Mia Hamm Research paper Essay Example for Free

Mia Hamm Research paper Essay At the beginning of the story Alice starts off being pressured into marring a man she doesn’t even love. Her sister tells her to go get married and live just happily ever after like her but her husband is cheating on her. I think Alice’s call was when she kept spotting the white rabbit in the bushes and began to follow him in the middle of getting purposed to. Also after she fell down the hole the rabbit was trying to explain to her who she is and how she’s supposed to be the champion for wonderland. Stage 2: Refusal of Call Alice starts to refuse when she begins telling them that she is not the right Alice their looking for. I didn’t think she would still be refusing even after they showed her the scroll of what happened. I kind of thought she was just saying no because she was afraid of what was ahead of her if she took on the challenge of becoming the champion. Throughout the beginning and middle of the movie she Lyric Perry 9/22/13 World Literature was trying to convince everyone that this was her dream and everything would be ok when she woke up. Stage 4: Crossing the first Threshold I thought during the whole story I think she crossed more than one threshold. The first one was when she fell down the hole and entered wonderland because the trees by the two holes were both twisted and looked very similar. Her coming out of the hole to Wonderland to me was like the crossing in a new unknown land. Another threshold was when she made it up in her mind that she was the hero and started believing in wonderland and the impossible. Stage 5: Belly of the Whale The belly of the whale is when a character is fully enclosed in the new world or adventure. I think she entered the belly of the whale when she began to accept the fact that it wasn’t a dream and wonderland is a real place. I think that Lyric Perry 9/22/13 World Literature the only way she was going to get out and go back to the real world was to complete her quest and slay the jabberwocky. Stage 6: Road of Trials Alice had lots of trials during her journey such as when the dog/polar bear thing started to chase her and cut her arm. At the tea party when the red queen’s knight, soldiers, and bloodhound came looking for Alice I felt it was a trial because if they were to have caught her she wouldn’t have been able to complete her goal. The road of trials is a very important stage because I think they help the character get ready for what they are about to embark on. Stage 11: The Ultimate Boon The ultimate boon to me was when she cut the head off of the jabberwocky. This was really important because the whole fate of wonderland was in her hands. I think the white queen was depending on her the most because she really wanted the crown and for the red queen to stop torturing Wonderland. Stage 15: Crossing the Return Threshold At the end of the story I saw two returning thresholds the first one when she climbed out of the hole and when she started standing up to everyone at the party back home. When she was climbing out of the hole she was crossing back over to the real world and her normal life. She started telling everyone the truth and saying what she really felt even things that sounded impossible. Stage 17: Freedom to Live I thought this happened for Alice at the very end of the movie because that’s when she really decided to live her own life and do what she wanted. Such as she told the man she wasn’t going to marry him she was going to find someone she loves. Alice starts talking to the man about his business and how he should move it china. Her falling down the hole to me was on purpose to get her to really follow her own bliss not everyone else’s.

Hinduism Essay -- Religion Spirituality Carvaka Yoga Essays

Hinduism In India there are six orthodox schools of philosophy which recognize the authority of the Vedas as divine revelation, and they generally function as pairs - Nyaya and Vaishesika, Mimamsa and Vedanta, and Samkhya and Yoga. Those who did not recognize this authority were the Jains, Buddhists, and materialists. Even in India where spiritual ideas dominate the culture there were some who were skeptical of those ideals and held to a materialist view of the world; they were called Carvaka, and their doctrine that this world is all that exists is called Lokayata. The materialists did not believe in an afterlife and found sense perception to be the only source of knowledge, denying the validity of inference or general concepts. They focused on the senses and the four traditional elements of earth, water, fire, and air. Consciousness for the Carvaka is only a modification of these elements in the body. The soul is also identified with the body, and pleasure and pain are the central experiences of life, nature being indifferent to good and evil with virtue and vice being merely social conventions. This worldly philosophy naturally ignored the goal of liberation (moksha) or simply believed that death as the end of life and consciousness was a liberation. However, they also tended to neglect the value of virtue or justice (dharma), placing all of their attention on the worldly aims of pleasure (kama) and wealth or power (artha). Although Carvaka ideas are mentioned in some ancient writings, their own ancient writings were lost, and much of what we know of the early materialists is based on criticisms of other schools. However, a famous, ancient drama called The Rise of the Moon of Intellect (Prabodha-candrodaya) reveals some of the beliefs of this worldly movement. In this play Passion is personified and speaks to a materialist and one of his pupils. Passion laughs at ignorant fools, who imagine that spirit is different from the body and reaps a reward in a future existence. This is like expecting trees to grow in air and produce fruit. Has anyone seen the soul separate from the body? Does not life come from the configuration of the body? Those who believe otherwise deceive themselves and others. Their ancient teacher Brihaspati affirmed the importance of the senses, maintaining that sustenance and love are the objects of human life. For the materiali... ...ch developed into the Vaishnavite faith in medieval Hinduism. The poem begins with Dhritarashtra asking Sanjaya what is happening not only on the field of Kuru but also on the field of dharma (virtue, duty). Sanjaya describes how both armies are arrayed against each other blowing their conch horns to show their readiness to fight. Then Arjuna asked Krishna to position his chariot between the two armies, and there he saw many of his relatives on the other side, causing him to feel faint and consider not fighting. Even though the others are killing, Arjuna does not think it would be worth it to do so, even for sovereignty of the three worlds, let alone an earthly kingdom. Evil would come to him, he says, if he should kill his relatives. How could this bring happiness? This family destruction is wrong and would destroy ancient family duties and bring on lawlessness, which would lead to corruption of the women and caste mixing. Why should he kill for greed of royal pleasures? It would be greater happiness for him to be killed unresisting and unarmed. Thus Arjuna's mind was overcome by sorrow. Krishna, who is called the Lord, responds by upbraiding Arjuna for timidity and cowardice

American Involvement in Vietnam: Failure or Not?

More than thirty years went by after the last American combat troops left Southeast Asia, but the social and political fires of the Vietnam War still keep on burning throughout the United States and Vietnam. Wars do not simply fade away when the guns are silenced. Millions of citizens in both countries bear the deep, painful scars of a conflict that wreaked havoc on the political and social landscapes of both nations.Even today, legions of war veterans endure the physical and emotional wounds inflicted during their tours of duty, while the 3 million people who perished on all sides (Berman 16) are only memories to millions of husbands, wives, children, grandchildren, parents, siblings, and friends. In the United States, the nation's military affair into Vietnam continues to impact its political institutions, foreign and defense policies.The Vietnam War also profoundly altered Americans' view of their public institutions. While polls suggest that public confidence in the federal gover nment has not declined significantly in more than thirty years, Vietnam did awaken millions of Americans to the fact that their presidents had routinely lied to them – about the American military role in Southeast Asia, about Watergate, and about many other issues (Mann 2). Vietnam was, indeed, a turning point in American political history.So, what was Vietnam War for the United States – the necessity to stop communist erosion or tragic delusion? The purpose of this study is to explore whether American involvement in Vietnam was total failure or the nation had strong reasons to go into warfare. Toward this end we will scrutinize the reasons underlying the decision to launch war affair, analyze the outcomes of Vietnam War, consider the reaction of American community upon it, and make the conclusion. The Reasons of American Involvement in Vietnam and Its CourseFive successive American presidents and scores of senators and congressmen had insisted that the preservation of a small, isolated Southeast Asian nation was vital to the US national security. During a period of twenty-five years, these leaders first funded the war fought by the French and then supported and sponsored a policy under which the fighting in Vietnam was eventually assumed by the US military – to the point that it became, almost entirely, an American war. America's involvement in Vietnam began in 1950 as a political reaction to events elsewhere in Asia (Olson & Freeman 463).While the communist victory in China in 1949 and the subsequent invasion of South Korea in 1950 had not directly threatened the United States, the political fallout from these events had tarnished President Harry Truman's presidency and elevated the importance of Southeast Asia to his administration (VanDeMark 216). By early 1965, it was clear that if the United States did not introduce regular ground troops into South Vietnam, communists would overrun the country in a matter of months (Helsing 240).In M arch 1965, Johnson deployed the first contingent of the US Marines to Vietnam, and by the end of the year more than 184,000 American ground troops were in the country. Despite the growing American commitment, the government of South Vietnam grew weaker, and the Vietcong, now sustained by troops and supplies from North Vietnam, grew stronger (Olson & Freeman 464). The character of the struggle for control of South Vietnam has been the subject of prolonged debate, directed toward the ultimate question of whether or not U. S. military involvement there was lawful. Many of those supporting U. S.involvement in the war insisted that American intervention was an attempt to enforce the principles of the United Nations Charter in Asia. The argument was as follows: North Vietnam had attacked South Vietnam in violation of Article 2 of the Charter and the United States â€Å"had every right to join South Vietnam in ‘collective defense’ under Article 51 of the Charter† (Frey- Wouters & Laufer 76). The United States had also undertaken commitments to assist South Vietnam in defending itself against Communist aggression from the North; thus the introduction of United States military personnel and equipment was justified (Johns 4).The bombing missions in 1972 became a turning-point of the war – a campaign of enormous proportions comprising more than fifty-five thousand sorties, during which American planes dropped more than 100,000 tons of bombs on North Vietnam by early June – were finally yielding the deadly and destructive results (Olson & Freeman 466). By early summer, North Vietnamese intransigence began melting as the bombing and the naval blockade dried up communist supply lines.Realizing they could not overpower the South Vietnamese army as it was backed by such massive American air power, the North Vietnamese were now more favorably inclined to negotiations about peace (Mann 702). But Nixon's infamous bombing campaign came at a steep price. In addition to losses of twenty-six American aircraft, public opinion about war changed radically. Almost overnight, his approval rating in the polls slumped to 39 percent (Mann 713). Despite its intensity and callous brutality, Nixon's bombing worked. In late December, the North Vietnamese finally signaled their willingness to return to the negotiating table (Johns 7).It’s obvious that the intense bombing had been largely responsible for North Vietnam's sudden eagerness to settle. Then presidency’s problem, however, was their mistaken belief that the conflict in Vietnam could be won entirely on the battlefield. Vietnam was also a political conflict in which the hearts and minds of the people were at stake. More bombs could never force the political and economic changes necessary to persuade millions of South Vietnamese that their government in Saigon was worth fighting for (Mann 729).In Paris, in 1973, on January 27, Secretary of State William Rogers joined rep resentatives of North Vietnam, South Vietnam, and the Viet Cong in signing the accords, bringing about an official end to what the New York Times called â€Å"the longest, most divisive foreign war in America's history† (Mann 714). The Vietnam War, arguably the most misguided political and military crusade in American history, thus, ended. Aftermath of the Vietnam War After the Paris Peace Accords were signed in January 1973, the war went on for another two years until Saigon's collapse in April 1975.The Vietnam War was such a traumatic and divisive experience that once the last American combat forces were withdrawn from Vietnam many Americans tried to forget the conflict. But it soon became clear that this was not an easy task. Most Americans agreed that the war in Vietnam was markedly different from any other experienced by the American nation (Johns 11). It was the first war rejected during its fighting by a substantial part of the American people, and, in retrospect, many Americans continue to have serious doubts about the wisdom of having entered that conflict.Independent survey studies carried out in the postwar period show that several years after the end of the war, a majority of the American public agreed that the US should have stayed out of the fighting in Vietnam. In addition, respondents perceived the war's lasting effects on the United States as almost entirely harmful (Frey-Wouters & Laufer 79). The war created serious economic problems. Until 1965, when President Lyndon B. Johnson introduced the US ground troops into the conflict, the Vietnam War had only a minor impact on the American economy.But as the war escalated, government expenditures increased dramatically. The large-scale federal spending fueled an inflationary spiral during the late 1960s. When inflation reached 6 percent in 1968, Congress passed a 10 percent income tax surcharge in hopes of slowing spending and lessening inflation, but it was too little and too late. Although the Vietnam War's most dramatic impact on American society was social and political, it did set in motion the inflationary spiral that plagued the economy throughout the 1970s and 1980s (Olson & Freeman 465).The legacy of Vietnam, like the war itself, remains a difficult and painful subject for Americans. As passions subside and time bestows greater perspective, Americans still struggle to understand Vietnam's meaning and lessons for the country. They still wonder how the United States found itself ensnared in an ambiguous, costly, and divisive war, and how it can avoid repeating such an ordeal in the future (VanDeMark 215). In opinion by many Americans who were opposed to U. S. policy in Vietnam, the American government had engaged in an illegal war in Vietnam in violation of international law and morality.In addition, the United States, in their view, had violated the United Nations Charter by its military intervention in the civil war (Frey-Wouters & Laufer 77). Moreover, many h istorians argue that American involvement in Vietnam violated international law and that the US committed crimes against humanity using napalm, gas, and defoliants, search and destroy operations, treatment of prisoners, forced relocation and pacification programs, and artillery, aerial and naval bombing (Mann 714). Those who opposed the war made the following points: 1) South Vietnam was never a separate state.A separate state or nation of ‘South Vietnam’ had never existed. A convention signed in 1946 between the French commissioner and President Ho Chi Minh recognized the Vietnam Republic as a free state. Peace was finally negotiated, and on July 21, 1954, the Geneva Conference ended with the adoption of a Final Declaration, which reconfirmed the independence of a single, united Vietnam. An agreement was reached for the temporary division of Vietnam into two zones for a two-year period (Frey-Wouters & Laufer 76). The reunification of the two zones of North and South Vi etnam, which was promised for July 1956, did not materialize (Asselin 2).2) South Vietnam was not subjected to armed attack by North Vietnam. Many opponents of the war argued that the American intervention was not justified by the right of collective self-defense. The Charter of the United Nations permits collective self-defense only in case of an armed attack, and no such armed attack existed in the case of Vietnam. From the antiwar critics' perspective, a civil war was going on in Vietnam, and the only proper course for states that were not themselves placed in the necessity of self-defense was to abstain from intervention (Frey-Wouters & Laufer 78).Conclusion The President Nixon had not won the war, or the honorable peace that he had promised. He just merely delayed the day of the communist victory, with deadly and disastrous consequences. The Vietnam War was America's longest armed conflict, a tragic crusade that cost millions of lives and ruined millions more. The war dispelled the widespread and erroneous belief that, in its foreign and military policies, the United States had always exhibited the purest of motives and actions. This, of course, had never been the case, particularly in the twentieth century.From Truman to Nixon, the decisions about Vietnam were almost always made by presidents and other political leaders seeking to preserve or enhance their domestic or international political standings. While these presidents talked of preserving democratic institutions in Southeast Asia, the massive influx of American manpower and military in the 1960s actually undermined the ideal of a free and independent South Vietnam and transformed the nation into a client of the United States. By the time the war ended, the region that America had sought to protect from communism was, instead, ruled by it.At home, the United States became, in some ways, a stronger nation because of its tragic experience in Vietnam. Organized public dissent became a widely accepted and effective way of influencing public policy. The American people and the news media exhibited a more healthy distrust of government officials and their public pronouncements. These and other positive changes, however, came at a horrible cost. In the name of fighting for freedom in Vietnam, the political and military leadership of the United States inflicted untold damage on a proud nation and its people.Thus, American involvement in Vietnam represented a total failure not just of American foreign policy but also of American statesmanship. The policymakers inflexibly pursued a path which eventually damaged the essence of American power by consuming excessive lives and resources, shook allied confidence in the US strategic judgment, and demolished liberalism's political unity and legality by polarizing and paralyzing American society. Whatever the conflicting judgments about this controversial war, Vietnam without a doubt stands as the greatest tragedy of twentieth-century U.S. for eign relations. Works Cited Asselin, Pierre. A Bitter Peace: Washington, Hanoi, and the Making of the Paris Agreement. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2002. Berman, David M. â€Å"Never Forget the Sacrifice: A Visit to Chu Van an High School In Hanoi, Vietnam. † Social Studies 86. 1 (1995): 12-17. Frey-Wouters, Ellen, and Robert S. Laufer. Legacy of a War: The American Soldier in Vietnam. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1986. Johns, Andrew L. â€Å"Achilles' Heel: The Vietnam War and George Romney's Bid for the Presidency, 1967 to 1968.† Michigan Historical Review 26. 1 (2000): 1-16. Mann, Robert. A Grand Delusion: America's Descent into Vietnam. New York: Basic Books, 2001. Olson, James S. , and Samuel Freeman, eds. Historical Dictionary of the 1960s. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1999. VanDeMark, Brian. Into the Quagmire: Lyndon Johnson and the Escalation of the Vietnam War. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995. Helsing, Jeffrey W. Johnson's War/Jo hnson's Great Society: The Guns and Butter Trap. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 2000.

Public Service At The Station - 1434 Words

With a house in the suburbs and a small family, life on the outside looked as ordinary as it seemed. However, growing up in the Atlanta Bonnie Lee Kellogg knew, the controversy was in plain sight. Her first experiences with music occurred as a teenager when she bought her first AM radio. During the nights, she would listen to various stations across the states where 50,000-watt coverage was available. Red Jones, the on-air disk jockey of her local radio station, announced her as the winner of a contest to â€Å"be a disk jockey for the day† (Kellogg 2016). Even after the contest had finished and her prize received, she would continue to work at the station writing PSA’s (public service announcements) and was assigned other errands. She would†¦show more content†¦She was a liberal thinker living amongst conservative minds. Many of the friends that she had were considered â€Å"outcasts† by Atlanta social standards. One of her friends was expelled from the Peace Corps because he dared to date a black woman in Africa. She went to high school with the son of a governor who took out an ax to repel demonstrators and shut down his restaurant rather than â€Å"serve blacks† (Kellogg 2016). Dating the captain of the Atlanta Hawks basketball team, the couple would remain in â€Å"safe† neighborhoods out of fear of the violence he would face for being out with a white girl (Kellogg 2016). Working in the radio industry, she had a lot of black friends, and it was recalling those moments in the present how unusual it was to go to the clubs and see artists such as Ray Charles and the Fifth Dimension performing in person. Growing up listening to black artists, there was a lot of hostility regarding the racist attitude of the rest of Atlanta versus her own. This is evident in an essay written by her in 1976 titled â€Å"Today I’m Going to Be Green† served as the advertising campaign for ARCO oil that envisioned her persp ective of the world in the year of 2076. In her writing, she imagined the world â€Å"where color didn’t matter† and is optimistic about the direction concerning the progress going forward (Kellogg 2016). Her support for equal rights was a part of her principles, witnessing the funeral parade of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. from a tall