The document discusses the geopolitical motivations and impacts of the United States establishing new military bases around the world since the end of the Cold War. It argues that the US uses its military strength to establish spheres of influence and counter the rise of economic rivals like Europe and China. New bases have been established through wars in the Gulf, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, and Iraq, allowing the US to project power over regions with strategic resources like oil. However, maintaining global bases networks long-term risks overextension and increased anti-American sentiment.
- In August 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait which led the U.S. to launch Operation Desert Shield to protect Saudi Arabia. In January 1991, the U.S. led a coalition in Operation Desert Storm that began an aerial bombing campaign against Iraq and drove its forces from Kuwait in a brief ground assault. The war ended in February 1991 after Iraq's defeat and agreement to a ceasefire.
The document provides background on US entry into WWI. It discusses how the US initially desired neutrality but Germany's unrestricted submarine warfare, such as the sinking of the Lusitania which killed 128 Americans, and the intercepted Zimmerman Telegram offering Germany's support for a Mexican attack on the US, led President Wilson to declare war on Germany in April 1917. Perspectives from a grieving widow, a German U-boat commander, German diplomat Arthur Zimmerman, and President Wilson provide various viewpoints on US entry into the war.
The document discusses why the United States entered World War 1. It provides perspectives from a grieving widow, a German U-boat commander, Arthur Zimmerman, and President Woodrow Wilson. President Wilson argues that America must enter the war to defend democracy and make the world safe after attacks on American ships and the Zimmerman Telegram, which proposed a German alliance with Mexico against the US.
The document provides background information on the rise of Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. It discusses key events that contributed to bin Laden's radicalization such as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 and the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia. The document also examines how bin Laden used Islam to justify violence against the West and spread jihadist ideology. It summarizes bin Laden's impact post 9/11, though Al Qaeda continued attacks and new extremist groups like ISIS emerged who were influenced by bin Laden's message of anti-Western sentiment.
The document discusses two potential theories for why the US entered World War I:
1) The US was attacked despite declaring neutrality, as German U-boats sank American merchant ships and killed thousands of Americans.
2) President Wilson wanted to make the world safe for democracy and fix Germany's aggressive government, which had decided on ruthless attacks like U-boat strikes against merchant vessels.
3) After analyzing perspectives and evidence for both theories, the document concludes that the main reason for US entry was being attacked despite neutrality declarations.
This document provides an overview of several wars in Asia and the Middle East involving the United States since World War II. It discusses the Korean War where North Korea was backed by China and the U.S. supported South Korea. It also covers the Vietnam War where the U.S. fought communist rebels in North Vietnam supported by China. The document then summarizes the war in Afghanistan where the U.S. targeted Al Qaeda training camps after 9/11 and the war in Iraq where the U.S. invaded to depose Saddam Hussein and search for weapons of mass destruction. Most recently, it discusses the U.S. shift to focus its efforts on fighting terrorists in Afghanistan.
Great article that examines the lessons that students of military history can study to learn how lessons learned from America's Indian Wars still applies to military studies today.
The document provides perspectives from different cases on why the United States got involved in World War I. It includes perspectives from citizens, government officials, submarine commanders, survivors of attacks, and those in business and finance who saw economic opportunities from American involvement. Students are asked to review the perspectives and draw their own conclusion on why the U.S. entered the war based on the evidence presented.
- In August 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait which led the U.S. to launch Operation Desert Shield to protect Saudi Arabia. In January 1991, the U.S. led a coalition in Operation Desert Storm that began an aerial bombing campaign against Iraq and drove its forces from Kuwait in a brief ground assault. The war ended in February 1991 after Iraq's defeat and agreement to a ceasefire.
The document provides background on US entry into WWI. It discusses how the US initially desired neutrality but Germany's unrestricted submarine warfare, such as the sinking of the Lusitania which killed 128 Americans, and the intercepted Zimmerman Telegram offering Germany's support for a Mexican attack on the US, led President Wilson to declare war on Germany in April 1917. Perspectives from a grieving widow, a German U-boat commander, German diplomat Arthur Zimmerman, and President Wilson provide various viewpoints on US entry into the war.
The document discusses why the United States entered World War 1. It provides perspectives from a grieving widow, a German U-boat commander, Arthur Zimmerman, and President Woodrow Wilson. President Wilson argues that America must enter the war to defend democracy and make the world safe after attacks on American ships and the Zimmerman Telegram, which proposed a German alliance with Mexico against the US.
The document provides background information on the rise of Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. It discusses key events that contributed to bin Laden's radicalization such as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 and the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia. The document also examines how bin Laden used Islam to justify violence against the West and spread jihadist ideology. It summarizes bin Laden's impact post 9/11, though Al Qaeda continued attacks and new extremist groups like ISIS emerged who were influenced by bin Laden's message of anti-Western sentiment.
The document discusses two potential theories for why the US entered World War I:
1) The US was attacked despite declaring neutrality, as German U-boats sank American merchant ships and killed thousands of Americans.
2) President Wilson wanted to make the world safe for democracy and fix Germany's aggressive government, which had decided on ruthless attacks like U-boat strikes against merchant vessels.
3) After analyzing perspectives and evidence for both theories, the document concludes that the main reason for US entry was being attacked despite neutrality declarations.
This document provides an overview of several wars in Asia and the Middle East involving the United States since World War II. It discusses the Korean War where North Korea was backed by China and the U.S. supported South Korea. It also covers the Vietnam War where the U.S. fought communist rebels in North Vietnam supported by China. The document then summarizes the war in Afghanistan where the U.S. targeted Al Qaeda training camps after 9/11 and the war in Iraq where the U.S. invaded to depose Saddam Hussein and search for weapons of mass destruction. Most recently, it discusses the U.S. shift to focus its efforts on fighting terrorists in Afghanistan.
Great article that examines the lessons that students of military history can study to learn how lessons learned from America's Indian Wars still applies to military studies today.
The document provides perspectives from different cases on why the United States got involved in World War I. It includes perspectives from citizens, government officials, submarine commanders, survivors of attacks, and those in business and finance who saw economic opportunities from American involvement. Students are asked to review the perspectives and draw their own conclusion on why the U.S. entered the war based on the evidence presented.
The document discusses several topics related to US foreign policy including:
- Eras of US foreign policy from isolationism pre-WWII to the post-9/11 era.
- Principles of American foreign policy in the 21st century focus on ensuring freedom and security for all.
- An examination of the Iraq war including justification for invasion, strategy, critique of staying the course policy, and slow institutional change.
- Issues related to the war on terrorism including defining the enemy and determining an end.
The document provides details about key events and individuals in the American Revolution from Thomas Paine's pamphlet Common Sense advocating independence to the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4th, 1776. It then discusses the early military victories of the British forcing the Continental Army to retreat across New Jersey and into Pennsylvania as well as the turning point American victory at Saratoga that led France to form an alliance. In closing, it notes some of the obstacles the British faced in trying to retain control over the large territory of the thirteen colonies from across the Atlantic.
Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939, starting World War II in Europe. Great Britain and France declared war on Germany. Hitler signed a non-aggression pact with Stalin, dividing Poland between them. The United States initially remained neutral but increasingly aided the Allies through acts like Lend-Lease. Japan attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, bringing the U.S. into the war. The U.S. and Allies fought major battles across Europe and the Pacific, gradually turning the tide against Germany and Japan. The U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 and Nagasaki on August 9th, leading Japan to surrender and end World War II.
After Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, millions of Americans enlisted to fight in WWII. The military greatly expanded and began utilizing more women and minority groups. War production boomed as auto plants converted to build tanks, planes and other supplies. Scientists worked on advances like radar, penicillin and the atomic bomb through the Manhattan Project. The US launched major offensives against Japan and Germany, leading to pivotal battles like Stalingrad, D-Day, and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which ultimately forced Japan's surrender and ended the war.
The Cold War in the Middle East saw increasing tensions and proxy conflicts between the United States and Soviet Union from the 1950s to late 1970s. There were four main episodes: the 1956 Suez Crisis, the 1967 Six Day War, the 1973 Yom Kippur War, and the 1978 Camp David Accords. These events were driven by superpower competition for influence in the region, efforts to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict, and ideological battles between secular nationalism and Islamic movements. Key leaders like Nasser of Egypt and various Israeli prime ministers were central figures during this volatile period in the region.
This document discusses America's relationship with Middle Eastern oil and the role it has played in conflicts in the region over the past century. It outlines how the US viewed the Persian Gulf as strategically vital for oil and worked to empower authoritarian regimes as allies. This led the US to pursue policies of militarization in the region, arming allies heavily. However, this exacerbated regional tensions and instability, contributing to conflicts like the Iran-Iraq war. The document examines how US oil and security interests in the region have long been interconnected and a driver of American military interventionism in the Middle East.
World War II required immense contributions from all Americans. This document discusses the various roles that different groups played in the war effort, including soldiers in the Army and Air Force who fought abroad, Navy personnel who engaged in pivotal naval battles in the Pacific, African Americans and women who helped on the frontlines and home front despite facing discrimination, the deception unit known as the Ghost Army that used innovative tactics to mislead enemies, and women who took on important industrial and medical jobs at home while also serving in the armed forces. All citizens played crucial parts in the collective effort to defeat the Axis powers.
PNAC - PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURYVogelDenise
Understanding the United States Of America's Attempts to MONOPOLIZE The World! Yes, to date, the United States' CORRUPT Government Officials and their Lawyer/Attorney (Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz) are hard at work to DOMINATE THE WORLD through their TERRORISTS ACTS and WHITE SUPREMACIST PRACTICES - i.e. with its and its ALLIES sights SET ON THE MIDDLE EASTERN REGION!
This document discusses America's relationship with Middle Eastern oil and the role it has played in conflicts in the region over the 20th century. Key points:
1. The US became dependent on Middle Eastern oil in the 1930s and viewed the region's stability and friendly regimes as a national security priority.
2. From the 1970s, the US pursued a policy of militarizing friendly Gulf states like Iran and Saudi Arabia, viewing them as pillars of regional security. However, this exacerbated tensions and fueled an arms race between states.
3. The US supported authoritarian rulers who were often unstable and illegitimate. This instability combined with militarization to destabilize the region and lay the foundations for
The document summarizes key events leading up to and during the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. It discusses FDR's presidency and US isolationism. As tensions rose between the US and Japan over Japan's expansion in Asia, the US placed embargoes on scrap metal and oil sales to Japan. Despite hopes from Emperor Hirohito and others for a peaceful solution, Japan's military leaders planned a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor to neutralize the US Pacific fleet. The attack succeeded in damaging much of the fleet but failed to destroy critical assets like carriers and oil fields. It had the effect of drawing the US into World War 2 despite originally non-interventionist attitudes.
Imminent War on the Persian Horizon - Prophecy in the News Magazine - Februar...miscott57
1) The document discusses how the US is preparing militarily for a potential war with Iran by moving additional naval forces like aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships into the Persian Gulf region.
2) It analyzes that the appointment of Admiral Fallon to lead US forces in the Middle East signals a strategic shift toward focusing on Iran as the main target rather than Iraq.
3) The author believes that with US forces already in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US is in a position to put pressure on Iran and that a naval assault would escalate the current conflicts into an even larger World War III scenario.
This Power Point presentation is designed for students to learn more about our history, specifically the attacks on Pearl Harbor. It is geared toward middle school to high school students.
This is a slides that I used while I was studying at IPU New Zealand, at the the class of Internationalism. This a bit of picture of how the attack on Pearl Harbour has happened.
On December 7, 1941, Japanese forces launched a surprise attack on the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. The first wave of attacks began around 8:00 am local time, as Japanese planes bombed battleships and other vessels. Over 2,400 Americans were killed and 1,178 were wounded. The following day, President Franklin D. Roosevelt addressed Congress and called for a declaration of war against Japan, saying the attack was "a date which will live in infamy." Congress approved the declaration, and the U.S. entered World War II on the side of the Allies.
After Pearl Harbor, the Allies adopted a strategy of focusing first on defeating Hitler in Europe while containing Japan. This strategy aimed to give America time to ramp up its massive economic potential for war production. The US home front experienced full employment and conversion of industries to all-out war production, along with rationing of goods and migration of workers to centers of war manufacturing. The war effort ultimately revived the US economy and increased national unity, though Japanese internment caused civil liberties issues.
The document provides details about key events leading up to and during World War II. It describes Germany invading Poland on September 1, 1939, starting WWII. It then discusses the Allied and Axis powers and leaders like Churchill, FDR, and Stalin on the Allied side and Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo on the Axis side. It provides military details of key battles like the Battle of Britain and Germany's blitzkrieg tactics. It also summarizes America's entry into the war after the attack on Pearl Harbor and key domestic policies like rationing and the internment of Japanese Americans. Lastly, it discusses major turning point battles in 1944-1945 and the Manhattan Project that led to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima
The Japanese Imperial Navy led a surprise attack on the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii on December 7, 1941. Admiral Yamamoto called for the attack, which was carried out by 353 Japanese aircraft led by Commander Fuchida. Many U.S. Navy ships were docked and were hit, with 12 being sunk and 9 damaged. Over 2350 Americans were killed in the two hour attack, which came as a complete surprise and plunged the U.S. into World War II.
The document presents two cases with differing theories for why the United States entered World War I. Case I focuses on the Zimmermann Telegram and Germany's resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare, which threatened U.S. trade and killed Americans. Case II argues that President Woodrow Wilson entered the war to make "the world safe for democracy" and defend democratic nations against autocratic powers like Germany and the Ottoman Empire. Both cases include perspectives from individuals impacted by or involved in the U.S. entry into the war.
Presentation by Kristina Hoeppner (Catlyst IT) at iMoot 2015 http://2015.imoot.org about connecting Mahara to Moodle.
Recording is at http://youtu.be/ebr_PSQrpGI and slides are also available at http://slides.com/anitsirk/moodle-with-a-side-of-eportfolio for viewing.
Licensed under Creative Commons BY-SA 3.0
Adult museum visitors' learning identitiesguest7e812a
The document discusses a study on how adult museum visitors' views of learning relate to their learning experiences at museums. It examines relationships between learning, education and entertainment for visitors and how their role during a visit can influence their learning identity. The study used interviews and observations to understand how visitors see themselves as learners and how their learning identity may change as a result of their museum experience. Key findings showed that learning identities can change, be reinforced, or remain unchanged depending on how well the visit matched individual learning styles and priorities.
Presentation by Beth Gordon (Pace University) and Kristina Hoeppner (Catalyst IT) at AAEEBL 2015 http://www.aaeebl.org/?page=2015annualconference on 30 July 2015.
Recording: http://youtu.be/0dCpENOL0co
Live slides: http://slides.com/anitsirk/crowdsourcing-your-way-to-a-better-eportfolio
This document provides an overview of administering a school using the MyPortfolio platform. Key points include: maintaining accurate administrator contact information; managing user accounts, profiles, and content; providing first level technical support to users; keeping informed through online discussions and webinars; and knowing when to suspend vs delete user accounts. Resources like the MyPortfolio user manual and support contacts are also listed.
The document discusses several topics related to US foreign policy including:
- Eras of US foreign policy from isolationism pre-WWII to the post-9/11 era.
- Principles of American foreign policy in the 21st century focus on ensuring freedom and security for all.
- An examination of the Iraq war including justification for invasion, strategy, critique of staying the course policy, and slow institutional change.
- Issues related to the war on terrorism including defining the enemy and determining an end.
The document provides details about key events and individuals in the American Revolution from Thomas Paine's pamphlet Common Sense advocating independence to the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4th, 1776. It then discusses the early military victories of the British forcing the Continental Army to retreat across New Jersey and into Pennsylvania as well as the turning point American victory at Saratoga that led France to form an alliance. In closing, it notes some of the obstacles the British faced in trying to retain control over the large territory of the thirteen colonies from across the Atlantic.
Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939, starting World War II in Europe. Great Britain and France declared war on Germany. Hitler signed a non-aggression pact with Stalin, dividing Poland between them. The United States initially remained neutral but increasingly aided the Allies through acts like Lend-Lease. Japan attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, bringing the U.S. into the war. The U.S. and Allies fought major battles across Europe and the Pacific, gradually turning the tide against Germany and Japan. The U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 and Nagasaki on August 9th, leading Japan to surrender and end World War II.
After Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, millions of Americans enlisted to fight in WWII. The military greatly expanded and began utilizing more women and minority groups. War production boomed as auto plants converted to build tanks, planes and other supplies. Scientists worked on advances like radar, penicillin and the atomic bomb through the Manhattan Project. The US launched major offensives against Japan and Germany, leading to pivotal battles like Stalingrad, D-Day, and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which ultimately forced Japan's surrender and ended the war.
The Cold War in the Middle East saw increasing tensions and proxy conflicts between the United States and Soviet Union from the 1950s to late 1970s. There were four main episodes: the 1956 Suez Crisis, the 1967 Six Day War, the 1973 Yom Kippur War, and the 1978 Camp David Accords. These events were driven by superpower competition for influence in the region, efforts to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict, and ideological battles between secular nationalism and Islamic movements. Key leaders like Nasser of Egypt and various Israeli prime ministers were central figures during this volatile period in the region.
This document discusses America's relationship with Middle Eastern oil and the role it has played in conflicts in the region over the past century. It outlines how the US viewed the Persian Gulf as strategically vital for oil and worked to empower authoritarian regimes as allies. This led the US to pursue policies of militarization in the region, arming allies heavily. However, this exacerbated regional tensions and instability, contributing to conflicts like the Iran-Iraq war. The document examines how US oil and security interests in the region have long been interconnected and a driver of American military interventionism in the Middle East.
World War II required immense contributions from all Americans. This document discusses the various roles that different groups played in the war effort, including soldiers in the Army and Air Force who fought abroad, Navy personnel who engaged in pivotal naval battles in the Pacific, African Americans and women who helped on the frontlines and home front despite facing discrimination, the deception unit known as the Ghost Army that used innovative tactics to mislead enemies, and women who took on important industrial and medical jobs at home while also serving in the armed forces. All citizens played crucial parts in the collective effort to defeat the Axis powers.
PNAC - PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURYVogelDenise
Understanding the United States Of America's Attempts to MONOPOLIZE The World! Yes, to date, the United States' CORRUPT Government Officials and their Lawyer/Attorney (Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz) are hard at work to DOMINATE THE WORLD through their TERRORISTS ACTS and WHITE SUPREMACIST PRACTICES - i.e. with its and its ALLIES sights SET ON THE MIDDLE EASTERN REGION!
This document discusses America's relationship with Middle Eastern oil and the role it has played in conflicts in the region over the 20th century. Key points:
1. The US became dependent on Middle Eastern oil in the 1930s and viewed the region's stability and friendly regimes as a national security priority.
2. From the 1970s, the US pursued a policy of militarizing friendly Gulf states like Iran and Saudi Arabia, viewing them as pillars of regional security. However, this exacerbated tensions and fueled an arms race between states.
