Rhetoric analysis

In the article, Ginsberg provides a discussion of how politics and violence relate. Violence tends to provide three major questions of the political life that include power, statehood, and territoriality. In the article, the writer uses several examples to indicate how violence is the answer to the political problems. With the help of examples to support his claims, the author can convince the audience of the role that violence plays in politics so as to broaden the audience understanding with regards to violence and politics. 

Why violence works

When reading through the article, the author tends to explain that violence is not good; however, it is required. As described in the article, through violence, there is a lot that nations have managed to achieve. Ginsberg states that violence is a key instrument of political and social change. The author states that violence remains as the primary catalyst for change, and that has been happening throughout the history. The author sees violence as being unavoidable, valuable, and indispensable. Violence is a method in which the society tends to preserve social order (Ginsberg, 2013). Through the use of the examples that the author uses, the audience gets to think about how violence has been a key element in achieving different aspects of life.  Ginsberg purports that even groups that are committed to non-violent acts rely on the violent reactions of their opponents in achieving their ends.

So as to explain how nations have been using violence to gain power and balance, Ginsberg considers the example of the United States. The international system of the United States is a large part a product of wars and violent episodes. The global dominance of the West is much associated with the function of its involvement in violence. As nations are trying to change how the US has gained presence abroad, nations are developing military capabilities so as to challenge the United States. For instance, Iran has been developing nuclear weapons so as to dominate in the Middle East and China has been building air, naval, and ground forces to make the country a central power in Asia. The weapons that the countries are making, they aim to use them so as to gain more power in their regions.

In the book, Ginsberg tends to make bureaucracies as the force multipliers in that the threat of violence is enough to change the intentions of people. The author claims that the relationship between African-Americans and American police forces was the difference. Most of the big-city police forces subjected the blacks to harassment, and they were likely to enforce brutality against blacks and whites (Ginsberg, 2013). During the time, the police officers in black communities did not respond to calls for help. Most of the efforts by African Americans in persuading police to change their practices were not successful, and there were organizations to protest the police misconduct. However, the numerous peaceful protests were not successful, and success was achieved after an outbreak of violence and rioting. Based on the description through the use of historical events that happened in the past, Ginsberg helps the audience to understand how acts of violence and the threat of violence helped countries to achieve balance in different areas. Some of the tactics used were aimed at provoking a violent response.

There is a lot that the audience gets to learn from this article. One of the lessons is that violence tends to be the driving force of politics. In the article, the author states that through the use of violence, the states tend to have some advantages are about other actors. Most of the nations do not usually rely on naked violence as being an instrument of governance; however, they aim at refining violence and making is to be a more effective tool. It is through violence that determines what nations exist and their power, the territories that they occupy, and the groups that will exercise power in them.

In the analysis of the article, one element that Ginsberg uses is narration. In describing the reason for violence, the author uses narration to explain the issue of dominance. The author uses narration in describing the Tiananmen Square Bloodletting. Apart from narration, there is also the use of compare and contrast. The author compares two incidences when he says that “the result is likely to resemble the Tiananmen Square Bloodletting than the fall of the Berlin Wall” (Ginsberg, 2013). Through the use of this device, it provides the audience with an opportunity of comparing one incident with another incident and see how the two incidents differ. The author also provides a similarity on the tactics that Gandhi and King uses, which were not violent. The techniques that these leaders use that included demonstrations, strikes, and boycotts aimed at provoking a violent response from the opponents.

In this essay, it provides a rhetoric analysis of the article on why violence works. Through the use of the different elements, the audiences can understand how violence and politics relate.

Reference

Ginsberg, B (2013). Why violence works. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Violence-Works/140951/

Sherry Roberts is the author of this paper. A senior editor at Melda Research in nursing writing services if you need a similar paper you can place your order for already written essay.

Psychology of learning

Introduction

There are different theories of learning. This paper discusses Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism, and Humanism as applied to learning. It also describes different perspectives stemming from learning theories that are important to teach managers so they can better understand their employees learning needs.

Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism, and Humanism as applied to learning

Behaviorists view learners as basically passive and just respond to stimuli. Learning occurs in a black box and focuses on observable behavior. Stimuli and nature of reward and punishment are the factors that influence learning. Behaviorism theory best explains task-based learning.  Cognitivism is of the view that learners amass and retrieve information for use afterward. Previous experiences and existing schema are among the factors that influence learning. The role of the memory is to encode, store and retrieve information. This theory best explains problem-solving, reasoning and clear objectives types of learning. Constructivism view is learning as an active process in which learners construct concepts or new ideas based upon present or past knowledge.  Humanistic perspective views learning as an active process where learners participate actively in learning activities (Davis, 2010).

