Bulgaria. Many factors led up World War I such as nationalism, imperialism, and the assassination in Sarajevo. The Western Front was quickly lined with trenches producing a stalemate for most of the war. With the introduction of these deadly trenches it soon brought new devastating tactics such as poison gas, hand grenades, tanks, and heavy mortar attacks.  [1]  During World War I trench warfare had significant and lasting effects on soldiers due to the devastating and horrid conditions. Over two hundred thousand men died in the trenches during World War I.  [2]  Trench warfare was first started during the development of rapid firing small firearms and artillery strikes. With these new developments it made infantry charges a lot less effective and impracticable, thus bringing stalemate to both sides. Trench warfare was a type of fighting were soldiers on both sides stayed in trenches to avoid enemy fire. The soldiers built their beds into the side of the trenches. They dug holes in the ground to use as bathrooms. In order to get around in the trenches they needed to walk on boards to keep from sinking in the soft soil. If a solder should lift his head above the trench he would risk being shot by an enemy sniper. The trenches that were constructed were made in a zigzag pattern, never being in a straight line, and were approximately twelve feet deep. By being dug in a zigzag pattern it made it so it was not possible to see more then ten feet down the trench. The re ason being was so that if the trench was infiltrated with enemies the enemy would not be able to gain access to the hole trench, but rather only one point Another reason for the zigzagged trenches was to compress a bomb or bomb shell if it landed in the trench. Death within the trenches was a continuous cycle that never ended, even with the absence of any raids that were launched by the enemy. Nonstop artillery attacks were set out by the enemies directed at the trenches brought unsystematic death to men that were either relaxing in the dugout and laid flat down in the trench.  [1]  New soldiers that had never been in trenches were often killed due to curiosity while looking over the trenches into no mans land. Millions of rats infested trenches of World War I. With so many rats infesting the trenches they were eventually classified into type types of rats, the brown rat and the black rat. The rats could grow up to the size of a cat by crawling into the corpses of dead bodies and eating their internal parts, completely changing the dead soldiers appetence.  [2]  Soldiers, becoming exhausted and afraid of the rats, tried many different ways to kill them such as hitting them to death, shooting them, and even using the bayonets at the end of their guns. Rats could produce up to nine hundred offspring a year which would later on spread infections within the trenches and contaminate foods. Lice were among many of the other problems faced in trench warfare. Lice would breed and lay eggs in fine seem of the soldiers clothing, causing them to start to itch. Although clothes were washed from time to time this did not stop the spread of lice eggs. As soon as the clothes were washed the eggs would still remain hidden in the seams and hatch because of the steamy weather. Trench Fever was a diseased caused by the lice. The disease first started off with excruciating pain and then progress into a high fever. To recover from Trench Fever soldiers had to be sent away from the trenches to recuperate, which took around twelve weeks. It was not until the end of the war until lice were finally identified as the cause of Trench Fever. Another diseased cause by trench warfare was Trench Foot. The cause for Foot Fever was the unhygienic conditions of the trenches and the cold, wet ground. If it got worse enough the foot many times, would have been amputated. By 1915 the sanitary conditi ons of trenches improves and the cases of Trench Foot went down.  [1]   The soldiers were under heavy watch by snipers and enemy look outs during the day which required them to keep their heads down and limit activity. When nightfall arrived men continued on with their assigned duties, once done they were aloud to go and concentrate on more personal issues. Soldiers would writer letters home, write diaries and read books to cure their boredom in the trenches. No synopsis of trench warfare can skip generalization of the deadly smell in the trenches in which the soldiers first encountered when they got to the trenches for the first time. There were thousands upon thousands of dead bodies lining the battlefield rotting giving off a horrible stench. For instance, two hundred thousand bodies lay out in No Mans Land after the Battle of Somme. The feet were told to give off the most horrific smell of all, because men most times, did not have shoes that were in good condition, if they had a pair at all. Areas designated for the soldiers to go to the bathroom were overflowing, consequently giving off a horrible order. Soldiers who had not been able to have the comfort of bathing themselves would give off a reeking smell of dried sweat. The smell of creosol and chloride of lime, used as disinfectants, stained the disgusting air. Include the smell of cordite, the persistent aroma of poison gas, rotting sandbags, heavy mud, cigarette smoke and cookin g food even though it overwhelmed the newcomers to the trenches, many of the men soon got use to it. Along with these few examples consisted the smell of gun powered, poisonous gas, cigarette smoke, cooking food, mud, and rotting sandbags all of which turned the smell of the air into a common enemy for both sides.  [1]   Each morning after breakfast each man would be inspected by a superior commander. Once inspection was done thee commanders would then assign each soldier their daily chores, except for men who had a medical excuse or various excuses.  [2]  Many chores within the trenches consisted of refilling the sandbags, repairing the trench boards that lined the floors in the inside, and draining the trench of an access of water. Especially after rain downfall the trenches consumed a lot of muddy rain water; this made the trenches very weak and the walls unstable. To solve this problem men were assigned to use the pumping equipment, if the damage was too bad then a group of men would be told to actually repair the trench. With the arrival of dusk the cycle of stand off was started to protect the trenches from any attacks during the night in the dark. During this time the trenches become enlightened with activity as men executed various activities. Although the enemy would always be on the look out and it was still fairly dangerous maintained and supply activities were performed To get their rations of food, the soldiers would be sent to the back of the lines to gather the little food they were given. In addition soldiers would be assigned fire step duty. Fire steps were mounds of dirt used to boost up the soldiers to peer over the sandbags. A man was generally expected to be on duty guarding for attacks for two hours. The reason men were only expected to serve two hour shifts would be because the commanders didnt want to risk a man falling asleep while on duty. If on fire step duty and a soldier were to fall asleep then the penalty would be death by firing squad. The system in which the trenches were made had a specific order in where they were placed and why. The Allied had a main system of four different types of trenches. The first lines of trenches were located 50 yards to a mile from the German front line of trenches, often called the attacking or firing trenches.  [1]  Positioned in the rear, the front trenches were the support trenches, which were usually several hundred yards away. The support trenches had the job to provide the front trenches with more men and supplies. Behind the support trenches contained another line of trenches called the reserved trenches. The reserve trenches were several hundred yards away further behind support trenches. The meaning for the reserve trenches was for it to be supplied with men and emergency supplies incase there was an invasion of the first two rows, the front and support trenches. The fourth type of trench, the communication trenches, was used to transport messages, men, and supplies betwe en the various trenches. To attach the bunkers and gun storages the trenches often had underground networks to join them to the communication trenches. The trench system in which the Germans adopted was a lot more glamorous so to speak. The Germans built complex and more refined tunnels and trench structures.  [1]  Some living quarters within the trenches could be over fiftieth under the ground. The trenches in which the Germans occupied consisted of electricity, beds, toilets, and needs in which was the total opposite of the Allied trenches. To break the deadlock of the war British came up with idea of a tank and started to develop plans to make them to break the stalemate of the war. During the Battle of Somme tanks were first used but only in limited numbers. Tanks, at first, were shown to be unreliable and ineffective largely because there was poor strategic and tactical planning. Some of the bad strategies involved were that the tanks were being spread too thinly on the ground. Also huge shell explosions made big holes within the ground and it created a great problem for the tanks of the time, they were still in the early stages of development and not that maneuverable.  [1]  Towards the end of World War I more improved concepts of tanks and strategys made them able to get through enemy lines and become an important component of war. Although trench warfare brought many negative aspects into World War I, it also had a few positively out looked specifics as well. The more modern idea, at the time, of open field fighting was soon lost due to the trenches. Mens lives wouldnt be simply washed away in open field combat where they lined up waiting for their lives to be taken. Although gruesome, trenches gave the men somewhere to sleep, eat, and have cover from open fire. After World War I the tanks design continued to get better and began to bring back the more mobile part of war once known before trench warfare. The use of tanks is still used up to this day with improved designs and tactics. The devastating conditions of trench warfare proved to be a major catastrophe in World War I. The construction of these huge holes in the earth was a long and very heavy labor required job. Conditions in these unsanitary trenches were infested with rats and lice which killed off two hundred thousand men alone in the Great War.  [2]  The feet were told to give off the most horrific smell of all, because men most times, did not have shoes that were in good condition, if they had a pair at all. Diseases plagued through the trenches from soldiers to soldier from lice and the wet cold floor of the twelve foot pits. Stand-off and other agonizing duties made life in the trenches hell on earth. The small rations of food were given to them and gave them barley anything, just enough to survive. A combination of air attacks, mortar bombardment, and tank invasions soon overcame trench warfare.  [3]  On the battlefield water was often found and depended on from contaminated water that collected in shell-holes and other hollow spaces which caused dysentery.

Music In The Movies: Experiencing Something New :: essays research papers fc

Question: â€Å"For the elements of music are not tones of such and such a pitch, duration and loudness, nor chords and measured beats; they are like all artistic elements, something virtual, created for perception . . .sounding forms in motion.† [Suzanne Langer, Feeling and Form (1952), p.107]. The success of music in film relies on the perceptions and interpretations of audiences based on their social experiences. Discuss. Response to Question: The function of film music is not easily defined. Film music is often associated with realizing the social experiences of the audience, such associations then leading into psychological and aesthetical discussion. Whether or not film music is examined as an analyzable art form, it is part of an audiovisual system that allows spectators to escape. If this is so, music is subliminal in the sense that it unconsciously prepares the spectator for the means by which to do so. Cinema events can allow audiences to perceive reality in a passive framework and therefore, the success of film music does not heavily rely upon interpretations of viewers’ social experiences. More to the point is the fact that film music allows a virtual reconstruction of ‘experience’ along with the proposal of new ones. If cinema accommodates the invention of virtual social experiences, then by what means does the music contribute to this? An understanding of the relationship between music and the cinematic world of the ‘make believe’ will help to answer this question. Film music can allow far-fetched ideas to become plausible. Alien attacks, shootings, murders and court room hearings are not usually associated with the vocabularies of our everyday social experiences, so how can cinema extrapolate such experiences so realistically? Music certainly has an important role. Suzanne Langer discusses in depth the associations between music and time. She suggests that: Music creates and image of time measure by the motion of forms that seem to give it substance, yet a substance that consists entirely of sound, so it is transitoriness itself. Music makes time audible, and its form and continuity sensible. Jean Mitry has similar ideas: Film needed a king of rhythmic beat to enable the audience to measure internally the psychological time for the drama, relating it to the basic sensation of real time. Consequently, film music can cover up the incoherencies between real time and virtual time. The relative time passed between events on screen can be expressed through the music. How else can a narrative spanning decades logically take place within and hour or two of film?

Math Facts Essay -- Education, The Arithmetic Gap

â€Å"Memorizing math facts is the most important step to understanding math. Math facts are the building blocks to all other math concepts and memorizing makes them readily available† (EHow Contributor, 2011). To clarify, a math fact is basic base-10 calculation of single digit numbers. Examples of basic math facts include addition and multiplication problems such as 1 + 1, 4 + 5, 3 x 5 and their opposites, 2 – 1, 9 – 4, 15/5(Marques, 2010 and Yermish, 2011). Typically, these facts are memorized at grade levels deemed appropriate to a student’s readiness – usually second or third grade for addition and subtraction and fourth grade for multiplication and division. If a child can say the answer to a math fact problem within a couple of seconds, this is considered mastery of the fact (Marques, 2010). Automaticity – the point at which something is automatic- is the goal when referring to math facts. Students are expected to be able to recall facts without spending time thinking about them, counting on their fingers, using manipulatives, etc (Yermish, 2011). . In order to become a fluent reader, a person must memorize the sounds that letters make and the sounds that those letters make when combined with other letters. Knowing math facts, combinations of numbers, is just as critical to becoming fluent in math. Numbers facts are to math as the alphabet is to reading, without them a person cannot fully succeed. (Yermish, 2011 and Marquez, 2010). A â€Å"known† fact is one that is â€Å"answered automatically and correctly without counting† (Greenwald, 2011). In order for a child to achieve academically, the child must master basic facts. A child's progress with problem-solving, algebra and higher-order math concepts is negatively impacted by a lack... ...wer but offer no assistance with learning a concept (Mahoney and Knowles, 2010). Automaticity of math facts is beneficial to all mathematics learning. Fortunately, there are ways to help students learn basic facts without skill and drill. Explicit strategy instruction is more effective than encouraging strict rote memorization (Woodward, 2006). Yet, many educators are unsure of how to help students master facts. Too many educators still have misconceptions of how students learn facts and how they commit them to long-term memory (Baroody, 1985). Some people argue that students no longer need to learn how to compute now that calculators are widely available. â€Å"While facility at one-digit computation is far from the primary aim of elementary school mathematics, it is an important skill that provides the foundation for many other topics†(Burton and Knifong, 1982).