3. The US supported authoritarian rulers who were often unstable and illegitimate. This instability combined with militarization to destabilize the region and lay the foundations for
The document summarizes key events leading up to and during the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. It discusses FDR's presidency and US isolationism. As tensions rose between the US and Japan over Japan's expansion in Asia, the US placed embargoes on scrap metal and oil sales to Japan. Despite hopes from Emperor Hirohito and others for a peaceful solution, Japan's military leaders planned a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor to neutralize the US Pacific fleet. The attack succeeded in damaging much of the fleet but failed to destroy critical assets like carriers and oil fields. It had the effect of drawing the US into World War 2 despite originally non-interventionist attitudes.
Imminent War on the Persian Horizon - Prophecy in the News Magazine - Februar...miscott57
1) The document discusses how the US is preparing militarily for a potential war with Iran by moving additional naval forces like aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships into the Persian Gulf region.
2) It analyzes that the appointment of Admiral Fallon to lead US forces in the Middle East signals a strategic shift toward focusing on Iran as the main target rather than Iraq.
3) The author believes that with US forces already in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US is in a position to put pressure on Iran and that a naval assault would escalate the current conflicts into an even larger World War III scenario.
This Power Point presentation is designed for students to learn more about our history, specifically the attacks on Pearl Harbor. It is geared toward middle school to high school students.
This is a slides that I used while I was studying at IPU New Zealand, at the the class of Internationalism. This a bit of picture of how the attack on Pearl Harbour has happened.
On December 7, 1941, Japanese forces launched a surprise attack on the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. The first wave of attacks began around 8:00 am local time, as Japanese planes bombed battleships and other vessels. Over 2,400 Americans were killed and 1,178 were wounded. The following day, President Franklin D. Roosevelt addressed Congress and called for a declaration of war against Japan, saying the attack was "a date which will live in infamy." Congress approved the declaration, and the U.S. entered World War II on the side of the Allies.
After Pearl Harbor, the Allies adopted a strategy of focusing first on defeating Hitler in Europe while containing Japan. This strategy aimed to give America time to ramp up its massive economic potential for war production. The US home front experienced full employment and conversion of industries to all-out war production, along with rationing of goods and migration of workers to centers of war manufacturing. The war effort ultimately revived the US economy and increased national unity, though Japanese internment caused civil liberties issues.
The document provides details about key events leading up to and during World War II. It describes Germany invading Poland on September 1, 1939, starting WWII. It then discusses the Allied and Axis powers and leaders like Churchill, FDR, and Stalin on the Allied side and Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo on the Axis side. It provides military details of key battles like the Battle of Britain and Germany's blitzkrieg tactics. It also summarizes America's entry into the war after the attack on Pearl Harbor and key domestic policies like rationing and the internment of Japanese Americans. Lastly, it discusses major turning point battles in 1944-1945 and the Manhattan Project that led to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima
The Japanese Imperial Navy led a surprise attack on the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii on December 7, 1941. Admiral Yamamoto called for the attack, which was carried out by 353 Japanese aircraft led by Commander Fuchida. Many U.S. Navy ships were docked and were hit, with 12 being sunk and 9 damaged. Over 2350 Americans were killed in the two hour attack, which came as a complete surprise and plunged the U.S. into World War II.
The document presents two cases with differing theories for why the United States entered World War I. Case I focuses on the Zimmermann Telegram and Germany's resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare, which threatened U.S. trade and killed Americans. Case II argues that President Woodrow Wilson entered the war to make "the world safe for democracy" and defend democratic nations against autocratic powers like Germany and the Ottoman Empire. Both cases include perspectives from individuals impacted by or involved in the U.S. entry into the war.
Presentation by Kristina Hoeppner (Catlyst IT) at iMoot 2015 http://2015.imoot.org about connecting Mahara to Moodle.
Recording is at http://youtu.be/ebr_PSQrpGI and slides are also available at http://slides.com/anitsirk/moodle-with-a-side-of-eportfolio for viewing.
Licensed under Creative Commons BY-SA 3.0
Adult museum visitors' learning identitiesguest7e812a
The document discusses a study on how adult museum visitors' views of learning relate to their learning experiences at museums. It examines relationships between learning, education and entertainment for visitors and how their role during a visit can influence their learning identity. The study used interviews and observations to understand how visitors see themselves as learners and how their learning identity may change as a result of their museum experience. Key findings showed that learning identities can change, be reinforced, or remain unchanged depending on how well the visit matched individual learning styles and priorities.
Presentation by Beth Gordon (Pace University) and Kristina Hoeppner (Catalyst IT) at AAEEBL 2015 http://www.aaeebl.org/?page=2015annualconference on 30 July 2015.
Recording: http://youtu.be/0dCpENOL0co
Live slides: http://slides.com/anitsirk/crowdsourcing-your-way-to-a-better-eportfolio
This document provides an overview of administering a school using the MyPortfolio platform. Key points include: maintaining accurate administrator contact information; managing user accounts, profiles, and content; providing first level technical support to users; keeping informed through online discussions and webinars; and knowing when to suspend vs delete user accounts. Resources like the MyPortfolio user manual and support contacts are also listed.
This document discusses graphics and design elements for a game about safely driving and avoiding passenger planes. It mentions using low quality images from gettyimages.com and having to trace paths to create a blended alpha effect with blurred plane icons for a darker graphic style.
Layer by layer assembly by Azulene based supra amphiphileMuhammad Ehsan
The document describes the fabrication of surface-imprinted multilayer films using supra-amphiphiles for reversible recognition of organic molecules in water. The films were constructed using the layer-by-layer technique with polyelectrolytes and supra-amphiphiles containing azulene-based oligomers and pyrene. The films demonstrated imprinting for pyrene through loading, cross-linking, and selective reloading experiments. These surface-imprinted multilayer films show potential for separation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and purification of pyrene-rich water.
The document discusses several key events in Iraq's history including foreign occupations from the 1600s to 2003, the main ethnic and religious groups, and Saddam Hussein's rise to power in 1979. It also summarizes US involvement in Iraq including the 1991 Gulf War to liberate Kuwait after Iraq's invasion, establishing no-fly zones, and the 2003 war launched under the rationales of WMDs and terrorism links that ultimately proved false. Main post-war issues in Iraq centered around government, security, economy, and the 2011 US troop withdrawal.
1. The United States has significant geostrategic interests in the Middle East due to its location along important trade routes and its large oil reserves. The U.S. seeks to ensure regional stability and prevent hostile powers from gaining control of the region.
2. U.S. involvement in the Middle East has grown since the early 20th century. A key goal of U.S. policy was originally to counter Soviet influence during the Cold War. More recently, concerns about weapons proliferation and human rights have also shaped U.S. strategy.
3. Support for Israel remains an important factor in U.S. Middle East policy due to historical, strategic and domestic political considerations. Ensuring secure oil supplies also remains
The document discusses US foreign policy and involvement in various conflicts over several decades. It summarizes the US's two-track policy of supporting both Iran and Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war to prolong the conflict. It also discusses the US initially giving Saddam Hussein the impression it would not intervene in Iraq's invasion of Kuwait but then leading a coalition against Iraq. The document provides timelines of US involvement in Afghanistan, including supporting mujahideen groups and the emergence of the Taliban, as well as interventions in other countries like Indonesia, Philippines and Venezuela.
The document discusses the Reagan Doctrine, a foreign policy pursued by President Ronald Reagan from 1981-1989. The doctrine provided overt support to anti-communist groups fighting Soviet-backed regimes. In Afghanistan, the Reagan Doctrine backed Mujahideen rebels against the Soviet occupation. This policy weakened the Soviet Union and hastened its collapse, though also strengthened groups like al-Qaeda that later attacked American interests. The doctrine aimed to roll back Soviet expansion without direct American military involvement by arming indigenous opposition groups.
The document provides background information on America's emergence as a world power in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It discusses the reasons for US imperialism, including global competition, cultural superiority beliefs, seeking new naval bases and markets. It outlines America's acquisitions of Alaska, Hawaii, and Samoa. It then summarizes the causes and key events of the Spanish-American War, including yellow journalism, the De Lome Letter, and the sinking of the USS Maine. Finally, it briefly discusses the Treaty of Paris and the new US spheres of influence in places like Puerto Rico, Cuba, and the Philippines in the aftermath of the war.
1) The document discusses America's emergence as a world power in the late 19th/early 20th century and provides reasons for U.S. imperialism including global competition, cultural superiority, naval bases, and new markets.
2) It examines specific acquisitions and wars including the Spanish-American War, which gave the U.S. colonies in the Caribbean and Pacific, and involvement in Asia, Latin America, and events leading up to WWI.
3) Key factors that pushed the U.S. onto the global stage included a desire to compete with European powers, expand influence, and gain new economic opportunities through trade and resources from foreign territories.
This document examines US foreign policy before and after WWII, during the Cold War, and currently. It discusses how US policy may have contributed to conflicts like the Mexican-American War, Spanish-American War, and Vietnam War through policies of isolationism, expansionism, and containment of communism. More recently, US support for rebels in Syria and Afghanistan has inadvertently strengthened enemies like ISIS and the Taliban. The document argues the US should adopt a more restrained foreign policy focused on responding to allies rather than intervening proactively.
The document summarizes key events in the 1980s that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of the United States as the sole superpower. It discusses President Reagan's confrontational stance towards the Soviet Union, the USSR's economic struggles and failed war in Afghanistan. Mikhail Gorbachev's reforms of perestroika and glasnost are described as unleashing forces that weakened the Soviet system. By 1991, revolutions in Eastern Europe and independence movements within the USSR led to its collapse, leaving the US as the world's dominant power.
Hello..!! its my first presentation...please keep support me ..i will provide your subjects related meterial..i want to teach or understand each and basic knowledge of our world ..
Cato Institute Policy Analysis No. 159Ancient History U..docxketurahhazelhurst
Cato Institute Policy Analysis No. 159:
"Ancient History": U.S. Conduct in the Middle East Since World War II and the Folly of Intervention
August 16, 1991 Sheldon L. Richman
Sheldon L. Richman is senior editor at the Cato Institute.
Executive Summary
When Iranian revolutionaries entered the U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1979 and seized 52 Americans, President Jimmy Carter dismissed reminders of America's long intervention in Iran as "ancient history." Carter's point was not merely that previous U.S. policy could not excuse the hostage taking. His adjective also implied that there was nothing of value to be learned from that history. In his view, dredging up old matters was more than unhelpful; it was also dangerous, presumably because it could only serve the interests of America's adversaries. Thus, to raise historical issues was at least unpatriotic and maybe worse.[1]
As the United States finds itself in the aftermath of another crisis in the Middle East, it is worth the risk of opprobrium to ask why there should be hostility toward America in that region. Some insight can be gained by surveying official
U.S. conduct in the Middle East since the end of World War II. Acknowledged herein is a fundamental, yet deplorably overlooked, distinction between understanding and excusing. The purpose of this survey is not to pardon acts of violence against innocent people but to understand the reasons that drive people to violent political acts.[2] The stubborn and often self-serving notion that the historical record is irrelevant because political violence is inexcusable ensures that Americans will be caught in crises in the Middle East and elsewhere for many years to come.
After 70 years of broken Western promises regarding Arab independence, it should not be surprising that the West is viewed with suspicion and hostility by the populations (as opposed to some of the political regimes) of the Middle East.[3] The United States, as the heir to British imperialism in the region, has been a frequent object of suspicion. Since the end of World War II, the United States, like the European colonial powers before it, has been unable to resist becoming entangled in the region's political conflicts. Driven by a desire to keep the vast oil reserves in hands friendly to the United States, a wish to keep out potential rivals (such as the Soviet Union), opposition to neutrality in the cold war, and domestic political considerations, the United States has compiled a record of tragedy in the Middle East. The most recent part of that record, which includes U.S. alliances with Iraq to counter Iran and then with Iran and Syria to counter Iraq, illustrates a theme that has been played in Washington for the last 45 years.
An examination of the details and consequences of that theme provides a startling object lesson in the pitfalls and conceit of an interventionist foreign policy. The two major components of the theme that are covered in this study are
U.S. policy towa ...
The document provides background on the origins of the War on Terror leading up to 9/11. It discusses the Cold War between the US and USSR, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan which led to the US training mujahideen fighters like Osama Bin Laden. After the Soviets withdrew, Afghanistan descended into civil war. Bin Laden formed Al Qaeda and the Taliban rose to power in Afghanistan, hosting Al Qaeda training camps. Al Qaeda launched several attacks against US interests in the 1990s, leading up to the 9/11 attacks where they hijacked and crashed four planes in a coordinated terrorist attack that killed nearly 3,000 people.
