Essay Instructions: Examine how the changes in military history has changed the perspectives on the First Anglo-Chinese War of 1839-1842. How did the early "Drums and Trumpets" historians explain the English success? How has the advancement of historiography provided new perspectives on the First Opium War. What have 'New Military Historians', 'R.M.A. Historians' and 'War and Society Historians' said about the 1st Anglo-Chinese War that earlier historians did not write about or chose not to include, and why?
What defines a historiographical research paper is accurately characterizing the historiography - the interpretations presented by scholars - on your research agenda. Yet you cannot simply just summarize what others have said. your goal is to add something - illumination, undertanding; rather than simply narrating or summarizing what other scholars have already said. You need to identify the major interpretative 'schools' or 'positions' related to your research agenda. Then you need to explain how and why these interpretative differences have arisen and changed over time as well as the strengths and weaknesses of each interpretation or interpretative school.
There are faxes for this order.
Customer is requesting that (cdbrychalk) completes this order.
Excerpt From Essay:
Essay Instructions: I need a comprehensive and detailed military history of the eastern Theatre of the War from 1861 to the end of 1862. In the process discuss Union and Confederate War goals, and the strategies developed bu both to achieve these goals. be sure to discuss the Emancipation proclamation,
Reference Source: "Ordeal by Fire, The Civil War and Reconstruction", third edition, by James M. McPhearson
Excerpt From Essay:
Essay Instructions: Topic: The effects of the National Defense Authorization Act of 1916 & 1920 on the National Guard
May want to also include some most recent news like the Defense Authorization Act of 2012 which gave the National Guard a seat at the table with the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Please, No internet sources
I will need primary and secondary source material (to include original source documents, books, journal articles, newspapers, etc.)
The style of the research paper must be "historical narra-tive;" that is, like Jay Luvaas, “Is Military History Still Practicable”. Transition from one idea to another should be smooth, without numbering your paragraphs or using sub-paragraphs.
Use FOOTNOTES only when attributing sources. With current computer technology, there is no reason why footnotes ??" the standard of historical attribution ??" should not be use.
Things that should be included:
• A clear thesis statement
• A well-organized line of thought
• Well-developed, supporting paragraphs
• Specific and relevant details
• Good sentence structure
• Logical transitions
• Good word choice
• Correct, standard English usage
• Attribution of sources (Footnotes Only)
• A Bibliography (NOT Works Cited) of all sources consulted (include those sources that you researched but did not find useful for your paper).
I have included the research plan I turned in
The impact of the reserve component military forces in the United States has been significant over the years, and continues to be a vital part of American defense and homeland security. The reserves also provide valuable support when there is natural disasters and other emergencies in the U.S. that call for the capabilities that the National Guard and other reserve forces provide.
The Literature ??" the History of Reserve Military Forces in the U.S.
Barry Stentiford’s book, The American Home Guard: The State Militia in the Twentieth Century, is a valuable resource when reviewing how the current National Guard came to exist. Stentiford explains that soon after the first settlers arrived on the shores of North America, as early as 1636, militia companies were formed strictly because the settlers feared attacks by Native Americans (Stentiford, 2002, pp. 4-5). In fact the militiamen were trained to fight and protect the colonies from Indian attack ??" “and the French” ??" up until the Revolutionary War, Stentiford continues.
During the Revolutionary War the state militia “augmented Washington’s Continental Army” and also “enforced revolutionary discipline” in the communities, according to Stentiford (5). What Stentiford means exactly by “stabilizing the homefront” is not clear, but after the colonies won the Revolutionary War, the militia had the responsibility for protecting the United States of America. The citizens did not want a standing army because of the cost and, Stentiford explains, it would be “…dangerous to the survival of the new republic” ??" at least that’s what colonial citizens feared (5).
Author Lucia Raatma explains that the militia in colonial times were called “Minutemen” and they could be as young as 16 or as old as 60. They bought their own weapons and “trained for four hours at a time, usually twice a week” (Raatma, 2005, p. 6). As brave and “clever” as the Minutemen were, Raatma explains, “they were also just ordinary citizens” that struggled to make ends meet. Clearly though, the militia played a vital part in the Revolutionary War.
Meanwhile, the document that laid out the details of our new government, the Articles of Confederation (effective from March 1, 1781, to March 4, 1789, when the U.S. Constitution became the supreme law of the land), did not address the need for “…the retention or re-creation of the Continental Army” following the Revolutionary War. After the Constitution went into effect in 1789, however, Articles I and II ??" and the Second Amendment ??" clearly spelled out the need for a “federal standing army” that did not rely on local militia (Stentiford, 6).
The federal government passed the Militia Act of 1792, and that legislation required “most free white males” ages 18-45 to “arm themselves and attend regular muster” in order to be prepared. However, Stentiford explains (7), that law was never firmly enforced. The states however did manage their own militia groups, and the men that came into the groups were there because they had a sense of patriotism or they were afraid of a slave uprising, Stentiford continues (8).
President Jefferson in 1800 was a strong supporter of the militia, he believed it to have one of the “essential principles of our government” (Doubler, et al, 2007, 19). Taking the same position of many citizens, Jefferson’s policy as far as the military was concerned was “the supremacy of the civil over the military authority”; the president believed that “a well-disciplined militia” was America’s “best reliance in peace and for the first months of war, till Regulars may relieve them” (Doubler, 20) By 1804, Doubler explains, the War Department of the young nation claimed to have 525,000 men enrolled and organized “…into a hodgepodge of regiments and brigades” ??" a situation that was unacceptable to Jefferson because the soldiers were “far from ready to perform as a coherent, national defense force” (20).
Hence, Congress agreed to allocate $200,000 for the “purchase and distribution of weapons” (at $13 per musket) of about 15,000 new muskets annually (Doubler, 20). Moreover, it became very clear that the militiamen were not up to the task of defending the nation, when in 1814, British Redcoats landed near Chesapeake Bay heading to Washington, D.C.. About 5,000 militiamen fought the Redcoats but were “overrun” and retreated while the British entered Washington and “torched the Capitol, the White House, and a number of other public buildings” (Doubler, 21).
On June 3, 1916, President Woodrow Wilson signed the National Defense Act into law, legislation that expanded the “size and scope” of the National Guard, which had previously been a network of state militias (History.com). The Act brought all those militias under federal control, making it a backup to the regular army; in other words, the president could call out the National Guard for a number of national or international services.
President Wilson had been resisting the temptation to inject the U.S. military into World War I ??" even though Theodore Roosevelt and other Republicans had been pushing to get American troops on the ground in Europe ??" partly because the Guard and the U.S. Army were busy battling Pancho Villa who was raiding cities. Eventually (on April 6, 1917) Wilson and Congress made the decision to enter WWI, knowing that American allies needed the support to fight the Germans.
The National Defense Act of 1916 established qualifications for officers serving in the National Guard, authorizing them to receive training at regular Army schools, the History.com site explained. In fact all National Guard personnel would be organized “according to the standards of regular Army units”; and, “for the first time,” the National Guardsmen would be paid, not just for their active duty during annual training exercises (raised from 5 to 15 days a year), but also for their monthly drills, which were increased from 24 per year to 48 every year (History.com).
Moreover, the National Defense Act of 1916 authorized the “Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC)” which began training high school and college students for eventual service in the Regular Army (History.com).
Maurice Madloff is the author of the book American Military History, and he writes that the upgrade of the National Defense Act of 1916 was put into legislation by the National Defense Act of June 4, 1920, which fully governed the regulation and the organizing structure of the Army until 1950 (Madloff, 1996, p. 65). What the Act of 1920 accomplished was to establish the United States Army into three components: the professional Regular Army; the civilian National Guard; and the civilian Organized Reserves (composed of Officers and enlisted Reserve Corps), according to Madloff.
The author explains that this 1920 Act actually served as an official acknowledgement that what had been the rule of thumb during the previous two hundred or so years was officially now federal policy. That is, the U.S. had always maintained a “standing peacetime force” that was too small if it needed to be expanded to respond to a major land war, but that same standing army also depended on “a new Army of civilian soldiers” that would be trained and available for large mobilizations (Madloff, 65-66). And now, after the passage of the 1920 Act, there would be a standing army of 17,726 officers (three times the strength of the officer corps prior to WWI), Madloff continues (66).
The 1920 Act also authorized the military to expand to three more branches ??" the Air Service, the Chemical Warfare Service, and a Finance Department. After WWI General John Pershing reorganized the War Department (now known as the Defense Department) into five divisions, which made it easier to for the National Guard to be ready to respond should another war break out. Pershing had a personnel staff in what he called G-1, G-2 was intelligence, G-3 deals with operations and training, G-4 was supply division, and G-5 was focused on “strategic planning” (Madloff, 66).
Meanwhile, the Congressional Digest (the official federal publication that explains legislation) in 1934 provided some basic details on the Act of 1920. Beyond what has already been described vis-à-vis the 1920 Act, the Congressional Digest explains that the Act fixed the number of members of the Army at 15,034 combat officers, 280,000 enlisted men, in addition to the number of officers (17,726) alluded to earlier in this paper. There was also flexibility built into the military, in that the size of the army could “be varied depending on the changing importance of the branches in the scheme of defense” (Congressional Digest, 1934).
In conclusion, the Army National Guard has been very active in protecting Americans at home and abroad. At one point in the Iraq War, the Army National Guard made up more than 50% of the U.S. Army combat force and after Hurricane Katrina, “more than 42,000 Army National Guard troops” from many states provided relief and security. Ever since the National Defense Acts of 1916 and 1920, the National Guard has grown and become an huge part of American homeland and foreign defense activities.
Congressional Digest. 1934. Provisions of the National Defense Act. Vol. 13, Issue 4. Retrieved
November 18, 2011, from EBSCOhost.
Doubler, Michael Dale, Listman, John W., and Goldstein, Donald M. 2007. The National Guard:
An Illustrated History of America’s Citizen-Soldiers. Dulles, VA: Potomac Books.
History.com. 2010. U. S. President Woodrow Wilson signs National Defense Act. Retrieved
November 19, 2011, from http://www.history.com.
Madloff, Maurice. 1996. American Military History: 1902-1996. Jackson, TN: De Capo Press.
Raatma, Lucia. 2005. The Minutemen. North Mankato, MN: Compass Point Books.
Stentiford, Barry M. 2002. The American Home Guard: The State Militia in the Twentieth
Century. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press.
Customer is requesting that (johnfitz44) completes this order.
Excerpt From Essay:
Total Pages: 5 Words: 1601 Works Cited: 3 Citation Style: MLA Document Type: Research Paper
Essay Instructions: The final paragraph from For the Common Defense Introduction (xiv) says:
?Americans have had a peculiar ambivalence toward war. They have traditionally and sincerely viewed themselves as a peaceful, unmilitaristic people, and yet they have hardly been unwarlike. Statistics alone testify to the pervasive presence of war in the nation?s history, for tens of millions of Americans have served in wartime and more than a million have died in uniform. Understanding both this paradoxical love-hate attitude toward war and the relationship among military institutions, war, and society is essential in comprehending America?s past, its present, and, perhaps, its future.?
1. Interpret and analyze the ?American way of war?
2. Describe and compare American military models
3. Analyze changing American military policies and goals
4. Examine American military use of technology
5. Analyze American relationship with, preparation for, and application of war
Use each of the five Core Learning Outcomes to address the issues highlighted in the final introductory paragraph of For the Common Defense. What evidence from our readings suggests that Americans consider themselves essentially peaceful? What evidence shows Americans as warlike? Explain this paradoxical love-hate attitude toward war and how this relationship is reflected in America?s military history. Finally, why is understanding this important?
This analytical essay should be:
Double-spaced, font size of 10-12, Times New Roman.
Citations in proper Chicago Style for History Majors OR MLA or APA Style for non-History Majors.
Use margins of one-inch on all four sides
Contain a proper page header with numbered pages.
Length: 1,000 to 1,500 words (approximately 4 to 6 pages).
Include an abstract of 40-60 words.
Include an introduction paragraph with a clear statement of thesis or purpose, and a conclusion paragraph that reiterates your key points.
Be placed as a Word or rtf document by midnight on Sunday of week 6.
Papers will be evaluated for both content (evidence and argument) and style of presentation. Proofread, Proofread, Proofread!
Excerpt From Essay:
I really do appreciate HelpMyEssay.com. I'm not a good writer and the service really gets me going in the right direction. The staff gets back to me quickly with any concerns that I might have and they are always on time.
I have had all positive experiences with HelpMyEssay.com. I will recommend your service to everyone I know. Thank you!
I am finished with school thanks to HelpMyEssay.com. They really did help me graduate college..