The Afterlife of Frankenstein

The Frankenstein myth has produced over 2,600 pieces of derivative work and 100 films. Post-publication it was critiqued but not heavily. William Godwin, an old radical, was dedicatee on the anonymously published work and so association with him garnered rejections from conservative publications. There were questions over aspects of the novel reflecting preoccupations and values of the time. It was praised in some essays. All in kind showed some respect initially. Lawrence published his work and gained notoriety. Through being or fear of being associated with his work Mary Shelley revised her work n 1831 where se removed signs of his ideas. The first play appeared in 1823, Presumption, making three key changes from the novel: Frankenstein's religious remorse, the monster being mute and a comic servant called Fritz. It is a cautionary reading followed by The Demon of Switzerland. Before her own changes had been made, she had lost control over her own plot. Her edits were damage limitation. Conservative writers were interpreting it however they wanted knowing their readers agreed. She cut what The Quarterly wanted removed from Lawrence's work. The novel is the first in the mad-scientist genre. Victor has now become more corrupt. The creature is more sensationalised and dehumanised. Playwrights recognised problems in translating the play. The internal reasonings of Victor and the monster were cut. Walton's framing narrative couldn't be portrayed. The story became more visual. The monster became the star with more visual violence. There were also comic versions. The plays stay a lot truer to the original than most of the films. Silent films found it hard to translate the story onto screen. Thomas Edison's company created the first film version. James Whale arguably changed the story the most so far, basing his version on Peggy Webley's play. His monster supersedes all others. He introduces the image of Dr. Frankenstein, the Igor character, and the sensational creation scene which is rarely mentioned in the text. Victor is an arrogant grown man and not an unknowing youth. ‘Whale's sequel Bride of Frankenstein (1935), and later sequels Son of Frankenstein (1939), and Ghost of Frankenstein (1942) all continued the general theme of sensationalism, horror, and exaggeration, with the newly-dubbed Dr. Frankenstein and his parallels growing more and more sinister.' (Tourney) Later films became more diverted from the original meaning. He is a sexual pervert, a necrophiliac, opens up transsexual debate, bringing the focus back to the scientist, but not as the scientist of the original text. These films show us about its nature and how the populace views of science have evolved. How time changes our ideas and priorities to garner meaning from the text. Frankenstein has become a doting father in The Munsters, moved to television, become a household icon, As one of the famous Universal Monsters his recogniseable image has been transferred to all sorts of merchandise. He has appeared in comics and games and been referenced in music. The mad scientist trope has become familiar in science fiction. The name Frankenstein has spawned words, Frankensteinian and Franken- prefix can indicate something assembled out of parts or scientifically modified. He is a prominent figure at Halloween and other tropes such as creations falling out of one's control and rebirth through assembling parts are apparent in various mediums. Questions of Science are still resonant. How far should we go? This afterlife raises interesting questions over the nature of adaptation. In an age where most of us are exposed to images of the monster before ever reading the original text, how then does that affect our own interpretations of the myth? Questions arise over meaning through adaptation, but that is its nature. It is by definition of the Oxford English Dictionary ‘The action or process of adapting, fitting, or suiting one thing to another.' The medium has an effect on the message but so does the time period. Cinema is visual and the story has to be modified to suit this, but elements are also foregrounded or hyperbolised if they work well on screen. The adapter(s) interpret the original in a certain way and critics can also play a hand in this by influencing them also, emphasising certain ideas that the adapter may want to portray at the expense of others. My view is that a text's original meaning can never be fully understood and in an adaptation carries less importance because adaptations, like originals, are a reflection of their place in time. By reading a story we allow it to take shape within our minds, conceptualising it and instantly creating our own reproduction of it. Frankenstein means something different to everyone, all are reproductions. Criticism can alter that meaning and history can foreground certain ideas for it is always evolving. Interpretation is never static. We are the monster, he evolves with us. Adaptations are an amalgamation of views. A singular vision constructed through the collective consciousness, through the many people working on them, the critics that influenced them, society that imparte values onto them, the media and government that re-order their priorities. By its nature adaptation can never stay true to the original and that is a good thing. Were it even possible, would films be as interesting to us if it followed Shelley's text word for word and faithfully recreated all events? What is more interesting to us as students of literature is context. The context of a novel or a play or a film are the same, A text or interpretation gains meaning through where it lives historically.