· IRAQ WARIraq and Afghanistan Have Officially Become Vietnam 2..docxoswald1horne84988
· IRAQ WAR
Iraq and Afghanistan Have Officially Become Vietnam 2.0
Our policy of arming and training local militias in Vietnam was largely unsuccessful. So why are we repeating that mistake today?
By Andrew J. Bacevich
OCTOBER 13, 2015
A US Army platoon leader and an Afghan National Army officer sit together in Kunar province, northeastern Afghanistan. (AP Photo / Brennan Linsley)
First came Fallujah, then Mosul, and later Ramadi in Iraq. Now, there isKunduz, a provincial capital in northern Afghanistan. In all four places, the same story has played out: in cities that newspaper reporters like to call “strategically important,” security forces trained and equipped by the US military at great expense simply folded, abandoning their posts (and much of their US-supplied weaponry) without even mounting serious resistance. Called upon to fight, they fled. In each case, the defending forces gave way before substantially outnumbered attackers, making the outcomes all the more ignominious.
Together, these setbacks have rendered a verdict on the now more-or-less nameless “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT). Successive blitzkriegs by ISIS and the Taliban respectively did more than simply breach Iraqi and Afghan defenses. They also punched gaping holes in the strategy to which the United States had reverted in hopes of stemming the further erosion of its position in the Greater Middle East.
Recall that, when the United States launched its GWOT soon after 9/11, it did so pursuant to a grandiose agenda. US forces were going to imprint onto others a specific and exalted set of values. During President George W. Bush’s first term, this “freedom agenda” formed the foundation, or at least the rationale, for US policy.
The shooting would stop, Bush vowed, only when countries like Afghanistan had ceased to harbor anti-American terrorists and countries like Iraq had ceased to encourage them. Achieving this goal meant that the inhabitants of those countries would have to change. Afghans and Iraqis, followed in due course by Syrians, Libyans, Iranians, and sundry others would embrace democracy, respect human rights, and abide by the rule of law, or else. Through the concerted application of American power, they would become different—more like us and therefore more inclined to get along with us. A bit less Mecca and Medina, a bit more “we hold these truths” and “of the people, by the people.”
So Bush and others in his inner circle professed to believe. At least some of them, probably including Bush himself, may actually have done so.
History, at least the bits and pieces to which Americans attend, seemed to endow such expectations with a modicum of plausibility. Had not such a transfer of values occurred after World War II when the defeated Axis Powers had hastily thrown in with the winning side? Had it not recurred as the Cold War was winding down, when previously committed communists succumbed to the allure of consumer goods and quarterly profit statements?
If th.
Jordan pursued different foreign policy stances in the two Gulf Wars due to regime survival considerations. In Gulf War I, Jordan abstained from condemning Iraq due to economic dependence on Iraq and the need to appease public opinion. In Gulf War II, Jordan tacitly supported the US-led coalition due to stronger economic ties with the US and a less populist regime survival strategy that deemphasized public opinion. The document examines how domestic politics and economic interests shaped Jordan's shifting foreign policies in the two Gulf Wars in order to ensure regime survival.
Unit 8 lesson 5 end of the cold war and post war policyMrsSmithGHS
President Reagan challenged communism through military buildup and casting the Cold War as a struggle between good and evil. His policies increased tensions but ultimately contributed to the end of the Cold War under Gorbachev. Meanwhile, the US faced challenges including conflicts in the Middle East and Latin America. Under President Bush, Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, leading to the Persian Gulf War where a US-led coalition liberated Kuwait through air strikes and a brief ground invasion. However, they did not remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.
Mahan argued that sea power was crucial to a nation's supremacy and influenced Britain and Germany to build up their navies. Dole helped overthrow the Hawaiian monarchy in favor of US sugar interests and annexed Hawaii as a US territory despite presidential opposition. The document discusses different approaches to US foreign policy including isolationism, collective security, internationalism, and imperialism.
1. NEW U.S. MILITARY BASES: Dr. Zoltán Grossman Member of the Faculty (Geography/NAS) The Evergreen State College, Olympia, Wash. http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz Article at www.counterpunch.org/zoltanbases.html SIDE EFFECTS OR CAUSES OF WAR?
3. The Post-Cold War is Over New geopolitical picture: U.S. only military superpower. Rise of Europe, East Asia as economic superpowers. U.S. using military strength to offset (relative) decline in economic status. Tripolar Economy
4. New U.S. aims Short-term aims are new military bases and control over oil economy. Long-term aim is U.S. “sphere of influence” in the Eurasian “middle ground” between the E.U., Russia, and East Asia. Some parallels with Mackinder’s Heartland Theory, Kennan’s Containment Doctrine
5. “ Next to the U.S. nuclear monopoly, there was no more universally recognized symbol of the nation’s superpower status than its overseas basing system.” -- James Blaker, former Senior Advisor to the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1990
6. Military bases network history Bases to secure U.S. land base in Indian Wars, Civil War “ Coaling stations” for maritime power Early naval stations in Hawaii, Haiti, Central America Bases for overseas imperialism Cuba (Guantanamo), Philippines (Subic), Puerto Rico, Guam, Panama Nicaragua Cuba
7. Purposes of military bases Force projection Listening post / surveillance Prepositioning supplies Training & munitions testing Medical, brig, R&R facilities and more….
8. Bases as “tripwires” Military tripwire guarantees U.S. intervention in a crisis (Korea) Political tripwire cements U.S. interests in friendly regime; increases interference (Philippines, Australia) Easier to insert forces through base reinforcement than outright invasion (Panama) Putting troops in harm’s way sets up sacrifice that builds public support for intervention?
9. Gender and social costs Economic gap between Americans, locals Racial attitudes between Americans, locals Dangers & environmental contamination Prostitution and fathered children Crimes (especially rape) and tensions over Status Of Forces Agreement (SOFA) (Cynthia Enloe)
11. New bases since 1990 1. Gulf War 2. Somalia/Yemen conflicts 3. Ex-Yugoslav wars 4. Afghan War 5. Iraq War
12. Wars since 1990 Insertions of U.S. military power into new strategic areas U.S. government claims : “ Humanitarian” interventions to halt aggression & terrorism, topple dictatorships, protect ethnic minorities. Most common critique: Extension of U.S. “imperial” influence in oil-rich regions Another perspective : Military & economic counterweight to emerging competitors (EU & Japan, China); control of their oil.
