| Papers [1-16] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "GERMAN NAVAL STRATEGY WORLD WAR": |
|
|
German Naval Strategy During World War II, 2002.
A discussion of Germany's Naval Strategy during World War II, focusing on the development of the German Navy as well as their weapons and strategy.
19,400 words (approx. 77.6 pages), 64 sources, MLA, AU$ 401.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
As a result of the Treaty of Versailles the German Navy was reduced to a small coastal defense. This thesis looks at the German Naval plan during World War II and why it was not as successful as it should have been. Issues such as their deployment strategy, ship and submarine building, weapons are examined in great detail. The German Naval strategy is compared with the British Navy. The miscalculations made by the German Naval leaders are evaluated to show what went wrong for the German Navy.
From the Paper
"During the Second World War Great Britain depended on her sea born trade to maintain her ability to be involved in the conflict. This required the Royal Navy to protect convoys by using most of its capital ship strength. German leaders realized that they could never create a navy large enough to challenge the British directly. From the onset of German remilitarization they planned to build a small, technically advanced fleet of battleships that could destroy the capital ships of the Royal Navy in succession and weaken Britain to such a point that she would be compelled to negotiate a settlement."
| |
|
Naval Doctrine and the Naval Impact in World War II, 1999.
A look at why Allied naval doctrine at the start of the war was outdated, and how the Allies quickly caught up.
3,030 words (approx. 12.1 pages), 21 sources, AU$ 144.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains ll the major combatants of the war at sea in World War II entered the conflict with outdated naval doctrine and then points out that although the addition of modern weapons were vital to the outcome of the war at sea it was the Allies? ability to utilise these weapons through changing tactics and rapid adaptation that was decisive. The paper further suggests that although the Allies? initial responses to the new type of ocean warfare with which they were faced was slow this situation quickly changed and argues that the Axis powers were much slower to adapt and continually made crucial errors in estimating their opponents capabilities. Finally, it is argued that, in the end, it was the phenomenal American ability to produce, in combination with the efficient use of signals intelligence, that destroyed or nullified the Axis powers at sea.
| |
|
AirCraft Carriers in World War Two., 2002.
A look at the influence and strategic purposes of the aircraft carrier during World War II.
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 5 sources, AU$ 85.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay will argue for the influence of the aircraft carrier during World War II and discover why this form of Naval craft was so useful for strategic purposes for naval warfare. The elements of the ship's usage will be explained, along with an overview of how the ship was used to help win the Great War. By relating all of these factors, a better understanding of naval history will prove how it's invention was essential to the history of strategy on the seas. By studying some of tactics that the British, Japanese, and Americans used during the Second World War, a clear understanding of the aircraft carrier as a strategic weapon can be made.
| |
|
The First World War, 2007.
This paper analyzes who was responsible for the outbreak of WWI.
2,155 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 6 sources, MLA, AU$ 108.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, when considering all of the dominant factors that were instrumental to the start of World War One, it is clear that no one element or country was absolutely to blame for this war. The author points out that social ideologies, imperialism, nationalism, colonialism, the arms race and political changes throughout Europe played a part in causing this tragedy. The paper concludes that man's greed, the need to be seen as more important, powerful or superior and the desire to see one's country as the most advanced, prosperous and evolved were all implicating factors. The paper includes a chart of the naval strengths of the powers of 1914.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
The War to End All Wars
Social Darwinism
The Structure of Europe
Imperialism, Nationalism, and Colonial Expansion
The Arms Race
Over By Christmas
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The Austro-Hungarian government, with full support from Germany, waited for three weeks before issuing the July ultimatum to Serbia, which insisted that Serbia should take full responsibility, and which basically asked to be included in the investigation concerning the assassination. Serbia refused to hand over the three men that were implicated in the assassination, and appealed to Russia for help. Russian mobilization began, and on the 28th July 1914, Austro-Hunagria declared war on Serbia. Due to their promised support to Austro-Hungaria, on July 31, Germany issued Russia with an ..."
| |
|
The Nature of War and the Significance of Strategy, 2008.
An essay on the military strategies of various war leaders.
1,987 words (approx. 7.9 pages), 10 sources, MLA, AU$ 102.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses many well-known ancient commentators of war and highlights the thoughts expressed by one of the most famous of these commentators, Sun Tzu, who lived some time between 500 and 300 B.C.E., during the warring kingdoms period in China. The paper goes on to discuss the five factors Sun Tzu saw necessary for implementing war and then compares his ideas with that of Henri-Antoine Jomini, who was influenced by the Napoleonic era, and many others. The paper concludes that with the power of nuclear warheads today perhaps mankind has realized that "warring" is no longer an option.
From the Paper
"While there are many commentators in western history, including notably Thucydides and Julius Caesar - both of them practitioners as well as commentators - perhaps the most notable of the ancient commentators is a person of who we know very little. We believe Sun Tzu lived some time between 500 and 300 B.C.E., during the warring kingdoms period in China. His various teachings on war were written out some 200 years later."
| |
|
Peloponnesian War Strategy of Pericles and Cleon, 2005.
Compares the war strategies of two ancient Greeks, Pericles and Cleon.
2,294 words (approx. 9.2 pages), 6 sources, MLA, AU$ 113.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares and contrasts the opposing strategies of two major figures of Athenian history, Pericles and Cleon, during the Peloponnesian War. The paper also deals with strategic options that were possibly overlooked and why that might have happened.
From the Paper
"Prior to the Peloponnesian War, Pericles of Athens developed a net assessment of the relative strengths and weaknesses of Athens and of his opponent. The antithesis of Pericle's defensive strategy was that Cleon's hawkish nature of war plunged Athens into further conflict. Ultimately, a study of each strategy reveals that Pericles and Cleon were not completely different, but actually had some similarities. What they did both have in common were strategic opportunities that were available but not taken."
| |
|
German Opposition to the War in Iraq, 2005.
An analysis of the German Foreign and Security Policy (GFSP) in relation to the Iraq war.
4,050 words (approx. 16.2 pages), 19 sources, AU$ 258.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines Germany's opposition to the war in Iraq. It examines key developments in German Foreign and Security Policy since unification, discusses who determines GFSP, evaluates how it is administered, and assesses present conditional factors. Upon examining these issues, Sebastian Harnisch concluded that GFSP since unification can best be described as modified continuity, and this paper agrees with this assessment. Regard for continuity was manifested in Germany's opposition to the war in Iraq, while Kosovo and Afghanistan demonstrated that changes in policy are sometimes implemented when international crises arise.
| |
|
Civil War Strategy, 2008.
This paper discusses Abraham Lincoln's contributions to the Civil War.
3,888 words (approx. 15.6 pages), 13 sources, MLA, AU$ 171.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper reveals the lack of strategy with which the American Civil War began but relates that the Army had one man, Abraham Lincoln, who had the vision to formulate a strategy that could win the war. The paper describes the events of the war and shows how despite several mistakes, Lincoln achieved his foremost goal of preserving the Union.
From the Paper
"One of the remarkable things about the Civil War was the lack of strategy with which it began. In 1861, with the southern states in secession and war looming, President Abraham Lincoln came into office to find a woefully understaffed and inadequate Army and a Navy so small and poorly ordered that it clearly could not address the crisis which the nation faced.
"The Army, which would be reduced substantially as southerners left, numbered barely 16,000 men, and had no general staff to develop strategic plans or even to envision strategy. Although it was soon apparent where a good deal of the fighting would take place, the Army plunged into campaigns without even basic maps, so that units wandered from one location to another with little or no idea where they were going."
| |
|
Archer Jones's "Civil War and Strategy: The Process of Victory and Defeat", 2004.
Summary and review of book on the U.S. Civil War.
1,389 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 2 sources, MLA, AU$ 75.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reviews Archer Jones's book on the U.S. Civil War, "Civil War and Strategy: The Process of Victory and Defeat", and summarizes the parameters of the book's content and the thesis Archer presents in the book. It looks at what the reaction to the book has been.
From the Paper
"The Civil War is often called, in military terms, the first modern war. However, although the war did blend technological and tactical elements that had never been deployed upon American soil, it was more of a heterogeneous mix of ancient and contemporary modes and means of warfare, than a truly modern war. In his text, Civil War and Strategy: The Process of Victory and Defeat, Archer Jones attempts to give a balanced study of Union and Confederate tactical and political decision-making. He attempts to illustrate how the ancient ideals of military history, as learned in the American nation?s service academies, were embodied in the conflict, as well as modern elements of strategy and weaponry that could only have been produced in a nation at the cusp of the Industrial Revolution."
| |
|
Japan's WWII War Strategies, 2003.
An analysis of factors which led Japan to adopt a southern war strategy in the early years of WWII.
1,610 words (approx. 6.4 pages), 11 sources, APA, AU$ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents an analysis of factors which led the Imperial Japanese government to adopt a Southern v. a Northern war strategy in 1940-1941, and to attack Pearl Harbor rather than Russia. It looks at the issue of China.
From the Paper
"This research paper analyzes the factors which led the Imperial Japanese Government to strike southwards in late ..."
| |
|
US Deterrence Strategies After The Cold War, 2006.
An in-depth analysis of the post Cold War US deterrence strategies.
22,206 words (approx. 88.8 pages), 74 sources, APA, AU$ 401.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the opinions of many after September 11th, that the present form of terrorism has made classical deterrence theory outdated. According to the paper transnational terrorism has totally dented conventional wisdom, which had dictated proceedings during the cold war. Similarly, rogue states all over the world, in general, and the Middle East and South Asia, in particular, have created a great deal of tension in Washington. The paper further discusses how the role of the American rival states, such as, North Korea and China and the functions and limitations of the UN Security Council have completely transformed the security structure of the sole hyper power of the world. This paper tries to elucidate the best possible deterrence strategy the United States should pursue after the cold war.
Outline:
Introduction
Statement of the Problem
Purpose of the Study
Justification of the Study
Research Design and Methodology
Collection of Data
Data Analysis and Search Tactics
Limitations of the Study
Part 2
Transnational Terrorism
The Rogue and the Rival States
The U.N. Security Council
Conclusion of This Section
Part 3
Literature Review
Classical Deterrence Theory
The End of Cold War deterrence
A New Justification
Conclusion of This Section
Part 4
The First Case Study: The Strategic Triangle (US/China/Russia)
The Sino-Russo Partnership
The US-Russian Labyrinth: A Subtle Relationship
The Source for Cooperation and Divergence
Effect of the End of Cold War
Conclusion of This Section
The Second Case Study: Deterring North Korea
US Policy on the Korean Peninsula Since 1945
The Future of the U.S. Foreign Policy on the Korean Peninsula
The Status Quo Option
The Hard-Line Option
Compromise
Early Bush Administration Policy
Conclusion
The third Case Study: Transnational Terrorism
Counter-terrorism in a Global Society
Conclusion
Part 5
Observation and Conclusion
Correcting the Strategic Gaps in the U.S. Approach to Homeland Defense Concentrating Less on Who is Responsible and More on What They Ought to be Responsible of
Planning for Higher-Probability, Lower-Consequence, and Lower-Probability, Higher-Consequence Events
From the Paper
"At the threat of generalization, one could make a case that US relations with China were greatly powered by two issues: the vicissitudes in the Sino-Russo association and--the more significant of the two--the Taiwan problem. For 30 years following the "People's Republic of China" (PRC) emergence in 1949, the United States carried on to acknowledge the adversary Chinese government (the Republic of China, or ROC) that had moved to Taiwan after trailing behind the civil conflict on the mainland. The path to ultimate US standardization with the PRC in 1979 was cemented by US President Richard Nixon, whose striking plan was to build a coalition with China--which was, at that time, in conflict with the Soviet Union--in an effort to oppose the increasing Soviet threat. However the United States, in spite of everything, maintains informal relations with the Republic of China. Certainly, under the "Taiwan Relations Act," a piece of internal US legislation, Washington is under a duty to defend Taiwan's safety and therefore carry on arms sales to the isle .
Washington's Taiwan association has bedeviled its dealings with the Republic of China from this time onwards, even more so following 1988 when Taiwan's political leadership demonstrated growing inclinations in the direction of a separatist route outside the One China state-of-affairs. All through a brief disagreement amid mainland China and Taiwan in 1996, the United States sent off two naval battle factions to the Taiwan channel to demonstrate moral cooperation for Taiwan (and maybe to gratify President Clinton's congressional associates). An unintentional war with China was hardly prevented only with the sensible removal of the US carrier Independence, at the same time as, the second carrier, the Nimitz, was still on its route as of the Mediterranean Sea. The narrow escape drove home the Republic of China's sincerity in relation to Taiwan to the Clinton management, forcing it to assume a soul-searching evaluation of Sino-US strategy. The concluding decision for Clinton's "thoroughgoing" engagement policy concerning the Chinese, which he practiced all through his second presidential tenure, was to prevent himself from being heaved into an unintentional war with China on behalf of Taiwan ."
| |
|
Charles the Second and The Dutch Naval Wars, 2002.
An in-depth look at the history of the Dutch Naval Wars, with England and the involvement of Charles the Second throughout. Particular emphasis is made on the third war.
4,930 words (approx. 19.7 pages), 8 sources, APA, AU$ 202.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The English and the Dutch fought three wars in the seventeenth century of which the first two were about trade and the third about King Charles II and his atempts to gain power. This essay outlines these wars and the impact they had on the trade, politics and religion of Europe at that time. It also allows us to understand better the motives and drive behind the English king engaging in various treaties, alliances and of course battle. Great detail is paid to historical fact.
From the Paper
"The Dutch naval wars have been viewed as having lesser historical importance than many other events of the same time period, such as the English civil wars and the restoration of Charles II. However, these wars had a great impact on the trade, politics and religion of seventeenth century Europe. Three wars were fought between England and the Dutch Republic, the first two about trade. The third war, on which focus has been aimed, dealt with the monarch of England, Charles II, and his attempts to gain power. The third Dutch naval war failed to enhance Charles II?s power because the war went badly and caused the treaty of Dover to backfire."
| |
|
The Korean War and the Korean War Veterans' Memorial, 2005.
This paper discusses the forgotten war, the Korean War, and describes the Korean War Veterans' Memorial.
1,050 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 3 sources, MLA, AU$ 58.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, although statistically the Korean War took more lives than the Vietnam War, the Korean War has been branded as America's "Forgotten War" because it was over-shined by two "greater" wars, the Second World War and the Vietnam War, which dragged on for more than a decade. The author points out that the Korean War is important because it (1) started the end of the communist expansion in the world, (2) laid the ground for the entry of democracy in the states in Eastern Europe and Russia and (3) began the American foreign policy of military intervention to gain or maintain security, freedom and democracy in the world resulting in a number of military conflicts which continues today. The paper describes in detail the Korean War Veterans' Memorial, adjacent to the Lincoln Memorial directly across the reflecting pool from the Vietnam Veterans' Memorial in Washington, D.C., which was dedicated in 1995 by Bill Clinton and Kim Young Sam, then presidents of the U.S. and South Korea.
From the Paper
"The symbolisms in the memorial are brilliant pictures of a war that will never be forgotten. For as long as the memorial continues to exist, the memories of a war, which advanced freedom at the cost of the lives of millions of people, will eternally be thought of and etched in the minds of guests. Moreover, this memorial also serves as a reminder that freedom, though sweet and liberating, must never be taken for granted and must certainly be forever guarded, secured and remain dear in our hearts. It must also be remembered that there are still countries in the world that do not enjoy the rights given by a true democracy. The pursuit for the expansion of democracy must certainly not be abandoned. Still, millions of people are yearning for a free, equal state where social, economic and political justice stands and endures."
| |
|
The Persian Gulf War, A War Without Formal Declaration, 2002.
Looks at how the United States government engaged in the Persian Gulf War and several other wars after WWII without officially declaring war.
1,208 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 3 sources, MLA, AU$ 67.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the history of U.S. military engagement since the end of WWII, with particular emphasis on the Persian Gulf War of 1990. It points out that Congress has not formally declared war since December 11, 1941, against Germany and that, during the course of the last several decades in United States history, the citizens of the U.S. have been continually forced into war without a formal declaration of war supported by the U.S. Congress. The paper then discusses the War Powers Act, which has made it possible for Congress to avoid making actual declarations of war while still permitting major military engagements such as the Persian Gulf War.
From the Paper
"Congress has not formally declared war since December 11, 1941 against Germany in response to a formal Declaration of War by Germany against the U.S. (Paul, 2002). When Congress does formally declare war, a task that requires small effort on the part of representatives, an enemy is clearly defined and the task at hand is readily made clear. A clear cut victory is also expected as was the case of the Declaration of war against Germany and Japan. During the course of the last several decades in United States history, the citizens of the U.S. have been continually forced into war without a formal declaration of war supported by the U.S. Congress. The most recent example prior to 2003 of this was the war started in the Persian Gulf. Such action taken by the president of the U.S. exemplifies the pomposity and overbearing authority the president has placed upon himself over the citizens of this country."
| |
|
The Vietnam War and the Iraqi War, 2004.
This paper compares the similarities of the Vietnam War and the Iraqi War.
850 words (approx. 3.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, AU$ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses that the world of nations is becoming embittered because the United States demonstrated an unethical utilization of military and political power in the Vietnam War and the Iraqi War. The author believes that the War on Iraq, like the War in Vietnam, was a mere ploy of politicians attempting to prove their superiority. The paper relates that the Vietnam War was fought to free the Vietnamese from a dictator the U.S. previously supported and that the war on Iraq was fought, again, to free the Iraqis from a dictator the U.S. previously supported.
From the Paper
"The Vietnam War was fought on the basis of freedom, democracy and the need to hinder the spread of the evil of Communism. The slogan of the times was that if the spread of communism was not stalled America would soon lose its freedom and democracy the world over would be wiped out. These words may seem dramatic to the rational mind but to really understand the mood of the time such words must be used. The government of the time played on the emotional fear of the people through propaganda to make them believe that unless they supported the Vietnam War they would be unpatriotic and cause the nation to lose its sovereignty. Though Vietnam was thousands of miles away the war soon reached the borders of the US for as the war began so did dissent."
| |
|
War in Iraq War on Terror, 2007.
A discussion of how the war in Iraq and war on terror became linked as election issues.
2,646 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 13 sources, MLA, AU$ 128.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper the author argues that the war in Iraq was utilized as a persuasive tool to win an election, in which the war was linked to the more global and less definable "war on terrorism." The author further contends that in the 2004 presidential elections the voters were seeking security, and therefore they linked the two issues. This paper demonstrates that the war on terror and the war in Iraq are not connected and in fact contraindicated for the long term safety of the US, specifically with regard to future acts of terrorism. Salient quotes from primary and secondary sources are used to support the author's thesis.
From the Paper
"The importance and reality of this link are now being questioned at every level. People, in both high and low places are questioning the validity of the connection and asking if this aggressive move, on the part of the US, even in the face of much international opposition was in fact appropriate to improve security in the US and her interests all over the world. The political positioning that has become increasingly obvious has undermined the faith of individuals in the nature and necessity of the War in Iraq, as people feel they were sold a bill of goods, rather than leveled with in regards to the strategic importance of the Iraq in the global war on terrorism in both the short and log term. In fact this work argues that the only connection between the war on terrorism and the War on Iraq is that the later has and will continue to serve to increase terrorist activities and actions against the US, no matter how the government spins it."
|
|
|