Crippen case Essay

1. Why was the Crippen case important? †¢ It was one of the first forensic cases. 2. What was Crippen accused of? Why was he accused of this crime? †¢ Crippen was accused of killing his wife. He was accused of this crime because his wife suddenly disappeared, and his secretary moved in with him. 3. Why do you think people were so interested in Crippen’s case? †¢ I think people were so interested in the Crippen case because it was one of the first forensic cases and there was a lot of doubt. The case was reopened 100 years later to further investigate if he was actually guilty or not. 4. Why was forensic science important in Crippen’s trial? How was it used in the trial? †¢ Forensic science is important in the Crippen trial to help identify the victim and the evidence found. 5. What do modern forensic scientists find when they examine samples of the remains? †¢ The found out that it was a male when they examined the remains. 6. What other evidence linked Crippen to the remains in the cellar? †¢ There were bloodstains on a shirt, and they found the pair of pants in his room. 7. What other inconsistencies were found in the case when the evidence was re-examined? Why do you think these inconsistencies were ignored at the time of the Crippen trial? †¢ An inconsistency found in this case was the fact that after the victim was poisoned why were they cut up if it was supposed to look like a natural death. I think these inconsistences were ignored at the time because they weren’t as advanced with cases like that back in the day. 8. Do you think Crippen killed his wife? Why or why not? †¢ No I do not think Crippen killed his wife. There are a lot of inconsistencies involved in this case and there is no proof found that he killed her.

Chaucer’s Humor

Chaucer has been acclaimed as the first realist, the first humorist, the first narrative artist, the first great character-painter, and the first great metrical artist in English literature. But it is powerful and ubiquitous presence of Chaucer’s humour that makes him distinct among others writers and poets of English Literature hitherto. Chaucer perpetually observes or perceives the humorous side of any facade of human life. His humor is not constrained to his emotions but it encircles all of his interests, his beliefs, his whole being and his everything.If he manifests his knowledge and information about a wide variety of things, he also mocks, creates caricatures, parodies with the help of same knowledge. It seems that manifestation of knowledge in this way, he tries to relieve himself. For example, he shows his interest in astronomy and manifests its knowledge here and there in Canterbury Tales; he also utilizes his extensive and intensive knowledge of astrology as satiric al and mocking frequently. He has an unparalleled sense of humor.The main reason for this outstanding achievement is that his use of humor has an outstanding multiplicity and variety. Unlike most humorists, he does employ the tone of hyperbole and fantasy. He concentrates on the traits and aims at providing the real mirror images. Additionally, his least-cynical observation of realities of life and traits of human beings enables him to produced unparalleled humor. When this effort mingles with his in-depth knowledge of things and his witticism, humorist effect is created.He achieves humor through a variety of elements including plot, characterization, language, pace, and timing,. Fir example in ‘The Merchants Tale’, he does juxtaposes genre of courtly love and religion against each other and mocks them. Different precepts of courtly love are satirized by characterization and are undermined to an extent by effective utilization of images, descriptions and tone that it se ems comical and illogical.So there is no reason to deny the fact that a great deal of liveliness and reality in Chaucer’s poetry is due to his all-pervasive humor and he is unsurpassable in this art of creating humorous sketches and verbal renderings that represent a probably every facet of the contemporary life. Kemp Malone and Albert Croll Baugh observation that ‘Chaucer is sometimes denied the rank of a great poet, on the ground that he lacked higher seriousness, that his poetry is without great themes nobly conceived’ is true to some extent but not utterly.The assumption that his poetry is devoid of great themes is based on misconception. His major contribution towards the content of poetry is in his advocacy of and strict adherence to realism. His Canterbury Tales embodies a new effort in the history of literature, as it strictly deals with real men, manners, and life. He realized, to adopt Pope’s famous couplet (with a little change): Know then thyse lf: presume not dreams to scan, The proper study of mankind is man. And the product of this realization was The Canterbury Tales.This poem, as it were, holds a mirror to the life of Chaucer’s age and shows it manners and morals completely, â€Å"not in fragments†. Chaucer replaces effectively the shadowy delineations of the old romantic and allegorical school with the vivid and pulsating pictures of contemporary life. ( Brewer, 1978) Chaucer’s tone as a poet is wonderfully instinct with geniality, tolerance, humor, and freshness which are absent from that of his contemporaries and predecessors who are too dreamy or too serious to be interesting. References Brewer, Derek. Chaucer and his world. New York: Dodd, Mead, 1978.

Aaron Zuniga-Bennett Essay

In the early 1980s, the American people elected Ronald Reagan as President of the United States of America. Many people claim that Reagan was one of the greatest presidents of all time, while others believe that the country would have been much better off had Reagan never been elected. Regardless of their political preferences, it is undeniable that Ronald Reagan changed the world in the 1980s and his work as president will be forever remembered in the countless books of history. Ronald Reagan ran as a Republican and was the absolute spirit of a conservative. He worked to bring forth the ideal of conservatism in America and successfully captured and isolated that belief in the presidency. As president, Reagan worked to bring the ideal of American exceptionalism back to the country, to set the economy on the right track, and to end the Communist threat that had been present since the end of World War II. For all practical purposes, Ronald Reagan was a president who accomplished more t han he set forth to do and did so famously; some would say infamously. Nonetheless, Reagan accomplished more in his eight year presidency than most presidents of the 20th Century. He is widely hailed as the man who ended the Cold War and will forever be remembered as the man who led to the conservative resurgence in America. He was a man of profound ability and charm and America is better off for having Reagan as the Commander-in-Chief during the latter portion of the 20th Century. Ronald Reagan was born on February 6, 1911 in Tampico, Illinois. His mother, Nelle, was a homemaker; and his father, Jack, was a traveling salesman (Ronald Reagan). The Reagan family moved often as Jack searched throughout the state for work and Ronald Reagan grew up in a very poor family. Despite the hardships his family encountered, Reagan graduated from high school in Dixon, Illinois and earned a football scholarship to attend Eureka College (Reagan, â€Å"American Life† 43). After graduating from Eureka, Reagan pursued a career in Hollywood where he starred in over fifty movies and eventually became the president of the Screen Actors Guild. As president of the Screen Acto rs Guild, Reagan worked to remove all suspected Communists from Hollywood; all the while encouraging conservative values in the liberal slanted film industry. In 1964, the former actor, Ronald  Reagan, delivered a nationally televised political speech on behalf of conservative presidential candidate Barry Goldwater. The speech became one of Reagan’s most fundamental speeches that completely changed his life. In his speech, Reagan presented the country with his ideals of a perfect country, supported by his conservative values. He also spoke about how America needs a strong national defense, a reduction of taxes, and the need to defeat the Communist threat in the Soviet Union. He also stated, â€Å"We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope for man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness† (Reagan, â€Å"Speaking† 36). After his speech, Reagan was approached by many influential Republicans who urged him to run for Governor of California. His speech, on behalf of Barry Goldwater became one of his greatest triumphs. Reagan initially refused when he was asked to run for governor; nevertheless, many influential Republicans got together and formed a fundraising group called â€Å"Friends of Reagan.† They raise d a great deal of money and in 1966; Reagan defeated the needed Democrat Governor of California (What Would Reagan Do?). At that moment, his political career began and in 1981, Reagan assumed the role as President of the United States of America. Throughout his presidency, Reagan set America on a course to defeat the Communist threat in the Soviet Union, to boost military funding, to cut taxes, and to return optimism to the American people. Reagan worked relentlessly to accomplish his goals and in the process changed the world. Many of his critics view the 1980s as a decade of unmitigated wealth and greed; and they praise Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev for ending the Cold War. From the beginning of his presidency, Ronald Reagan worked to end the Cold War, not to appease the Soviets. Former presidents had worked to open relations with the Soviet Union. President Nixon had formed compromise and Carter worked to appease the Communists. However, â€Å"Reagan rejected Communism, dà ©tente, and containment, and set us on a course to win – not manage – the Cold War†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (The Great One). Reagan met several times with General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev of the Soviet Union, and together they worked to compromise and create treaties that would eliminate the threat of short range nuclear weapons. Many of the meetings with Gorbachev were productive, yet Reagan’s ideal of foreign policy was not as clearly defined as many of his critics may have wished.  The Reagan Administration dealt with foreign policy on the manner of â€Å"Peace through Strength,† they worked to isolate any world menace and to direct all immediate attention to that threat. This ideal of foreign policy worked to threaten the Soviet Union and to make them aware that any danger they may pose would be dealt with in a quick and decisive manner. In 1983, Reagan ordered the United States Marines to invade Grenada. A coup d’à ©tat was taking place and a revolutionary group was trying to take control of the government to align with the Marxist Soviet Union (Reagan, â€Å"American Lifeà ¢â‚¬  449). Although the troops were only in Grenada for a short period of time, they did suppress the threat of a Communist uprising and Reagan shocked the world with his tough stance on global threats. During his presidency, Reagan increased federal defense spending by 35 percent and began building nuclear weapons at an unprecedented rate (Ronald Reagan). In 1986, one American serviceman was killed in a bombing in Berlin that injured 63 other members of the American military. It became evident within hours that the terrorist attack had been planned and carried out by Mu’ammar Qadhafi, the leader of Libya. Reagan was quick to order an air raid on key ground targets in Libya. The strike was a success and many important buildings were destroyed. Reagan addressed the nation shortly after the air raid and made several comments that were illustrative of his firm stance against terrorist actions. He said, â€Å"When our citizens are abused or attacked anywhere in this world†¦ we will respond so long as I’m in this Oval Office,† and to terrorist leaders around the world he said, â€Å"He [Qadhafi] counted on America to be passive. He counted wrong† (Reagan, â€Å"Speaking† 288). With that speech, Reagan imposed his views upon the world and he let the country know that he would not succumb to any foreign national threat. For all practical purposes, nearly all of the military actions of the 1980s were directed in some manner towards the Soviet Union. The preemptive attacks on Grenada and Libya were used as threats against the Soviet Union and were meant to be symbolic of the fact that America would not hesitate to act. Reagan used his strong military presence as a threat against the Soviets and many of Reagan’s naysayers still believe he used force in a manner contradictory to the astute power of the President of the United States. However, the Reagan Administration used their military ability to inflict fear into all Communist threats worldwide. The political  philosopher, Niccolo Machiavelli, speaks of powerful leaders, he writes, â€Å"†¦it is much safer to be feared than loved†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Machiavelli 66). Therefore, regardless of what criticizers may say, it would seem that Reagan’s use of military force throughout the world was effective and that Gorbachev feared his American equivalent. Reagan used his superiority to his advantage when he met with Gorbachev to discuss the reduction of nuclear missiles. During the 1980s, Reagan increased the defense spending more than any president had done before; it was a part of his â€Å"Peace through Strength† foreign policy. During this time, the production of nuclear missiles surged and the United States found itself in a mini-arms race with the Soviet Union. In principle, the Reagan Administration outspent the Soviets in defense and nuclear weapon production. In an effort to compete, the Soviets bankrupted themselves and had no choice but to dismiss their Marxist values. Between the years of 1985 and 1988, Reagan met with General Secretary Gorbachev four times; in Switzerland, Iceland, Washington D.C., and Moscow (Reagan, â€Å"American Life† 545). The meetings between the two world leaders were dramatic and Reagan walked out of the meeting in Reykjavik, Iceland after Gorbachev failed compromise. The tensions were high during all of the meetings and many people feared that any mistake could lead to an immediate nuclear Armageddon. Fortunately, no nuclear weapons were launched and the Reagan Administration triumphed over the Soviet Union. In 1987, Reagan visited East Berlin and spoke at the Brandenburg Gate. During his speech, he called for an end to Communism and a strengthening of individual liberty. His speech as the Brandenburg Gate is often viewed as one of the most successful speeches of his presidency. While speaking to a crowd of thousands, Reagan said to the General Secretary of the Soviet Union, â€Å"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall† (Reagan, â€Å"Speaking† 352). Two years later, the Soviet Union agreed to tear down the Berlin Wall and within the year, Communist nations around Europe began to crumble. Many Democrats in Congress and the mainstream media admired Gorbachev for bringing peace to European countries; they praised Gorbachev for surrenderin g and for keeping the warmongering Ronald Reagan from leading the country on the road to a nuclear war. Many Americans who opposed the Reagan Administration were more than happy to give the credit to the Soviet Union; they believed Reagan was  too overpowering and heartless to have been so successful. Nevertheless, conservative talk show host, Rush Limbaugh writes, â€Å"The end of the Cold War and the defeat of Communism in the Soviet Union was a clear victory for American values, for the American way of life, for the republican, democratic, free-marked ideals of the United States of America† (Limbaugh â€Å"Ought to Be† 230). Therefore, it would seem that Reagan played a major role in bringing an end to the 40 year Cold War. Regardless of the beliefs and values one holds, Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War and suppressed the Communist threat worldwide. He changed the world! Although his greatest success may have been bringing closure to the Cold War, Reagan also accomplished a great deal in the United States of America. When he left office in 1989, the economy was breaking records and benefitting from the longest period of peacetime prosperity without recession or depression (Ronald Reagan). People were making money in America and thanks to Reagan’s tax cuts; they were able to keep more of what they earned. The Reagan Administration began an economic policy that became identified as â€Å"Reaganomics† or trickle-down economics. Reaganomics was the belief that tax cuts for the rich, middle class, and poor would work to stimulate the economy. If the rich had more money, they would create more businesses and opportunity, the middle class would then be able to become business owners, and higher the poor. It is a social hierarchy of job creation and the nation experienced 96 months of peacetime economic growth (Limbaugh, â€Å"Told You So† 122). In 1990, George H.W. Bush disbanded the policy of Reaganomics and the 96 months of economic growth ended almost immediately. Many historians , to this day, view the 1980s as a decade of greed where the rich got richer and the poor got poorer. They also discredit the policy of Reaganomics because they do not believe the rich paid their fair share of taxes. However, economic figures are illustrative of how much the rich truly pay in taxes. It seems that the top 1% of income earners pay nearly 40% of all federal income taxes in the United States (What Would Reagan Do?). Therefore, even if the 1980s were deemed as a decade of greed, it would seem that greed is good. Reagan worked to reduce onerous taxes in order to return the wealth to its rightful owners, the workers. The Reagan Administration did not hand out money; rather, they let people keep more of what they had already earned. In return, consumerism rose and the money was  immediately deposited back into the national economy. Therefore, it would seem that the tax cuts and policy of Reaganomics worked very well in the 1980s; the economic growth experienced in that decade has yet to be matched. Regardless of one’s political affiliation, it is undeniable that tax cuts work and the economic policy of the Regan Administration should be implemented into our system now, during th e present economic crisis. The implementation of tax cuts, both on income and corporations, provided working class Americans with the incentive to work and to achieve. No longer were people afraid of earning; the tax cuts prevented hard working Americans from being punished with difficult and total taxation. This era of economic growth restored a feeling of optimism in America, especially after the failures of the Carter Administration and the record setting unemployment rate of the late 1970s. Ronald Reagan’s policies, both foreign and domestic, made people proud to be Americans once again. During the 1980s, Americans were not being villainized and condemned, they were being praised. Reagan restored the feeling of confidence in America and brought forth a generation of strong, nationalistic Americans. Ronald Reagan was a success as President of the United States, not only because of his charisma and communication skills, nor simply because of his policies. Ronald Reagan was a success because the American people loved him. In 1984, during his campaign for a second term, the electorate illustrated their reverie for him and he won in the large st landslide victory ever recorded. He was unanimously re-elected in 49 of the 50 states (What Would Reagan Do?). His unprecedented victory astonished the world and many of his political detractors wondered how he could be so popular. Once again, the political philosopher Machiavelli offers insight into how a person should be a successful leader. Machiavelli wrote in 1513, â€Å"†¦he should inspire his citizens to follow their pursuits quietly, in trade and in agriculture and in every other pursuit of men, so that one person does not fear to adorn his possessions for fear that they be taken away from him, and another to open up a trade for fear of taxes† (Machiavelli 91). In essence, Reagan accomplished all of these aforementioned goals during his presidency. His policy of a strong national defense worked to make people feel comfortable and unafraid of a Communist attack, and his policy of Reaganomics allowed people to become entrepreneurs without a fear of being taxed out of  business. For all practical purposes, Reagan epitomized the values of a good leader as prescribed by Niccolo Machiavelli; he restored the power and the faith to the people while simultaneously ruling under the facade of being a decisive and fearful leader when handling foreign threats. In the end, it is apparent that Ronald Reagan accomplished a great deal during his administration. His most important accomplishments stem from restoring optimism in Americans, the total growth of economic prosperity, and bringing an end to the Cold War. Many of his political opponents still work to destroy the successes of his administration and they blame him for being too demanding and too dangerous. They thought his actions during the 1980s were detrimental to the growth and prosperity of America. On January 11, 1989, during his farewell address to the nation, he said, â€Å"My friends: We did it. We weren’t just marking time. We made a difference. We made the city stronger. We made the city freer, and we left her in good hands. All in all, not bad, not bad at all† (Reagan, â€Å"Speaking† 418). The Reagan Administration was one of growth and success. During his presidency, he changed America, let alone the world, for the better. He had done what no president before him could, he set the nation on a course for unprecedented economic growth, and he led to the downfall of Communism and the Cold War. His opponents viewed him as a failure; however, his policies greatly impacted the world. If Ronald Reagan were alive today, he would still be the last best hope for this country. Reference Coulter, Ann. What Would Reagan Do?. http://anncoulter.com/cgi-local/article.cgi?article=77. 21 September 2005. Web. 4 April 2014. Limbaugh, Rush. See, I Told You So. New York: Pocket Star Books, 1993. Limbaugh, Rush. â€Å"The Great One.† National Review 28 June 2004: 36. Academic OneFile. Web. 7. April 2014. Limbaugh, Rush. The Way Things Ought to Be. New York: Pocket Books, 1992. Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1998. Reagan, Ronald. An American Life. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1990. Reagan, Ronald. Speaking My Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1989 â€Å"Ronald Reagan.† http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/ronaldreagan. Web. 7 April 2014.