13. “ American vital interests in the Central Region are long-standing. With over 65% of the world’s oil reserves located in the Gulf states of the region— from which the United States imports nearly 20% of its needs; Western Europe 43%; and Japan, 68%--the international community must have free and unfettered access to the region’s resources.” --General J. H. Binford Peay III, Central Command (1997) Cited in Blood and Oil by Michael Klare (Metropolitan Books, 2004) U.S. Central Command
14. Wars Since 1990 The military bases that the wars leave behind are as important as the wars themselves. U.S. not only stationed bases to wage the wars, but used wars as convenient opportunity to station new bases. 725 significant bases in 38 countries (DoD 2002); Others in 35+ countries Khanabad Uzbekistan 2001
15. Wars for Bases Each intervention left behind string of new and permanent U.S. military bases (or access through “basing rights”) Planners often view military bases as more significant than the wars, to anchor control over oil economy and regional influence Permanent stationing of U.S. forces has generated resentment and suspicion among civilians and some leaders (“blowback”).
16. Gulf War I, 1991 New bases not simply to counter Saddam, but to quell internal dissent against monarchies. Continued presence of U.S. forces has done more to fuel attacks on U.S. than the Gulf War itself did.
17. Gulf War I, 1991 Bases left behind in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states. Increased importance of Turkish air bases in continued bombing of Iraq. Chirac: War to secure U.S. corporate control over oil supply for Europe and Japan (not U.S. oil supply)
19. Somalia War, 1992-93 Somalia at strategic mouth of Red Sea, controls Suez Canal access Ousted dictator Siad Barre had granted U.S. Navy basing rights in return for support against Soviet-backed Ethiopia. Barre overthrow, clan warfare, famine as excuse to return in 1992. Somalia 1992
20. Somalia War, 1992-93 U.S. “peacekeepers” took sides against Mogadishu warlord Aidid, were defeated in battle. After withdrawal secured basing rights in Aden (Yemen), on other side of Red Sea mouth USS Cole attacked in Aden, 2000 Stationed troops in Djibouti, 2002 Somalia 1993 Yemen 2000 Somalia 1993
21. Yugoslav Wars, 1995-99 Opposed Serbian “ethnic cleansers,” but sided with Croatian & Albanian “ethnic cleansers.” Made Bosnia and Kosovo NATO “protectorates” (formally in Kosovo) under de facto ethnic partition NATO allies participated (to not be excluded), but did not have same priorities as U.S.; more independent EU military force being formed.
22. Yugoslav Wars, 1995-99 Left behind bases in Hungary, Bosnia, Kosovo, Albania, Macedonia Eastern Europe is the “gateway to Central Asia and the Middle East” --U.S. official, NYT 4/20/03 Pro-U.S. “New Europe” between EU, Russia? Enormous Camp Bondsteel in U.S. Sector Kosovo
24. Afghan War, 2001-? Ostensibly reaction to 9/11, but war against Taliban already in planning. Left behind bases in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan US backs dictatorships; Uzbek ousts bases when US criticizes massacre. Taking sides in internal Afghan warlord disputes (like in Somalia) also risks “blowback.”
26. Caspian Basin oil and gas pipelines 1996 Unocal plans for route across Afghanistan
27. Afghan oil/gas connection Premier Karzai and U.S. envoy Khalilzad are both former Unocal reps. Central Asian bases guard new oil infrastructure; risk local “blowback” and Chinese reaction.
28. “ When the Afghan conflict is over we will not leave Central Asia. We have long-term plans and interests in this region and... its countries will be given assistance…in exchange for concrete steps…” -- Elizabeth Jones, Assistant Secretary of State, 2001 Staying in Central Asia Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan
31. Iraq War , 2003-? Part of “Axis of Evil” as the main obstacles to U.S. Sphere of Influence. No credible Iraqi faction to rule; Many Saddam opponents oppose US/UK occupation New Iraqi government instability is excuse to keep U.S. military command to 2008 & bases beyond Black Sea bases in Romania, Bulgaria; Plans for Poznan air base in Poland
32. Staying in Iraq U.S. military plans to keep bases in Bashur (north), Tallil (south), Al-Asad (west), Balad (central), and Baghdad/airport; ~10 other locations “ The whole reason for the war is to get American troops into the region to put pressure on other governments. This is going to be the main American military base in the region” George Friedman/Strategic Forecasting Tallil air base, Iraq
33. Staying in Iraq “ [T]here are people in Washington who never intend to withdraw military forces from Iraq and they ’ r e looking for ten, 20, 50 years in the future…the reason that we went into Iraq was to establish a permanent military base in the Gulf region, and I have never heard any of our leaders say that they would commit themselves to the Iraqi people that ten years from now there will be no military bases of the United States in Iraq.” -- F ormer President Jimmy Carter (2/3/06)
38. Common factors Saddam, Noriega, Aidid, Milosevic, Taliban all seen as U.S. “friends” Did them no good. Sec. Rumsfeld shakes Saddam’s hand in Baghdad
39. “ Search for Enemies” E x-CIA official John Stockwell analysis: U.S. government creates Third World enemies to distract attention from domestic problems The regimes of most “demonized” leaders have stayed in power longer than any others. They can blame U.S. for economic problems & dissent. Castro (Cuba) Ho (N. Vietnam) Ayatollahs (Iran) Qaddafi (Libya) Noriega (Panama) Saddam (Iraq) Kims (N. Korea)
40. War as an opportunity 1991: Iraq invaded as its forces withdrew from Kuwait. 1992: Somalia invaded even though famine lessened. 1999: Yugoslavia bombed even though Serbia agreeing to withdraw from Kosovo. 2001: Afghanistan bombed even though some Taliban factions willing to give up Bin Laden. 2003: Iraq invaded as it increased cooperation with U.N. Not a conspiracy, but seizing opportunity: choosing fights that afford the best strategic positions
41. Staying is more important than winning Weakened Iraq, but not overthrew Saddam or backed Shi’ite rebellions in 1991. Withdrew from Somalia but moved naval basing to Yemen. Took over Afghanistan but “failed” to capture Bin Laden or Mullah Omar. Would have invaded Iraq even if Saddam ousted (Ari Fleischer, March 18, 2003)
42. If U.S. wins, it may be asked to leave Saddam’s capture strengthened Iraqi Shi’ite resolve for U.S. withdrawal Enemies are sometimes more useful alive and free long enough for them to justify the permanent stationing of forces.
