Foreverstudent

Introduction: The Cuban Missile Crisis was one of the most dangerous moment in U.S. History. In fact, it was more dangerous than we thought at the time, as there was a tactical missile placed in Cuba, which could be launched from the ground by any General. It was imperative the U.S. and the Soviet Union to communicate, respond and make sound decisions, in a short time period, to prevent the outbreak of a nuclear war.

First Gulf War Overview- The Gulf War (2 August 1990 – 28 February 1991) background, Run-up to the war, The Military Coalition, The Air Campaign, The Ground War, US options

Is deterrence at work in East Asia today? MEMO TO THE PRESIDENT CONCERNING A NUCLEAR IRAN

Short answers: Korea: What is motivating President’s Kim current outreach in South Korea, going back to the Olympic Games last January, and to the US? What are his goals? Counterinsurgency: Where are the main counterinsurgencies campaigns occuring in the world that the US is involved in? Describe briefly the level of US military personnel and goals. Prospects for success? Essay: Assume for the sake of the exercise that you are on the National Security Council. We are in November 1990. P...

2 assignements and 3 exams

You are an alien race, encountering a new planet after reading The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, and you name it, in Mearsheimer's honor, Mearsheimeron. The planet is composed of five continents, separated by water, which have the equivalent of modern 21st century technology. Your race consists of colonists, who wish to be organized into nation-states, but do not care how many or where they are placed. Using Mearsheimer's account of the causes of war, how would you divide the world so as to...

Construct a constructivist response, showing that the chemical weapons norm is deeply rooted in political culture through a response to the realist objection focusing on Syria. How does the Syria case, in other words, show that there is a deeply rooted international norm against the use of chemical weapons.

Thomas Schelling's Arms and Influence suggests that uncertainty is a major driver of conflict in international relations. Instead of coercion and a world of uncertainty, what would a world of brute force be like instead? Why or why not? In answering the question, it may help to respond to the following sub-questions: What does Schelling mean by uncertainty and what is its relation to risk? How does uncertainty enable coercion?

1. Are there contemporary institutions that enable deliberations such as those held by the league during its heyday? What are those institutions? How do they enable discussion to replace the use of force? 2. The Congress dissolved because of problems of mistrust. As Russian and British power waxed and waned, they changed their estimates of the threat posed by the other. Does the fact that the balance of power mattered for successful deliberation undermine the claim that under certain conditi...

Select a great power war that was not discussed in the readings from Part 1. Some examples are below. For this great power war, identify (a) the polarity of the system and (b) whether the polarity of the system may have contributed to the war. (Part A) A brief synopsis of the War of the Austrian Succession: (Part B) Polarity contributing to the War of the Austrian Succession: