Let s Talk Dick, By Richard M. Nixon Essay - 1610 Words

Let’s talk Dick. â€Å"Tricky Dick†, â€Å"Slick Rick†, Richard M. Nixon our 37th President. Born on January 9th, 1913, in California. He was a graduate of Duke University Law School. After serving in the Navy during WWII, Nixon was elected to congress. Soon after he won a seat on the Senate in 1950 and went on to become Vice President in the Eisenhower Administration. During his Vice presidency, he focused on foreign policy and later on a trip to Moscow, Nixon had an impromptu Debate with General Secretary Khrushchev, called the â€Å"kitchen Debate,† this would set the stage for Nixon to receive the Republican Presidential nomination in 1960.Though in his first run for president he lost to John F. Kennedy. But he would receive the nomination again and win the Race in 1969. His presidency would start off with the first moon landing done by American astronauts. During Nixon’s presidency he would focus more on international policy than domestic. Starting with, negotiating the SALT Treaty to act as a deterrent from nuclear conflict with the Soviet Union. Nixon then set the foundation for reducing trade restrictions with China in 1970, thus pressuring the Soviet Union into better relations with the United States. Though the biggest concern for Nixon and the American people was putting an end to the Vietnam War, which after much strife and compromise, he started by reducing the amount of troops being sent into conflict. On the domestic side of his presidency, he introduced newShow MoreRelatedOutline Of A Leader For Charlie Company2721 Words   |  11 Pageseven forgot the hand grenades† (Green). They were in charge of the Quang Ngai Province, known as â€Å"Pinkville,† which was one of the â€Å"hottest† areas and Charlie Company really felt that heat, especially in the weeks leading up to the massacre. â€Å"Calley s troops had been losing men to snipers, mines and an enemy they could not see. They were jumpy, frustrated and out for revenge† (Unger). Between Calley’s lack of respect and the frustrating situation that Charlie Company was in, tensions were high andRead MoreProject Managment Case Studies214937 Words   |  860 PagesCanada 118 Riverview Children s Hospital 124 The Evolution of Project Management at Quixtar 145 3 PROJECT MANAGEMENT CULTURES 151 Como Tool and Die (A) 153 Como Tool and Die (B) 157 Apache Metals, Inc. 160 Haller Specialty Manufacturing 162 The NF3 Project: Managing Cultural Differences 163 An International Project Manager s Day (A) 172 An International Project Manager s Day (B) (see handout provided by instructor) An International Project Manager s Day (C) (see handout provided byRead MoreManagement Course: Mba−10 General Management215330 Words   |  862 PagesCapital Feigenbaum−Feigenbaum International Management, Sixth Edition Hodgetts−Luthans−Doh Contemporary Management, Fourth Edition Jones−George Driving Shareholder Value Morin−Jarrell Leadership, Fifth Edition Hughes−Ginnett−Curphy The Art of M A: Merger/Acquisitions/Buyout Guide, Third Edition Reed−Lajoux and others . . . This book was printed on recycled paper. Management http://www.mhhe.com/primis/online/ Copyright  ©2005 by The McGraw−Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reservedRead MoreManaging Information Technology (7th Edition)239873 Words   |  960 Pagesand permission should be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or likewise. To obtain permission(s) to use material from this work, please submit a written request to Pearson Education, Inc., Permissions Department, One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458. Many of the designations by manufacturers and sellers to distinguish their

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR COURSE Case 5. MediSys Corp. The...