43. Wars in the making: Iran or Syria Iran in “Axis of Evil” as the main obstacle to U.S. Sphere of Influence. (U.S. bombers in Iran until Shah’s fall) Iran oil economy not under U.S. control. Iran nuclear program possible target. U.S. undercutting Iranian moderates; accusing of interference in Iraq. Syria’s Ba’ath Party accused of Iraq insurgent links, chemical arms, etc.
44. Palestinian obstacle Pro-Israel stance making U.S. interventions difficult. Possible solutions : Install weakened Palestinian leader in Kosovo-style protectorate? U.S. troops in peace deal? U.S. military/CIA increasing role in West Bank/Gaza
45. Wars in the making: Somalia or Yemen Bin Laden father from eastern Yemen, Al-Qaeda trainers were in Somalia. Using as excuse to return for naval basing in strategic Red Sea strait. Using indirect methods to avoid disaster: naval patrols, intelligence, training local forces, Predator drone missile strikes, Ac-130 attacks on Islamist militias Yemen AC-130 (used in Somalia)
46. Wars in the making: Georgia or Azerbaijan Georgia along planned oil pipeline route from Azerbaijan to Turkey. Training Azerbaijanis as counterweight to Russia, angering Armenia / Karabakh (strengthening Armenian ties to Russia) Putin joins U.S. in anti-OPEC bloc Russians flatten Chechen capital city of Grozny U.S. troops In Georgia Trained Georgians to fight “al-Qaeda” in Pankisi Gorge along Chechen border
47. Wars in the making: The Philippines U.S. opposes Abu Sayyaf: Thuggish outgrowth of Moro Insurgency in south, with weak link to Al Qaeda. U.S. evicted from bases in 1991; new deployment as excuse for new basing rights. Risk of expanding fight to other Moro or Communist rebels. Visiting Forces Agreement renews U.S. access to former Subic Bay Naval Base. U.S. troops land to train Filipino forces on Jolo Island off Mindanao
48. Wars in the making: North Korea North Korea part of “ Axis of Evil” to justify criticized bases in South Korea, and Japan/Okinawa. Inserting U.S. power back in East Asia to counteract growing Chinese power. Okinawa, Japan South Korea
49. Wars in the making: Colombia or Venezuela Colombia 3rd-largest aid recipient; Anti-drug campaign morphing into counterinsurgency, guarding oil pipelines Manta air base in Ecuador near Colombia (soon to be ousted) U.S. acquiesced in attempted coup vs . Chávez in Venezuela (OPEC) Hugo Chávez after coup attempt in Venezuela, 2004 Patch worn by Colombian troops guarding oil facilities
50. Wars in the making: North and West Africa Discussions to set up small bases in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia Training of government armies in Niger, Chad, Mali, Mauritania Lost ex-colony Liberia as listening post; increased naval presence along West Africa’s oil-rich coasts Algeria Liberia
51. Substitutes for unpopular bases Eastern European bases substitute for German bases Iraqi, Kuwaiti bases substitute for Saudi bases Filipino bases substitute for S. Korean, Okinawan bases? Less obtrusive presence, but not full withdrawal Different “R&R” strategies in Gulf, Kosovo Germany Saudi Arabia
52. Positioning of new bases More small forward deployments, base access agreements More flexibility: Small base can quickly be turned into large base Privatize services, training, logistics with civilian contractors Less sprawling, less visible off-base presence Families not brought to new bases More male / wives become single moms
53. Short-term reasons for bases To reestablish ousted U.S. military bases. To establish strings of new U.S. military bases. (Like Romans, to use military prowess to offset relative economic decline.) To establish control over oil for Europe, Asia.
54. Long-term reasons for bases To establish new U.S. Sphere of Influence (Poland to Pakistan and beyond). To counteract the rise of European political bloc of E.U. (Germany) & Russia Counteract emergence of East Asian economic bloc & Chinese military power. Joined by some allies because of overlapping priorities, fear of exclusion from carving out new order.
55. U.S. public support? Strong support for “security” against Al Qaeda; (heightened by “terror alerts”) and for oil control. Yet loss of public support if wars extended to Iran, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela/Colombia, etc . Increased vulnerability; risk of further “blowback” if military bases overextended, and wars and occupations constant. Solution to Islamist militancy is to reduce poverty, corruption and foreign occupation in the Muslim world.
56. Collins, John M. 1998. "Military Bases." Military Geography for Professional and the Public. Washington, DC: National Defense University. Institute for National Strategic Studies. http://www.ndu.edu/inss/books/milgeo/milgeoch12.htm Evinger, William R., ed. 1998. Directory of U.S. Military Bases Worldwide . Phoenix: Oryx Press. Global Security Organization http:// www.globalsecurity.org Stop NATO archives http:// lists.topica.com /lists/ANTINATO/read http://groups.yahoo.com/group/b-antinato US Air Force, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard, Army Military Bases http:// globemaster.de/bases.html U.S. Department of Defense. 2001. Worldwide Manpower Distribution by Geographical Area. Washington, DC: Directorate for Information, Operations, and Reports (Sept. 30). http://web1.whs.osd.mil/DIORCAT.HTM#M05 U.S. Department of Defense. 2002. Base Structure Report (A Summary of DoD’s Real Property Inventory . Office of the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense (Installations and Environment).
57. Blum, William. 2003. Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II. London: Zed Books. Center for Defense Information. 1989. "The Global Network of United States Military Bases." Defense Monitor 18(2). Enloe, Cynthia. 2000. Bananas, Beaches and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics. Berkeley & London, University of California Press.. Gerson, Joseph and Bruce Birchard, eds. 1991. The Sun Never Sets: Confronting the Network of Foreign U.S. Military Bases . Boston: South End Press. Johnson, Chalmers. 2004. The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic. New York: Metropolitan Books. Klare. Michael. 2004. Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependence on Imported Petroleum. New York: Metropolitan Books. Monthly Review . 2002. "U.S. Military Bases and Empire." Editorial (March). 53(10). Shalom, Stephen R. 1993. Imperial Alibis: Rationalizing U.S. Intervention After the Cold War . Boston: South End Press. Simbulan, Ronald. 1987. The Bases of Our Insecurity . Manila: BALAI Fellowship. Traynor, Ian. 2003. “How American power girds the globe with a ring of steel .” Guardian (Apr. 21).
58. Dr. Zoltán Grossman Member of the Faculty (Geography/Indigenous Studies) The Evergreen State College Lab 1, 2700 Evergreen Pkwy. NW Olympia, WA 98505 USA Tel.: (360) 867-6153 E-mail: [email_address] Website: http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz