Keydy Vasquez Cerrato Essays (483 words) - , Term Papers

Keydy Vasquez Cerrato Mr. Parker U.S History January 23, 2017 World War 1 DBQ Essay "Our motive will not be revenge or the victorious assertion of the physical might of the nation, but only the vindication of right, of which we are only a single champion." (Wilson) the First World War was one of the most destructive and deadliest wars of all time. Several countries participated in the war. When the se major European nations went to war in 1914, the majority of Americans wanted nothing to do with the raging war. In April 2, 1917, Woodrow Wilson asked Congress for a decla ration of war to make the world "safe for democracy." However, there is sti ll heated and debated argument going on: Could America's involvement in World War One been avoided by Wilson? There are several reasons why President Wilson could not avoid getting America involve in WW1. The Germans attacked boats holding Americans civilians. America was threatened by German and the allies would have lost. For the first few years of WW1, America made sure to stay out of the way. However when the German's attacked and destroyed the Lusitania and other ships, carrying American civilian . Many were in an uproar about the deaths and knew something had to be done to stop the Germans. The German promised that they would not sink unarmed passenger ships without warning, however, twice they promised, and didn't keep it. Americans thought that if these killings were to continue, then the US would have to intervene. In January of 1917, Germany was suffering from supply shortages do to blo ckades taking action. Germany had their foreign Minister Arthur Zimmerman send a telegram to Mexico, stating that if the U.S. declared war on Germany, that Mexico should do the same to the U.S. the tele gram was intercepted and given to American authorities. Although most leaders believed that Mexico would go to war, Americans were shocked with the publication of the telegram and wanted to enter the war. When the war broke out in the summer of 1914, it was like any other war. However when Germany started its campaign of unrestricted submarine warfare, it was clear that Germany and its allies pleaded for help from America. Without America sending in fresh troops and military supplies to the French and The British, The Allies would more than likely have fallen and be under the control of Germany. In conclusion, American involvement in World War 1 couldn't have been avoided by President Wilson. All these event lead to America being involved in the World War. The Lusitania, the Zimmerman Note and the Allies all happened, and no matter how hard America tried to not get involved, it eventually happened and they just got caught in the heat of the moment.

Free Essays on United Nation

. On the contrary, millions of people around the world look to these principles to bring them to the rights and fr... Free Essays on United Nation Free Essays on United Nation Far away, on America’s Pacific Coast, a conference was meeting to create the United Nations. Shortly after Roosevelt’s death, and slightly before the first nuclear bomb test, the world’s leaders argued about the structure of the organization they were building. They debated the â€Å"fundamental human rights† to which they dedicated themselves to. Rights included social progress for better standards of living and equal rights for men and women. Another word was added to this listjustice. The Charter of the United Nations was signed on June 26, 1945. It states that the main objective of the new organization is â€Å"to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights.† In 1946, the U.N. established the Commission on Human Rights the principal policy-making body within the U.N. system. On December 10, 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted and proclaimed by the General Assembly of the United Nations. This act went through by Resolution 217A (III). There were forty-eight votes for the Declaration and none against it. However, there were eight countries that stayed away from this. These countries included White Russia, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine, USSR, South Africa, and Yugoslavia. The United Nations was designed to include all peace loving states. They also left the great powers to enforce this peace. Although the U.N. failed to attain its dreams, it has provided a valuable â€Å"sounding board† for world opinion. It also developed a center for secret crisis negotiations. Since WWII, the U.N. has helped ease unendurable pressures. The Charter of the United Nations contains noble phrases with regard to human rights and fundamental freedoms. Some skeptics believe that the Declaration of Human Rights is just words. On the contrary, millions of people around the world look to these principles to bring them to the rights and fr...

The Chemistry Behind Sparkler Fireworks

The Chemistry Behind Sparkler Fireworks All fireworks are not created equal! For example, there is a difference between a firecracker and a sparkler. The goal of a firecracker is to create a controlled explosion. A sparkler, on the other hand, burns over a long period of time (up to a minute) and produces a brilliant shower of sparks. Sometimes sparklers are called snowballs in reference to the ball of sparks that surrounds the burning part of the sparkler. Sparkler Chemistry A sparkler consists of several substances: An oxidizerA fuelIron, steel, aluminum, or other metal powderA combustible binder In addition to these components, colorants, and compounds to moderate the chemical reaction also may be added. Often, firework fuel is charcoal and sulfur. Sparklers simply may use the binder as the fuel. The binder is usually sugar, starch, or shellac. Potassium nitrate or potassium chlorate may be used as oxidizers. Metals are used to create the sparks. Sparkler formulae may be quite simple. For example, a sparkler may consist only of potassium perchlorate, titanium or aluminum, and dextrin. Now that youve seen the composition of a sparkler, lets consider how these chemicals react with each other: Oxidizers Oxidizers produce oxygen to burn the mixture. Oxidizers are usually nitrates, chlorates, or perchlorates. Nitrates are made up of a metal ion and a nitrate ion. Nitrates give up 1/3 of their oxygen to yield nitrites and oxygen. The resulting equation for potassium nitrate looks like this: 2 KNO3(solid) → 2 KNO2(solid) O2(gas) Chlorates are made up of a metal ion and the chlorate ion. Chlorates give up all of their oxygen, causing a more spectacular reaction. However, this also means they are explosive. An example of potassium chlorate yielding its oxygen would look like this: 2 KClO3(solid) → 2 KCl(solid) 3 O2(gas) Perchlorates have more oxygen in them but are less likely to explode as a result of an impact than are chlorates. Potassium perchlorate yields its oxygen in this reaction: KClO4(solid) → KCl(solid) 2 O2(gas) Reducing Agents The reducing agents are the fuel used to burn the oxygen produced by the oxidizers. This combustion produces hot gas. Examples of reducing agents are sulfur and charcoal, which react with the oxygen to form sulfur dioxide (SO2) and carbon dioxide (CO2), respectively. Regulators Two reducing agents may be combined to accelerate or slow the reaction. Also, metals affect the speed of the reaction. Finer metal powders react more quickly than coarse powders or flakes. Other substances, such as cornmeal, also may be added to regulate the reaction. Binders Binders hold the mixture together. For a sparkler, common binders are dextrin (a sugar) dampened by water or a shellac compound dampened by alcohol. The binder can serve as a reducing agent and as a reaction moderator. How Does a Sparkler Work? Lets put it all together: A sparkler consists of a chemical mixture that is molded onto a rigid stick or wire. These chemicals often are mixed with water to form a slurry that can be coated on a wire (by dipping) or poured into a tube. Once the mixture dries, you have a sparkler. Aluminum, iron, steel, zinc or magnesium dust or flakes may be used to create the bright, shimmering sparks. The metal flakes heat up until they are incandescent and shine brightly or, at a high enough temperature, actually burn. A variety of chemicals can be added to create colors. The fuel and oxidizer are proportioned, along with the other chemicals, so that the sparkler burns slowly rather than exploding like a firecracker. Once one end of the sparkler is ignited, it burns progressively to the other end. In theory, the end of the stick or wire is suitable to support it while burning. Important Sparkler Reminders Obviously, sparks cascading off of a burning stick present a fire and burn hazard. Less obviously, sparklers contain one or more metals to create the sparks and any colors, so they can present a health hazard. For example, they should not be burned on cakes as candles or otherwise used in a manner which could lead to consumption of the ash. So use sparklers safely and have fun!

Change Management- Its interrelation with Project Management Essay

Change Management- Its interrelation with Project Management - Essay Example Change management is all about managing change and making the change beneficial for everyone. The main field of changes are psychological, business and engineering. Thus with the study of change in organization it is also necessary to have knowledge about change in individual. Kurt Lewin proposed a model in which he described change in three stages. The first stage is of Unfreezing. This stage proposes the change which raze the general thinking of an individual. The second stage is the period of disarray in which how should we replace the current set up also comes into mind. The third stage is refreezing in which all changes are set and comfort level returns back to the original position. This was the last stage which refers that change also provides comfort in work and behavior. The other change model is presented by Kubler Ross. This model describes two stages one is personal and second is emotional. There is formula for change that is that a beneficial change occurs when organizational satisfaction is not good or future immediate change and these changes must have greater effect than the resistance of company to occur change. There are some points that results in successful change: - 1) Awareness :- The people should be aware of change that why it is needed and up to which level. 2) Desire :- It is a person's own desire to have change and to participate in it with enthusiasm and a new vision, 3) Knowledge :- How the change should be done and when, knowledge of these things is of utmost importance. The knowledge of these things helps in a beneficial change. 4) Ability :- Change is not so easy process, to implement change is a very tough job. How to implement new technology and new skills so as to gain maximum output. This ability should be there in a manager. Organizational Change Management :- To manage the change in technology and process and individual behavior on an organizational level is called organizational change management. To manage these terms with an individual behavior gives change in organization. Changes should be handled with great care. The management of these changes should be such that they do not cause any negative impact on the organization. All possible views are considered before making nay change. Types of changes in organization :- 1) Operational change :- These changes effect the ongoing operations of the organizatio

Dry Docks Business Article Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Dry Docks Business - Article Example Amazingly, manual labor was very much involved during that time where able-bodied men helped in bringing in the ship. An engine known as organois was used in draining the water, allowing the vessel to be supported by cross-beams.(cite) Because of this, dry docks are considered part of inventions belonging to the classical period. Nevertheless, dry docks also were used in China during the Song Dynasty. Obviously, dragon ships during that time which carried imperial couches were made of solid wood. Because of this material, there was a need to repair the wooden hulls since it decayed quickly. It was only in a later period that some wise official suggested the concept of a dry dock. In another part of the world, Henry VIII commissioned the first dry dock was built in Portsmouth in 1495. In modern times, the drydock at Belfast , Ireland was once the biggest drydock in the world. While in the United States, Northrop Grumman Newport News Shipbuildings Dry Dock 12 is considered the largest, situated closely to the slipway where the unlucky Titanic was constructed. Due to the competitive maritime industry, more dry docks have been constructed on many parts of the world. According to the April issue of Maritime, the largest dry dock in the world is now located at Ulsan, South Korea. It was described by the article as : â€Å"†¦.490 meters (1,600 feet) long, 115 meters across and 13.5 meters deep, Hyundai has announced that it now has the world’s largest drydock. Imagine an area roughly the size of 7 soccer fields and that is what you would see at the new H-Dock in Ulsan, South Korea.   The dock is custom designed to build floating production storage and offloading (FPSO) vessels and includes two 1,600ton goliath cranes.   Traditionally FPSO’s hull sides and topside are built separately. The hull is built in a ship

Do the right thing by Spike Lee Essay Example for Free

Do the right thing by Spike Lee Essay I dearly love the film and maintain that its one of the great pictures from the last 10 years. I dont know what the director of this movie (Spike Lee) intended the moral to be, but my take on the film has always been that NO ONE does the right thing, and this is the cautionary element of the movie. The racial message about racial injustice is very deep and one that every race should see. The climax of the movie is very powerful and deep. The heat is blazing, tensions are running high (especially racial ones), and under this kind of pressure no one behaves according to common courtesy and decency. The entire film is a chain of uncontrolled outbursts of anger that lead to everyones misery. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability could be wrong, so is the belief that a particular race is superior to others. Anyone can have a belief like that black, white, whatever. I am not about to buy into this rhetoric that any race shoulders 100% of the blame for racism in America today. Indeed, but racism is a belief, not an action. Sociologists clearly delineate between prejudices and acts of discrimination. One can be racist (prejudice) and not act on it (discriminate). By the same token, one can discriminate against others and not hold racist beliefs (prejudice). There is simply no way, short of telepathy, to determine if anyone is truly racist. One can easily assume that Adolf Hitler was a racist based on his writings and horrific actions, but there is absolutely no way to know for sure that Hitler *truly* hated Jews or simply used the hatred of Jews as a convenient means to attain power. Anyway, those in a position of power have more opportunities to act discriminatorily than those without, but I see no evidence to suggest that The Powers That Be are more *likely* to engage in such behaviors. As such, a discriminatory action by a powerless person can be more effective than the lack of such an action by someone in power. Riots are NEVER true result of racism, but rather the violent, destructive impulses of citizens with no faith in the justice system to take matters into their own hands. They are simply an opportunity for a misguided youth, unsupervised or uninstructed on issued of morality, to appease their violent appetites by destroying the livelihood of someone who is not exactly like  them. In every major example of the last 40 years in US, the violent rioters were not good citizens who felt pushed to the breaking point by some act of injustice, but degenerates whose prejudices against anyone with more money than they found an excuse in the politicized racial arguments to act out what they never truly cared to know was wrong (Heath Petraitis, 1987). The only result of a race riot is hatred, looting, and murder. It is not the answer to anything, and should never be treated as such. It is an insult to the millions of black citizens who seek to live their lives as normal, peaceful, law-abiding citizens of the United States to associate them with the few degenerate thieves and murderers who commit race riots (Singer Singer, 1986). Thats why Do the Right Thing has always touched its viewers. The ending turns a decent, fine comedy-drama into a vessel for class and race related hatred. I do believe in violence as a last measure to protect ones self, or their personal freedoms, or in the case of a moral war. Just look at my signature closing line. I do not in any way believe that the situation in Do the Right Thing presents a need for violence. It is merely a bunch of tempered people retaliating against the brutality of the police by burning an innocent mans pizza shop down, apparently only because he was a white business owner. That is sad. I think, really, this films central theme if there really is one is the path black men in America today face as inspired by their most prominent leaders. Radio Rahiem is easily the wisest in the entire film as hes aware of the dichotomy and thus tries to balance his existence under both directions fight the power constantly playing takes on an entire new meaning here as the film doesnt really know what the power is that PE wants us to fight. Rahiem knows though, its the self. Pretty amazing imagery. But on the other hand, he rarely speaks but instead relies on his radio to speak for him. Likewise, he doesnt understand his own rhetoric on the nature of love and hate. That made him as racist as any other character in the film, with the possible but unlikely exception of smiley, and brings his own death on himself. I wondered what would be the cops reactions if racial positions had been  reversed (ie a black mans pizzeria, a white man accidentally killed after basically making a complete, hostile mess of himself, then resisting arrest etc) Would a white cops strangle a white man to death? Thats where racial issues arise. I was upset at the death of radio Rahiem, but just couldnt escape the fact that he had brought it on himself. No one deserves to die like that. But if he had avoided escalating a completely unnecessary confrontation by assaulting Sal, he wouldnt have died. He was responsible for his own death, just as Sal was responsible for the destruction of the pizzeria (very nearly his own death) when he destroyed Rahiems radio. Radio Raheem was pissed off, his whole existence was that radio. Sure he physically assaulted him, but he didnt say anything like, Ill kill you. Maybe if Radio said in an earlier scene Man Im gonna kill that irk bastard etc. Id be more apt to agree that Radio Rahiem intent was to kill Sal. Technically Sal brought the destruction of the pizzeria on himself too, by (through the chain of events) not putting up pictures of brothers on the walls; but it is his pizzeria and he was within his rights to do so. He yelled racist epithets which is a direct act of aggression and smashed someones property to pieces. Instead of destroying someones property, he should have called the police to escort Buggin out and Radio Rahim. Radio Rahiem was NOT within his rights when he entered the store and refused to turn his radio down. Of course Sal and Radio Rahiem are both racists, everyone in the film is. No one did the right thing in the end, but the unfortunate fact is that, in the final encounter with Radio Rahiem, Sal was just a little more right than Radio Rahiem. Imagine Radio Rahiem and Sal were both black (or white.) Imagine the ultimate reasons behind the clash were not racially based. Radio Rahiem is the aggressor, and because of this, ultimately audience sympathy would lie with Sal. Radio Raheem and Buggin Out were trying to bully an innocent business owner. It was Sals restaurant, if they did not like his regulations than they could leave, but he was entirely within his rights to demand for them to either leave or turn off the music. He certainly gave fair warning, and he never ever tried to physically harm anyone until Radios attack. While it is  unfortunate Radio died, he simply was not worth the destruction that was carried out in his name. I also find it mystifying that Mookie, supposedly the levelheaded character in the movie, was so superficial that he blamed Sal for Radios death. I cannot reconcile myself with the notion that Mookie throwing the trash can through the pizzeria window was even remotely doing the right thing. I sympathize a lot with Sal, but I also sympathize with Mookie. Sal also cared a lot about the black in Bastury, and was genuinely hurt when some of them turned against him. I will vehemently argue that Sals character is not racist; he drops an n-word at the end, but the man is watching his lifes work being torched by arson at the hands of a group of African-Americans; his outburst is understandable and forgivable. Vito, Lees Sister, and the baby are as decent as people could be. Da Mayor is a good man who has made mistakes but is trying to change so at this point hes a good man trying to be a better man. He does drink too many beers with little money, though. One thing that always confused me about this film (although its one of my favorites) is why Mother Sister painfully screams noooo, when only a few minutes beforehand, she was right with the crowd yelling burn it! burn it! it seems like a bit of a flaw to me, but I could be wrong. My guess is the Burn it down Burn it down is with respect to the pizzeria. The noooo is with respect to radio Rahiems death. Lets assume that the film is about the cyclical nature of violence. Does Spike Lee( the director) think that all violence is bad or only certain violence is? After reading Martin Luther Kings quote I thought it was all violence; after reading Malcolm Xs quote I got the message that some violence is ok. I know that Blacks have been prejudiced against for a long time, but I dont see how violence ever solved their problem. It seems to me that Martin Luther Kings non-violence approach ultimately did much more to further equality than Malcolm Xs approach of violence-sometimes-needed approac h. The cops didnt necessarily care for Sal or anyone there. They didnt kill Rahiem because they wanted revenge. They did a right think by choking Rahiem, but they should have weakened him enough to handcuff him and then have thrown him in the police car. I doubt either Clubbing or strangling  will ever equate to, to use your words, holding him in place until he calmed down. I doubt those are the only options law enforcement officers have. They shouldnt have killed him. It was an extreme use of force pure and simple. The key being that if as you say they were trying to prevent Sal from being chocked by a criminal than why didnt they release their choke hold on Radio Rahiem after he had let go of Sal? They kept choking him long after he was a threat to anyone and it was obvious he himself was being choked to death. Why did they not throw him to the ground at that time and handcuff him? They didnt even try. In the film, Da Mayor says you gotta Do The Right Thing. Rahiem does not because he wont respect Sals wishes to turn off or turn down the radio (Also didnt respect Sals decision to represent only his culture in the pizzeria). Bugging Out is just a racist who knows nothing and wants to pretend to have a calling so he rides in on Radios coattails. Rahiem did the wrong thing and Sal did nothing wrong until he uttered the N-word. I dont think Sal meant it in that way. He was angry so he exploited a characteristic of Radios boom box. The people were angry at Sal for saying the n-word but they didnt go against Sal. They got confused and yelled. Then the police came in and everything went up in flames. Obviously, a spark leads to a fire. The spark: The police killing Rahiem. The Fire: The mob. It was understandable for there to be a riot and it was understandable that they got angry at white men in general because they are black people and they live in an ugly area. But just because its understandable, doesnt mean its right. The name of the movie is Do The Right Thing. And to be honest, even though thats very straight and very literal, towards the end it becomes ironic. The moment that they could do the right thing, they did the worst thing of them all. And that riot could have been right but it went wrong. Their anger went in the wrong direction. Things just happen. Sals pizzeria going down in flames is symbolic of the fact that people just destroy each other. And in the end, the face of the oppressor (The white man) is thrown on every white body and someone with the face of the oppressor is oppressed. Well, theres a line (Not from this movie) that goes You become the monster so the monster will not break you. You become what you terrify you. And in  this case, the oppressed (The black community) gets so fed up (Throughout the entire movie, there is talk of there recently being a police brutality situation involving black civilians being killed) with being oppressed that they become what they hate and they oppress someone else: Someone whos been more of a family member to them then most of their families has a different face than they do. He has the face of the monster, and they dont like past skin deep and treat him the way they should treat the people who do oppress them. And its painful and we dont know what to think. Im the least racist person in the world and Im also the person who is more annoyed than anyone with jokes being allowed to be made about white people and not about black people. I dont like going to the park and having some guy say, White boy, dont want none of this. It irritates me because I want plenty. Sometimes it gets so hard to hear all the unfairness and listen to a persons lack of understanding for another. This film is just a day. Its the hottest day of the summer. You can do nothing, you can do something, or you can Do The Right Thing. You can. So do it.

The Red Shoes :: English Literature Essays

The Red Shoes ‘The Red Shoes’ is an imaginary and unreal story related by Hans Christian Anderson. Anderson makes effective use of fantasy to teach a moral lesson. He builds up the story in such a way that the reader does not care for the validity of the incidents. The moral lesson is that the proud and the disobedient must suffer. Disobedience is a sin, and according to the Christian belief it is what started the demise in the heavens above, so anybody who commits it must suffer. Whatever sins man commits in his lifetime he is punished for them. If only he repents for his sins can he be forgiven and at least he can die in peace. God forgives them only when they repent for their sins. The story also presents another facts of the Christian belief about sin and punishment, which is based on the strict principles of repentance and forgiveness. In the story Karen is a poor but beautiful girl. At the death of her mother, a rich old lady takes her to her home and brings her up. The widow of the cobbler gave Karen a pair of red shoes, which she wore for the first time on her mother’s funeral. The old lady who adopted Karen disliked, the red shoes greatly because of Karen’s obsession for them and so she burnt them. Then once Karen saw the princess wearing beautiful red shoes. Her love for these shoes got re-ignited; she liked them a lot indeed. Karen grew up to be a beautiful damsel. She was to be made the member of the church. Her foster mother, the rich old lady bought her a lovely pair of shoes incidentally those shoes were also red in color. This fact has escaped the old lady’s notice, but Karen found them to be exactly what she yearned for. She went to church in those red shoes. She thought that everyone in the church was looking at her shoes. She wore them at the time of confirmation, which was not the proper occasion to wear them. Karen felt very proud of them. She even forgot to pray in the church when the old lady came to know about it she told Karen not to wear those shoes in future but once again she went to the church wearing those shoes. This accounted for the sin of disobedience she committed.