BUSINESS MANAGEMENT AND ANALYTICS BACHELOR DEGREE III course students: Patrick Dorval Simon PlouvierQuentin Chael 2013 11 05 ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR COURSE Case 5. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare 2013 Contents TOC \o 1-3 \h \z \u The introduction (Patrick Dorval) PAGEREF _Toc371460703 \h 2Situation analysis PAGEREF _Toc371460704 \h 3Organization PAGEREF _Toc371460705 \h 3Policies of the organization PAGEREF _Toc371460706 \h 3Key players PAGEREF _Toc371460707 \h 4Problem identifications PAGEREF _Toc371460708 \h 5THEORETICAL SURVEY PAGEREF _Toc371460709 \h 6EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES PAGEREF _Toc371460710 \h 6SUGGESTED SOLUTION PAGEREF _Toc371460711 \h 6CONCLUSIONS PAGEREF _Toc371460712 \h 6REFERENCES PAGEREF _Toc371460713 \h 6†¦show more content†¦The lead engineer one the IntensCare project is Bret O’Brien. His main problem is with the deadlines given by the direction, which are a real challenge for him and his staff as the products are very complex to design and produce. They have difficult goals to reach with costs, time, and specified features. Karen Baio is a lawyer representing Regulatory Affairs on the team. She has been working with the company for years and her patience and persistence are appreciated. Her problem is that she is seen as an obstructionist by some of her teammates. She also finds Mukerjee and Merz difficult to tolerate. 3. Problem identification. What is the problem(s), try to analyze why they exist. This may lead to an even more critical (or basic) problem. Decide on ONE main problem. Problem identificationsThere are a lot of problems related to the case IntensCare. Indeed, there are a lot of issues related to the production of the product itself. First, the engineers have to face out with a space problem on the production line. For this problem, the president thinks the workers do not give their full potential. Also, as mentioned before, the marketing manager, Valerie Merz, thinks that the product will be way more popular if it gets a modular design. It seems to be a key factor for this kind of product; all the potential customers said that it was an important point. Moreover, the two potentials concurrent said that they

Radiological Threat to Public Safety Free Essays

Radiation is a silent death sentence i. e. you cannot see, smell, or taste it. We will write a custom essay sample on Radiological Threat to Public Safety or any similar topic only for you Order Now When radiological material ends up in the wrong hands it can become a catastrophic weapon of mass destruction. The public’s security against radiological threats is in the hands of federal, state, and local government agencies. These agencies have the responsibility to regulate, mitigate, monitor, and respond to incidents involving sources of radiological materials. An analysis of current radiological threats will provide an improved understanding of potential and creditable radiological threats confronted by the public. Radiological Threat to Public Safety Newswire (2011) states, â€Å"Less than one-third of the population feels they are prepared for a terrorist attack, specifically a radiological attack such as a dirty bomb; yet over eighty percent of Americans feel this type of threat is imminent†. Howard Forest (2008), suggest that a terrorist radiological attack would come by way of a radiological dispersal devise (RDD) or a dirty bomb i. e. a bomb mixed with radiological material and conventional explosives (p. 90). Oppenheimer (2008) states, â€Å"The threat of nuclear terrorism is far more likely from a radiological dispersal device (RDD)–a conventional IED laced with a radioisotope–than via a nuclear fission weapon†(para 1). Uranium and plutonium are well known elements used in nuclear devises. Howard et al. (2008) states, â€Å"Only uranium and a few other elements, notably plutonium, can be turned into explosive weapons, but many more elements emit radiation† (p. 90). Howard et al. (2008), states, â€Å"Two basic designs of crude nuclear explosives are likely to be adequate for most purposes of terrorist groups intent on nuclear terrorism†(p. 14). The first generation, gun-type nuclear explosive device is similar to the bomb that destroyed the city of Hiroshima, Japan. This is the simplest crude devise to design and construct with a powerful nuclear explosion (Howard et al. 2008, p. 114). The United States Department of Health and Human Services (2011) stipulates that the first step in understanding creditable radiation emergencies is to â€Å"draw the distinction between a nuclear event (like the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan) and a radiological event, such as a nuclear power plant incident or a radiological dispersal device (e. . , dirty bomb)†. The following is suggested credible nuclear and radiological events. Nuclear Events; * Produces a nuclear detonation involving the joining (fusion) or splitting (fission) of atoms to produce an intense pulse or wave of heat, light, air pressure, and radiation. * Highly destructive explosion that instantly devastates people and buildings because of extreme heat and impact of the blast. * Leaves large amounts of radioactivity and fallout behind. Radiological Events; * May involve explosion and release of radioactivity, but no nuclear fission. Typically, have less radioactivity released than in a nuclear event. In both events, the wind direction along with the weather patterns can spread radioactivity over a wide area (DHHS, 2008). Oppenheimer (2008), stipulated that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) suggested that â€Å"From 1993 to 2004, there were more than 400 confirmed incidents of trafficking materials–arrests and seizures involving radioactive sources–that could only be used to produce a RDD†(para 5). According to Howard et al. (2008) â€Å"no terrorist group has ever fielded or deployed a nuclear devise†(p. 110). However, Oppenheimer (2008) states, â€Å"Only one RDD incident is known: A dynamite bomb laced with cesium-137, a radioisotope used widely in medicine, was planted by Chechen separatists in a Moscow park in December 1995† (para 3). Authorities were able to find the terrorist RDD before it was detonated (Oppenheimer, 2008, para 3). The premise is evident i. e. terrorist organizations have the capability to obtain and deploy a RDD. Howard et al. (2008) suggest, â€Å"A homemade nuclear device, although crude and less efficient than a state military weapon, could very well serve the needs of a terrorist group† (p. 113). Bullock, Haddow, Coppola, Yeletaysi (2009), describe different types of terrorist events that might include the use of radioactive material. * Introducing radioactive material into the food or water supply. * Using explosives to scatter radioactive materials. * Bombing or destroying a nuclear facility. * Exploding a small nuclear device† (p. 187). Oppenheimer (2008) described and highlighted the unpredictable radiological poisoning of a former â€Å"KBG agent Alexander Litvinenko by polonium-210 in London in November 2006 â€Å"(para 6). This type of radiation, once inhaled or ingested, will cause an illness that is slow and painful. The contamination spread as the Litvinenko moved about London and beyond (Oppenheimer, 2008, para 6). According to Oppenheimer (2008), â€Å"The U. K. Health Protection Agency had the unenviable task of tracing and testing the urine of hundreds of potential contacts and arranging for them to be treated and counseled†(para 6). There were a total of 17 people who were contaminated with radiation at above-average levels (Oppenheimer, 2008, para 6). Oppenheimer (2008) suggests that â€Å"A growing number of smuggling cases since 2002 have involved radioisotopes used in civilian industries and medicine†(para 2). Radioactive materials that are no longer considered useful in medicine could be used in building a RDD or a dirty bomb (The American Nuclear Society, 2005). Some agencies feel as though there has â€Å"not been enough of a concerted effort focused on the threat of a radiological attack such as a â€Å"dirty bomb† (Newswire, 2011). Oppenheimer (2008) describes four attempts at deploying RDD by Chechens i. e. â€Å"deploying an RDD and attacking a nuclear power plant, which are not well documented but are known within the EOD (explosives ordnance disposal) community†(para 1). Hawley (2008) suggests, â€Å"The use of a pharmaceutical grade radioactive material attached to a pipe bomb would release radioactive material†. In addition this small amount of radiation could cause sickness over time. Howard et al. (2008) states, â€Å"Extended exposure to low-level radioactive material increases the likelihood of cellular destruction†(, p. 90). The low level of security at many of Russia’s nuclear power plants and abandoned Russian Northern Fleet submarines has also increased the risk of possible terrorist attacks or takeovers. â€Å"There still are about 120 subs with fueled reactors in need of disposal† (Oppenheimer, 2008, papa 2). If a meltdown or explosion at a nuclear facility ever took place a large quantity of radioactive material would be released into the environment. Employees at the nuclear facility would likely be contaminated with radioactive particles to include injuries from the explosion itself. Individuals who received a large dose of radiation might develop acute radiation syndrome. Individuals in the surrounding area could be exposed or contamination and would need medical assists along with decontamination (Bullock, et al. 2009 p. 233). This huge concern and worry of radiological threats, voiced by the public, might not be credible. This is based on research and analyses performed by numerous agencies. According to Bevelacqua Stilp (2009), â€Å"Bombings involving storage facilities or transportation vehicle pose the greatest threat†(p. 60). Mitigating potential bombings of critical facilities and transportation is a challenge for federal, state and local agencies. Bevelacqua et al. (2009) states† A nuclear bomb threat is unlikely to be carries out for a number of reasons, including the extreme expense, its logistical difficulty, and the enormous amount of technology necessary to develop a disperse such a devise† (p. 9). Hawley (2008) states, â€Å"The use of an actual nuclear detonation device is unlikely and very improbable given security these materials have† (p. 233). The amount of nuclear material required for an extensive nuclear result and the particular type of material needed makes use unlikely (Hawley, 2008, p. 233). Bullock, et al. (2009) states â€Å"Although a dirty bomb could cause serious injuries from the explosion, it most likely would not have enough radioactive material in a form that would cause serious radiation sickness among large numbers of people. Oppenheimer (2008) suggests, â€Å"There are numerous obstacles to overcome when weaponizing radioactive materials; the same devices that could be a threat to the public also pose potential threats to terrorists†(para 3). Howard et al. 2008, describe the seven myths identified about the threat of nuclear terrorism. 1. Terrorist want a lot of people watching, not a lot of people dead. 2. Nuclear material required to make a bomb are nearly impossible for terrorist to obtain. 3. Difficulties of constructing or stealing a nuclear bomb are unlikely by a terrorist group. 4. The only way a terrorist organization could acquire a nuclear bomb is from a state. 5. The mistaken belief that it is possible to put in place around the United States and other major countries a security cordon that can reduce to a low level the risk that nuclear weapons and material might be smuggled in. 6. The notion that an offensive security posture alone will mitigate the threat of nuclear terrorism. 7. A number of states analysts argue that states would not be especially interested in a stolen nuclear or stolen material to make one, because they want to produce the material for as many nuclear weapons as they need (p. 02). According to Shaw (2001) â€Å"Most studies of preventing terrorist nuclear attacks have reached the same basic conclusion–none of the available basic techniques is sufficiently capable to preclude a successful attack with a high degree of confidence† (p 3). The following are the seven suggested basic techniques: 1. Arms control and related diplomatic measures to control proliferation and access to technology and materials for making nuclear weapons. 2. Physical security and control of existing weapons and materials. 3. Pre-emptive actions. . Deterrent threats of retaliation for attacks. 5. Border controls and related domestic security measures aimed at preventing the movement of weapons or materials into the US. 6. Intelligence collection and law enforcement measures leading to the discovery and apprehension of would-be perpetrators. 7. Effective consequence control and mitigation—still a long way from reality—could be at best a distant second in desirability. Public education on the effects of radiation might allow for understanding the credibility of radiological events. Hawley (2008) states, â€Å"Education on hazards of radiation and the effective use of radiation monitors can ease this fear† (p. 234). There are organizations established to educate radiological protection, challenges, and issues. The Newswire (2011) states, â€Å"The Radiological Threat Awareness Coalition (R-TAC) was established to increase awareness and preparedness in this country against a possible radiological attack such as a â€Å"dirty bomb†(para 1) This synergistic awareness and preparedness was validated successfully by London government agencies responding to prevented a radiological event from becoming catastrophe. Oppenheimer (2008) suggests that the â€Å"London incident response demonstrate that government agencies could rapidly adapt to an unprecedented situation†(para 6). This radiological event also showed that nuclear events are all but impossible to predict. Conclusion The mitigation of nuclear weapons issues remain a heighten concern by free nations. The management of the existing stockpiles in the former Soviet Union continues to be a challenge in addition to the activities of the other governments that control nuclear weapons and demonstrate troublesome behavior especially, Pakistan, North Korea, and Iran (Banks, Nevers, Wallerstein, 2008, p. 7). According to Hawley (2008) â€Å"there is currently speculation that there are some small nuclear devises missing from Russia; but this has never been substantiated† (p. 233). However, the fear of missing nuclear devises is a weapon itself. According to Hawley (2008), there is an advantage to a noncredible RDD or a small RDD, and that is the public’s reaction. The public’s perception, and first responders, is that this event would be a radioactive disaster. However, the reality is that the amount of the radiation would not be dangerous, and as time passed, the danger would lessen as the radioactive material decayed to a lesser hazard. Radiation is one of the big unknowns and cause of fear because it is unknown. This fear makes radiation a key weapon for a terrorist organization. Given this analysis, the question continues to be asked. Is there a credible radiological threat? The answer is yes or maybe no. Either way terrorist organizations have instilled fear of possible radiological events in our nation’s future. How to cite Radiological Threat to Public Safety, Papers

Farmers Discontent Ap Essay free essay sample

The United States from the beginning was a nation of farmers. But by the late nineteenth century, people were leaving the farm and moving into the city. It was around this time that the farmers saw threats to their way of life. The farmers were being pushed around by the banks, railroads companies. They had good reasons for agrarian discontent. The documents show the validity of the farmers complaints, especially on bank mortgage rates and the gold standard. The Populist Party or Peoples party grew from agrarian uprising that rose after the collapse of agriculture prices following the Panic of 1873.The Farmers Alliance, promoted collective economic action by farmers and achieved widespread popularity in the South and Great Plains. Document A describe the complaints of the Populist Party and their views. The document supports the fact that the party Was formed to voice the complaints Of the farmers against gold standard, the industrialists, and the corruption. We will write a custom essay sample on Farmers Discontent Ap Essay or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page The Farmers Alliance or Populist Party was ultimately unable to accomplish its wider economic objective of grouped action against bankers, railroads, and merchants.By the late 1 sass, the Alliance had developed a political outline hat called for regulation and reform in national politics. The major issue was the Alliances opposition to the gold standard to counter the deflation in agricultural prices. The populist wanted sliver currency because they believe it would make it easy to pay back debt and bring inflation. Document C shows that money was hard to come by between 1870-1880 and show the reason for the farmers wanting a silver currency.They thought it would be easy to pay off their debt if money was easier to come by The Document E points out that the reason the farmers are in horrific economic situation is because they pep overproducing but theyre blaming it on the gold standard instead. Document B describes the reasons the silver currency wouldnt help farmers. The document says labor, hours, and pay would not be better and supports the gold standard. The agrarian discontent was caused by combination of many elements. The earth seemed to work against the farmers. Grasshoppers would destroy entire crops and leave farmer with nothing but bills to pay.Floods, expensive fertilizers, droughts all added to the farmers trouble. On top of Mother Nature misfortunes, the farmers were also cut into by their government. The land was over assessed. They had to pay high taxes, and tariffs. Over production forced farmer to sell their products at low- prices to remain competitive. The farmer got pull in to a depressing loop of buying expensive machinery to increase their production and selling them product at a lower price. The demand was just not as large as the supply. Farms started to operate at a loss. Farmer had to take out mortgages at ruinous rates of interest from eastern banks. The Document D shows a picture Of an eastern banker leading the framers to the court house to foreclose on their farms. Farmers who once own their land now became sharecroppers and tenant framers. The document shows the farmers as slaves to there eastern masters. Another reason for agrarian displeasure is that the farmer where at the mercy of large corporations. They were pressured by harvester trust, the barbed-wire trust, and fertilizer trust. The trusts could control production and raise prices. Document F describes trust as monopoles organized to destroy competition and restrain trade. The complaints made against the trust by the farmer are justified by document F. The railroad companies were major focal point of the farmers discontent. The farmers had to deal with outrages freight rates. If they tried to protest the cruel railroad operators could refuse them cars and let their grain spoil. The Document H support the fact the farmer had to deal with outrages freight rates. The document describes how the railroad raise there rates and ruin farmers. Farmer wanted the government to regulate the railroads. In Wabash, the Court had to decide whether states have the power to regulate railroad rates for interstate shipments.It ruled that the Commerce Clause does not permit dates to enact direct burdens on interstate commerce. The agrarian discontent is justified by the terrible hand dealt to them by the environment, monopolistic industrials, and legislatures. Farmers complaints about the railroad were valid, but the complaint made against the gold standard isnt because over production attributed to their misfortunes. The Populist Party was short lived but many of the Populist ideas were adopted by the Democratic Party. Once the more established party adopted the Populist policies, they no longer had much political force.