Perspectives that would be important to teach managers so they can better understand their employees

Associative Learning

The learning principle implies that experiences and ideas can be linked to each other as they reinforce each other. The role of memory is to hardwire repeated experiences where punishment and reward have the most impact.

Social Constructivism

Socialconstructivism involves having learners construct knowledge through social processes such as conversations and sharing ideas. Motivation, as well as social interactions, impacts the construction.

Problem-Based Learning

The problem-based learning involves building an environment around a scenario in which learners can take on considerable roles within it. The learners utilize the information processing to convey and take in new information. Learning occurs in a computational and structured way.

Discovery Learning

Engage learners in an active process and allow them to construct concepts or new ideas based on present or past knowledge

Maslow’s theory

Managers can use this theory to determine why an employee behaves differently in different situations. It guides them to understand human behavior and launch motivational practices.

Situated Cognition

Involves active process where learners participate actively in learning activities.  The training strategy attempts to bring the realistic situation to the learner.

Self-determination Theory

Learners determine the method of learning, learning materials, quantity of learning and recognize making a right or wrong choice as completely the learners’ responsibility.

Employees’ training strategies

Mentoring

Mentoring focuses on fostering a positive attitude and improving an individual’s general skill set.

Coaching

It is a more specific way of training employees to ensure that they have information and skills required to complete a particular task.

Lectures

Training materials are presented verbally. It is an effective way of training a large number of employees.

Role-playing and simulations

The training strategy attempts to bring the realistic situation to the learner.

Job rotation

It entails involving employees in a series of tasks associated with different jobs.

Audiovisual methods

Audiovisual methods include videotapes, television and other effective means of providing real world situations in a short span of time.

Programmed learning

Programmed learning uses computer aided instructions and allows the learner to learn at their own pace.

How each strategy would help ensure learning is taking place?

Mentoring, Coaching, and Lectures will allow the learners to utilize the information processing to convey and take in new information.  Role-playing and simulations, Job rotation, audiovisual methods and Programmed learning involve an active process where learners participate actively in learning activities (Marsick & Watkins, 2015).

Conclusion

Learning theories can be employed in workplace settings to effectively guide employee behavior and promote desired behaviors that employees can adapt to enhance success. It is important to recognize that every employee has their particular way of learning.

References

Davis, S. F. (2010). Psychology of learning. Wiley-Blackwell.

Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. (2015). Informal and Incidental Learning in the Workplace (Routledge Revivals). Routledge.

Dochy, F., Gijbels, D., Segers, M., & Van den Bossche, P. (2012). Theories of learning: Routledge. 
Sherry Roberts is the author of this paper. A senior editor at Melda Research in research paper services 
if you need a similar paper you can place your order for cheap research paper services.

Continental Airlines

1.      The Go-Forward strategy encompassed of an assortment of interrelated, simultaneous actions. The initial version of the general strategy possessed the advantage of restoring Continental (CO) to their previous profitability as well as offering it first-place rankings by numerous airline industry metrics. The subsequent segment of the strategy resulted in savings of $41 million in addition to a lessening of $7 million in fraud in the initial year alone. The company’s revenue grew by more than $500 million in six years. The implementation of the data warehouse exerted a decisive role in the second phase.  The implementation of the strategy aided Continental Airlines set up more actionable means of altering their industry position from most awful to first and from first to desirable (Turban, Sharda&Delen, 2013). It further ensured that technology was an increasingly vital attribute in supporting the new initiatives. The implementation of the strategy generated considerable strategic value as well as cost Reduction.

2.      The traditional data warehouse is employed for premeditated decisions as well as tactical while an RDW is employed for strategic, tactical and sometimes operational decisions. The consequences of employing a TDW can be difficult to gauge, the results of using an RDW, on the other hand, are calculated by operational data.  Adequate TDW invigorate rates array from daily to monthly while the RDW data, on the other hand, has to be must be up to the minute. The TDW summaries are frequently suitable while RDWs have to provide detailed data. TDWs characteristically utilize restraining reporting to corroborate or confirm patterns, habitually predefined outline tables while RDWs requires supple, ad hoc reporting. The traditional data warehouse ensures that there is the movement of the data from the airline’s operational databases to the DW on a programmed basis, characteristically daily or weekly. The attribute offers a dependable data for analysis carried out during one renew cycle but fails to make contemporary data accessible for the decisions that necessitate it (Turban, Sharda&Delen, 2013).The possession of real-time DW, as was adopted at CO, guarantees that data moves into the DW on an hourly yet more recurrent basis.

3.      It is imperative that an airline to uses real-time data warehouse as most of the airline decisions cannot be reached with the use of week-old, or even day-old, data. The best example is that of the frequent flyer honor accessibility on a certain flight. Airlines ensure that these are limited to guarantee that they do not give away very many seats that would be sold. The award seat allotment is frequently automated. Travelers thus can assess the availability online. American Airlines amongst others provide prolonged award accessibility to the people who fly at least 100,000 miles annually with them (Turban, Sharda&Delen, 2013). On the occasion that one of these wants a reward seat that is not accessible online, they can ask for it by phone. The agent has to make a decision on whether or not to make the seat available. 

4.      The decisions that Continental executives will make via the use of the real-time data is going to affect the power of the customers positively in that they are going to enhance the satisfaction of their customers, increasing their number and thus less powerful in impacting their prices. The use of the real-time system is going to ensure that the airline develops strong relationships with their clients, possess a small as well as competent data warehouse staff as well as record improvements in customer value performance (Magretta, 2013). These attributes will ensure that the airline recruits a huge base of contented customers who get value for the money they purchase the different services from continental airlines.

Sherry Roberts is the author of this paper. A senior editor at Melda Research in research paper services if you need a similar paper you can place your order for cheap research paper services.

Use of Rendition and Extraordinary Rendition for Counterterrorism

Combating terrorism is one of the most emphasized measures and strategies by the United States law enforcement agencies as well as intelligence agencies. Various legislations and programs have got formulated and enacted to safeguard the lives of American citizens not only in America but around the world. Rendition and extraordinary rendition is a vital counterterrorism tool used by the US government in collaboration with foreign governments to wipe out notorious terrorists around the world. This paper discusses the use of rendition and extraordinary rendition for counterterrorism, its history, and legal controversies. The paper also discusses significant successes of the counterterrorism tool such as capture and detention of Khalid Shaikh Muhammed (KSM) and Abu Zubaydah, as well as extraordinary botched renditions such as Khaled al-Masri and Omar Nasr.

Introduction

Rendition refers to the secret transfer of terror suspects from one state to another, by means that bypass all judicial as well as administrative due process. The terror suspects mainly get transferred into the custody of other nations such as Egypt, Jordan, and Syria where there is physical and also psychological brutality feature prominently in interrogations. In the war against terror, rendition mainly got initiated by the United States intelligence agencies –although it is not exclusive- and gets implemented with the collaboration, complicity or acquiescence of other governments. The persons get transferred into US custody and may finally get moved into detention centers located in Cuba, Guantanamo Bay, Iraq, Afghanistan, or black sites that are secret facilities operated by the Central Intelligence Agency. The primary objective of rendition practice is to gather adequate intelligence from suspects and also to keep detainees away from any judicial oversight. Extraordinary rendition refers to the apprehension and forced the transfer of people from a country to another, outside the legal process of law and presents a high risk of torture, inhuman treatment or degrading treatment to the person. The definition as mentioned above of extraordinary rendition conforms to the Council of Europe’s working definition that reflects the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The practice is extraordinary as a counterterrorism measure because it circumvents official legal structures and processes to arrest, detain and transfer suspected terrorists. The undertaking of extraordinary rendition programs requires extensive evaluation of the totality of circumstances before an extraordinary rendition operation gets permitted. The intelligence agency relies on diplomatic assurance from the host governments that hold a good human rights record. Subsequent monitoring of the suspected persons rendered to foreign states so as to ensure that the transfers comply with the American and international law.

The scope of rendition around the globe is tough to estimate due to the level of secrecy that surrounds the practice and also the many victims that have disappeared mysteriously. Families in these nations do not report the missing individuals to law enforcement agencies as they fear that intelligence officers may turn their focus on them. In 2005, Egypt’s Prime Minister stated that the United States had transferred approximately 60-70 detainees to custody in Egypt alone, and a former CIA agent stated that there had been hundreds of detainees sent by the US to custody in the Middle East (Committee on Foreign Affairs House of Representatives, 2007). After the occurrence of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on 9/11, hundreds of individuals suspected to be part of terrorist groups/activities to foreign jurisdictions have got transferred through extraordinary rendition. America agencies have received numerous aids in its rendition programs from European nations that have enhanced the transfers and from the states they receive and detain terror suspects. The European nations have adopted a policy referred to as “see no evil, hear no evil” in which they facilitate rendition flights using their territory airspace, and others get involved in individual cases. Several agents from the European nations have also participated in the apprehension of terror suspects or the interrogation of detainees. The foreign intelligence agencies in Europe that participate in the rendition program operate covertly outside the rule of law and without accountability. In addition to the United States and European countries, various other nations have got involved in the rendition process. They include the governments of Egypt, Morocco, Syria and Jordan that have received rendition suspects and subjected them to torture, indefinite detentions as well as disappearances must also get held to account for the violation of rights of persons in their custody.

The suspected terror suspects get seized in respective countries by local authorities in the particular nation at the behest of officers from the CIA, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or the Diplomatic Security Service (DSS). The suspects then get handed over to the US intelligence agency who use US assets to transport the terror suspect to various destinations around the globe. Some of the suspects, however, get destined for known prisons in the host nations; however, others get held in “black sites” that get operated by the United States administration in the foreign countries. This measure is significant in obtaining sensitive information from terror suspects and also in pulling out terrorists off the streets.

The use of rendition and extraordinary rendition measures for counter-terrorism get supported by the United States governments. President Obama issued executive orders to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to grant them the authority to undertake renditions, secret abductions and also transfer prisoners to nations that collaborate with America (Miller, 2009). The CIA has the authority to detain and interrogate terror suspects in their aim of keeping the country safe. These measures had been effective in the war on terror for several years hence the Obama administration could not afford to dispense it. The decision did not receive from criticism from the general public, among human rights groups or any other organizations. Through these measures and interrogations, intelligence agencies in the US have obtained valuable information about Al Qaeda and other terrorist-related groups and activities. The former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice together with the former President of US Bush, have acknowledged the rendition as getting conducted as a matter of policy, and also a vital component in US counterterrorism strategy (Boon & Lovelace, 2010).

History of rendition and extraordinary rendition

For many decades, America and other nations have used renditions to transport terrorist suspects from the nation where they got captured to their home nations or others where they got held, questioned, or brought to justice. President Reagan’s administration used rendition practice to bring people to justice in the US. The bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, the bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City, and also the subway attack in Tokyo set the stage for the United States to implement effective strategies to fight and prevent terrorism around the world. President Bill Clinton, who was the president in 1995, stated that terrorism is a potential threat to national security and criminal act; hence, it was necessary to combat it with all appropriate means. President Clinton’s administration used rendition to transfer detainees to third world countries where they were wanted for terrorism offenses. After the September 11 terrorist attack, the Bush administration redefined the goals of the rendition practice to the emerging and increasing terrorist threat. President Bush signed secret directives “that is the memoranda of notifications” on September 17, 2001, that authorized the CIA to engage in extraordinary rendition of suspected terrorist activities even without adequate and proper approval by the government and due process. This new measures led to increased transfer of aliens, detention of terrorists and interrogation without the prospect of any formal charges. Other tactics that got adopted to strengthen the combating of terrorism was forceful interrogations so as to pre-empt future attacks. Further, the attorney for the Department of Justice, John Yoo wrote a memorandum justifying the President’s authority to utilize broad powers during a time of war., therefore, removing the intense debate regarding the extraordinary rendition program concerning the interrogation of terror suspects in different parts of the globe. The United States government and intelligence agencies insist that the program gets designed for a limited number of cases involving only the most dangerous terrorists and other individuals believed to have crucial information that includes knowledge of planned terrorist attacks. The ability of US and the agencies to render a person a suspected terrorist to a foreign state is crucial in strengthening and safeguarding national security because it enables enhanced information sharing from the foreign state. Criticism has however emerged claiming that the rendition program entails torture and human rights violation.

Legal controversies of rendition and extraordinary rendition

The government followed domestic and international law in creating the legislation so as to safeguard the nation and also create accountability to protect human rights. The major extraordinary rendition controversy is to human rights concerns and possible torture. De Frias, Samuel & White (2012), states that extraordinary rendition is one of the most systematic, sophisticated and shocking human rights violations in the so-called “war on terror.” Extraordinary rendition practice entails severe violations of many international norms, giving rise to state and personal responsibility under the international law and the appropriate remedy and reparation.

The management and implementation of the extraordinary rendition policy have created significant opposition from human rights activists. For instance, Ramzi Yousef, a perpetrator of the bombings of the World Trade Center in 1993 was a target of the US rendition program. However, Yousef’s rendition and conviction encountered opposition since the moral imperative of free society is to offer adequate security and safeguard its citizens against threats such as terrorism. The human rights groups did not like the disappearance of individuals on ghost planes without getting charged with crimes they committed and detailed indefinitely. Before the September 11 terrorist attacks, few suspected international terrorists had got detained and delivered to the US. However, the attacks led to increased aggressive actions to combat terrorism; thus, rendition became public when exposed by inquisitive journalists. In 2004, the CIA director George Tenet testified before the 9/11 commission that only an estimated seventy total renditions had occurred before the World Trade Center bombing in 2001. It later got determined since then the US administration seized and transferred persons to countries where torture was common in their detention facilities, thus lead to the naming of the policy as outsourcing of torture. In 2006, the UN Committee against Torture called on the American government to stop the rendition of suspects as well as stop detention in secret detention facilities under its de facto effective control, since such actions led to the violation of the convention against torture (Tan, 2013). International law also prohibits the transfer of detainees to nations that have a significant risk of torture or ill-treatment. The extraordinary rendition operations were dependent on collaboration and planning between America and other countries so as to ensure secret capture, detention and also the transport of detainees. It is, however, a violation of international law.

Successful extraordinary renditions cases

Since the occurrence of the 9/11 bombings on the World Trade Center, there have been various successful extraordinary renditions as described in this section. The extraordinary rendition practice led to the apprehension and detention or prosecution of various notorious terrorists that include Khalid Shaikh Muhammed (KSM), Abu Zubaydah, Ibn Shaikh al-Libi, Walid Bin Attash, Muhammed Saad Iqbal Madni, and Encep Nuraman.

A.    Khalid Shaikh Muhammed (KSM)

KSM, a self-proclaimed mastermind of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States that lead to the death of 2996 people (including the perpetrators), got detained in Rawalpindi, Pakistan on March 1, 2003. KSM was a notorious terrorist and Al-Qaeda operator with known association with Usama bin Ladin and Ramzi Yousef. Before his arrest, KSM was wanted by the US agencies for over fifteen years. At the time of his arrest, KSM was the head of Al-Qaeda operational planner, military committee leader as well as media operations director for Al-Shabaab. The arrest of KSM leads to evasion of possible attacks he had planned against the US as well as yielded vital intelligence for the intelligence agencies regarding the leadership structure of the Al-Qaeda terrorist group. The rendition of KSM and subsequent detention gets considered by the United States as a significant achievement towards combating terrorism and blow to the Al-Qaeda.

B.     Abu Zubaydah (The Facilitator)

Abu Zubaydah, a known Al-Qaeda affiliate and operational planner, got apprehended in Faisalabad, Pakistan on March 28, 2002. As an Al-Qaeda facilitator, Abu was responsible for facilitation of the movement of top radical Islamic ideologues around the world with the aim of supporting training and group’s mission. Zubaydah was the overseer of the Khalden group of terror training camps situated in the Afghanistan.

Botched Extraordinary Renditions

Several of the extraordinary renditions by US intelligence agencies with the collaboration with foreign governments have got mistaken, and two cases get described in this section.

A.    Khaled al-Masri (A public relations failure)

Among the most known public failures of the program is the capture and detention of Khaled al-Masri, a Lebanese-born German citizen and car salesman captured in Macedonia in January 2004 (Robinson, 2008). The detention of Al-Masri quickly escalated the calling of stopping of rendition by its critics. Masri arrested while on vacation later got released in Albanian without explanation or any criminal charges. Al-Masri, who has since returned to German and filed a case against the US government, was simply a victim of mistaken identity representing nearly a third of the erroneous renditions of the program. The case attracted criticism and attention from the press, the German Government and American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The US government has since is yet to account for its mistakes in the Masri case.

B.     Omar Nasr (Abu Omar): Shoddy Tradecraft

Omar got detained in Milan in 2003 and flown to Egypt through the US airbases in Italy and Germany. Omar had received a refugee status in Italy since he believed that his return to Egypt would lead to mistreatment. The sloppy tradecraft of US officials helped the Italian investigators to unravel the whole Omar extraordinary rendition, starting with the capture of Omar. The Italian government convicted twenty-two of the suspected US officials and a US Air Force officer in absentia in November 2009.

References

Sherry Roberts is the author of this paper. A senior editor at Melda Research in <a href="https://www.meldaresearch.com">research paper services</a> if you need a similar paper you can place your order for <a href="https://researchpapers247.com">cheap research paper services</a>