Foreign Policy: National Interests and Values

Foreign Policy: National Interests and Values Foreign Policy linking the protection of national interests and promotion of national values. Great Britain has lost an empire and has not yet found a role. Implicit in the introductory quotation by American politician Dean Acheson (Hutchinson Encyclopedia, 2003) is the principle that a nation has various choices in setting foreign policy. A precursor to setting effective foreign policy is the need to have a foreign policy vision, or a fundamental view of what the nation would like to accomplish in the world arena. Two considerations in setting a foreign policy vision involve deciding if the nation should focus on promoting its values internationally or if it should focus on protecting its national interests. This essay will show that foreign policy should not require a choice between protecting national interests and promoting national values; rather, it will demonstrate that a nation can protect its national interests and, at the same time, promote its values in the world arena. Beginning with separate discussions on protecting national interests and on promoting values, the essay continues with an exploration of the linkages between promoting a nations values and protecting its national interests. Finally, conclusions will be presented. Before embarking on an exploration of national interests and values in setting foreign policy, a working definition for the term foreign policy will be established to help in framing the discussion. The Republic of Ireland (1996), in observing that there is no universally agreed definition of foreign policy, furnishes this succinct definition for the term: the pursuit by a state of its interests, concerns, and values in the external environment. Foreign Policy magazine (undated, cited in Labor Law Talk, undated) offers a somewhat fuller, yet essentially supportive, definition: A foreign policy is a set of political goals that seeks to outline how a particular country will interact with the other countries of the world. Foreign policies generally are designed to help protect a countrys national interests, national security, ideological goals, and economic prosperity. This can occur as a result of peaceful cooperation with other nations, or through aggression, war, and exploitation. Creating foreign policy is usually the job of the head of government and the foreign minister (or equivalent). The definition proposed by Foreign Policy magazine is accepted as the working definition in this context as it provides a more complete description, although the Irish definition will also be referenced. Protecting National Interests The working definition for foreign policy states, in part, that foreign policy is designed to help protect a countrys national interests; the Irish definition states, again in part, that foreign policy is the pursuit by a state of its interests. Each sovereign country can be expected to have different national interests and thus a different foreign policy focus because external policy reflects interests or concerns internal to the country pursuing them, according to the Republic of Irelands White Paper on Foreign Policy (1996). Logically, then, the protection of national interests through foreign policy is the protection of internal interests. Comparing the national interests of Canada and the United States, two closely-allied neighboring countries which are similar in many ways, provides insight into the extent to which national interests differ. Canadian foreign policy focuses on economic growth, social justice, quality of life, sovereignty and independence, peace and security, and harmonious national environment with the first three being the most important (Franks, 1997). Canadas neighbor to the south, the United States, sets foreign policy at three levels. Vital interests, which represent the highest level, include the physical security of American territory, the safety of American citizens, the economic well-being of American society, the protection of critical infrastructures from paralyzing attacks. Military troops may be used unilaterally and decisively to protect these vital interests. The second level includes those interests that do not affect national survival but do influence national well-being (e.g. protect ion of the global environment and commitment to allies). Finally, humanitarian and other interests, including responses to national disasters and promotion of human rights among others, are positioned at the third and lowest level (Gladkyy, 2003, citing White House, 1999). After the attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, the United States placed added emphasis on national security interests: The Government of the United States has no more important mission than (1) fighting terrorism overseas and (2) securing the homeland from future terrorist attacks. (Gladkyy, 2003, citing Bush, 2001). The contrast between national interests expressed by Canada and the United States is a stark one indeed. The expressed national interests of the United States are more reactive and could be considered to be more negative in tone than those of Canada which seem more proactive and uplifting. Interestingly, and perhaps demonstrating Canadas internal cultural attributes, three of the countrys six areas of national interest are focused on human bettermentsocial justice and quality of life, which are two of the three high priority interests, and a harmonious national environment. In contrast, humanitarian and other interests are relegated to the lowest priority national interests in the United States. Promoting National Values The working definition for foreign policy states that foreign policy, in addition to protecting national interests as mentioned earlier, is designed to protect a countrysideological goals; the Irish definition states that foreign policy, in addition to pursuing national interests, is the pursuit by a state of itsvalues in the external environment. According to Latham (2002), the term values refers to subjective views of individuals about what is worthy or important. He continues that in politics, [values] are views about the ends that social institutions ought to advance, and the virtues they ought to embody. As government is a social institution, values are the views governments should advance and virtues they should embody. Some examples of national values include freedom, democracy, free economies, and human dignity (The Hutchinson Encyclopedia, 2003). In addition, some national values can be discerned from the articulation of national interests. For instance, referring to Canadas national interests, one might conclude that Canadas values include human rights, peace, and environmental harmony. National values can be promoted by various means ranging along a continuum from active to passive. As an example, the United States, in promoting democracy, has used military actionthe most active meansand has modeled democratic behaviorsthe most passive means. In between these two extremes, the United States has used other approaches including diplomacy, foreign aid, international broadcasting, and even covert political manipulations. (Parapan, 2005). Linking the Promotion of National Values to the Protection of National Interests The thesis for this essay is that foreign policy does not have to involve a choice on the part of a nation between protecting its national interests and promoting its values in the world. A nation can do both and, conceivably, doing both effectively can enhance each one individually. A review of the literature revealed the following representative selections addressing the foreign policy linkage between protecting national interests and promoting national values: Haass (2003) claims that in the 21st century, the principal aim of American foreign policy is to integrate other countries and organizations into arrangements that will sustain a world consistent with U.S. interests and values for the purpose of promoting peace, prosperity, and justice as widely as possible. Abrams (2000) states a foreign policy of dominance will not only advancenational interests but will preserve peace and promote the cause of democracy and human rights. Mead (1994) states that foreign policy is based on a combination of interests and values, calling attention to the struggles associated with defining the national interest and national values and relating the two concepts in an overall foreign policy strategy. Using the term progressive internationalism, Falk (2004) summarizes a foreign policy based on four organizing ideas[that] embody a convergence of national values and interests: national strength, liberal democracy, free enterprise, and world leadership. And, finally, Edel (2005) quotes U.S. President George W. Bushs second inaugural address in January 2005: Americas vitalinterests and our deepest beliefs are now one. Seiple (2003) cautions the United States to be uncompromising over their national values when promoting their national interests, contrasting the differences between expressed values of fair play, the use of the Golden Rule, and the cherished freedoms of religion, association, and press and American interests [revolving] largely around economic access and a military that, by and large, is positioned around the world to protect that access. One factor that may complicate the alignment of national interests and national values in forming foreign policy is what might be considered to be an inherent conflict between the realism of national interests and the idealism of national values. Talbott (2000) expresses a contradiction between championing national interests and national values. He writes about the persistent effort to combine realism and idealism in the role [the United States] plays in the world, continuing by stating that the American people have made clear that they demand some thing nobler and more altruistic from their government and armed forces than the coldblooded calculus of raison detat or realpolitik in which European statecraft has often taken pride. McCraw (2003), in claiming that realism sees foreign policy as about national interests rather than promoting values, writes that this conflict explains why national governments have not been particularly identified with promoting human rights, a position that might be considered to be part of an idealistic foreign policy. The range of approaches nations can use in promoting national values as described earlier could also be applied in protecting their national interestsmodeling behaviors, diplomacy, providing foreign aid, broadcasting their messages, conducting covert political manipulations, and taking military action. For instance, a country that demonstrates democratic behavior may cause people in countries with totalitarian governments to push for democratic reforms. This to a large extent happened as formerly Communist countries of Eastern Europe established democratic forms of government modeled after those in countries of Western Europe and the United States in the latter part of the twentieth century. At the other extreme, the military incursion by the United Kingdom, the United States, and others into Iraq to purportedly establish a democratic government could be viewed as an example of forcing democratic values on a sovereign nation. The case of Iraq presents an interesting twist on the national values promotionnational interest protection issue, one that shows how the two are intertwined in foreign policy. In 2003, when the coalition of the willing invaded Iraq, the case for the incursion was based on the certainty that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction that could be used against other nations. This case reflected the desire to protect national interests, in this instance the safety of citizens. But, the invasion revealed that [t]here were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraqno unmanned aerial vehicles, no terrorist training camps, no outlawed Scud missiles, no nuclear weapons program (The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, 2004). When no such weapons were found, the rationale for the invasion changed to a desire to install a democratic government. The case changed from one of protecting national interests to promoting values, this time by military force. If the rationalewas truly altruisticto install a democratic form of government in Iraqand the installation of such a government would help promote the stability of the region thereby ensuring the continued worldwide flow of oil (a strategic interest), then the invasion would represent an example of how the promotion of national values can be used as part of foreign policy to protect national interests. Whether the motive of installing a democratic government is true or simply a cover for the failure to find weapons of mass destruction is not a topic for this discussion; however, the efficacy of forcibly installing a democratic government is appropriate. Parapan (2005) asks a probing question: After all, what is it that terrorists hate? The American values and culture, or the American insistence on imposing those on others? Parapan suggests that reform must come from within. Only time will tell whether the new, more democratic government in Iraq will be accepted or replaced by another dictatorship or, even worse, by anarchy. Future historians will be able to compare and contrast the long-term outcomes of the popularly-installed democratic governments in Eastern Europe with the forcibly-installed democratic government in Iraq to assess which approach was more effective. Conclusions This essay set out to show that foreign policy should not require a choice between protecting national interests and promoting national values; rather, that a nation can protect its national interests and, at the same time, promote its values in the world. This thesis was proven with the caveat that the road to achieving this type of foreign policy can be difficult. With a working definition of foreign policy in hand, examples of national interests of Canada and the United States were compared and contrasted and examples of national values were presented and accompanied by a description of the continuum of methods countries can use in promoting their values. The definitions and discussions formed the foundation for establishing the linkage between promoting national values and protecting national interests. At the most basic level, the two definitions cited for foreign policy link the protection of national interests and promotion of national values as purposes of foreign policy. Five extracts resulting from a literature search established the linkage between national interests and national values in foreign policy development (Abrams, 2000; Edel, 2005; Falk, 2004; Haass, 2003; Mead, 1994). Difficulties in linking interests and values in foreign policy were characterized as a conflict between realism and idealism (Seiple, 2003; Talbott, 2000). The approaches available to nations as they establish foreign policy that protects national interests were shown to be largely the same as those available to promote values. Examples from initiatives to establish democracies in Eastern Europe and in Iraq were compared and contrasted in the context of promoting national interests and promoting national values. In summary, nations can simultaneously protect their national interests and promote their national values through their foreign policy. Perhaps the proper promotion of national values, one that models the desired values and empowers the citizens of the receiving nation to make their own choices, can actually enhance the protection of national interests in the country implementing its foreign policy through its stabilizing effects in other parts of the world. Bibliography Abrams, Elliott (2000). American powerfor what? Commentary, January 1, 2000 (The) Atlanta Journal and Constitution (2004) Strategy: Make facts fitTime confirms the fabrications and exaggerations of the Bush administrations case for invading Iraq. June 23, 2004. Bush, George W. (2001) Securing the homeland: Strengthening the nation, 2001. Cited in Gladkyy, Oleksandr (2003), American foreign policy and U.S. relations with Russia and China after 11 September. World Affairs, June 22, 2003. Edel, Charles (2005), Picking our fights carefully. The Cincinnati Post, March 3, 2005. Falk, Richard (2004) Toward the revival of principled politics in America. American Tikkun, September 1, 2004. Foreign Policy (undated) Foreign policy. Cited in Labor Law Talk (undated), Foreign policy. Available from: , undated [Accessed: April 14, 2005]. Franks, C. E. S. (1997) White paper on foreign policy, The 1998 Canadian Encyclopedia, September 6, 1997. Gladkyy, Oleksandr (2003), American foreign policy and U.S. relations with Russia and China after 11 September. World Affairs, June 22, 2003. Haass, Richard N. (2003) Defining U.S. foreign policy in a post-post-Cold War world. DISAM Journal, January 1, 2003. (The) Hutchinson Encyclopedia (2003) Dean Acheson. From speech at the United States Military Academy at West Point, December 5, 1962. April 22, 2003. (The) Hutchinson Encyclopedia (2003) US foreign policy in a changing world. September 22, 2003. Labor Law Talk (undated), Foreign policy. Available from: , undated [Accessed: April 14, 2005]. Latham, Stephen R. (2002) National values, institutions, and health policies: what do they imply for [Canadian] Medicare reform? Canadian-American Public Policy, November 1, 2002. McCraw, David (2003) Analysing New Zealands foreign policy: David McCraw replies to criticism advanced by Michael Bassett of his depiction of New Zealands approach to foreign affairs. New Zealand International Review, November 1, 2003. Mead, Walter Russell (1994) Lucid stars: The American foreign policy tradition. World Policy Journal, December 22, 1994. Parapan, Manuela (2005) Why Arabs are anti-U.S. World and I, January 1, 2005. (The) Republic of Ireland (1996) The white paper on foreign policy: Background to Irish foreign policy. Available from: [Accessed: April 14, 2005]. Seiple, Robert A. (2003) The privilege of power: The US is right to oust Hussein but it must better balance national values with national interests. The Christian Science Monitor, March 10, 2003. Talbott, Strobe (2000) Self-determination in an interdependent world. Foreign Policy, March 22, 2000. The White House (1999) A national security strategy for a new century. Defense Strategy Review Page, December 1999, 1-2. Cited in Gladkyy, Oleksandr (2003), American foreign policy and U.S. relations with Russia and China after 11 September. World Affairs, June 22, 2003. Stiff: The Curious Lives Of Human Cadavers Stiff: The Curious Lives Of Human Cadavers After reading the book Stiff I have gained a better understanding of what donating your body to science really means. Through my research and by reading the book, I have decided that a person should most definitely donate his or her body to science. I believe that once a person has died, there is nothing more that the person can do with his or her body. Why not give yourself to science and continue to help people even after you have passed away? I personally would like to die knowing that I could potentially save the lives of millions. The first option for donating your body to science mentioned in the book is for the practice of cosmetic procedures. In the first chapter of the book, Mary Roach attends a seminar where plastic surgeons perform different cosmetic procedures on cadaver heads. The surgeons are able to practice new procedures on nonliving patients before performing them on live patients. The cosmetic surgeons gain a better knowledge of human anatomy and how to perform specific procedures. Practicing on these patients is much easier, since the patients do not have blood that would block their view of a humans basic anatomy and facial structure. The surgeons can see everything that is going on in the surgery clearly which will help them to better perform these surgeries later on. In addition to cosmetic procedures, I have learned through my research that universities often provide cadavers for medical students to use as a way to advance their knowledge of the human body. In an article I read, it stated th at before first-year medical students are allowed to lay their hands on the living, they must first learn the anatomy of the dead. Students are required to take apart their given body and look at each section of a humans internal anatomy. Although it is possible to learn this information through high-tech simulators and body models, nothing can replace being able to see and touch a real body. This is why donating your body to science is important; so that medical students will have the chance to learn from dead bodies, before operating on live ones. The third chapter of the book is set at a body farm. A body farm is a research facility where human decomposition can be studied in many different settings. At the body farm, Mary Roach sees a variety of dead bodies that are being used to study human decomposition. Each body is at a different stage of decay. Studying these bodies can help determine the time in which a person has died. In reality, this can help investigators determine the time of death of a corpse. Knowing the time of death can help solve crimes and murder investigations, an important component of forensic science. In the book, Roach mentions fly larvae as an important way to determine when a person has died. Forensic scientists can conclude how old the larvae on a cadaver are, and therefore decide how long the person has been dead for. Other methods of determining this can be used, such as looking at the potassium level in a persons eyelids or studying the stage of their decay. Not only are the donated bodies at diff erent phases of decomposition, they are also put into different scenarios. Every time a person dies, they are not going to be in the same setting. This is why researchers at the body farm have to put cadavers in different situations. The first body Mary Roach sees at the farm is wearing sweatpants, so that examiners can study the effects of decay on bodies that are wearing clothing. During my research, I have learned that some of the other scenarios bodies have been put in include being buried, left outside, and even submerged in water. People die in all different settings, which is why it is important to know how a body reacts in these different environments. By donating your body to science, forensic scientists can learn the rate at which bodies decay, and therefore solve investigations later on. The fourth chapter involves the use of cadavers as crash test dummies. When a person donates his or her body to science, it is possible that he or she will be sent to a research facility where researchers study the effects of impact on the body. When car companies make new car models, it is necessary for them to test if a car provides safety to a human in the event of a crash. However, researchers cannot use nonhuman crash test dummies for these studies. Crash test dummies can tell you how much force a crash has unleashed on a body, but not how this force affects the body. Scientists need to know how much force a real body part can handle. For these test, researchers need subjects that will provide accurate results without causing harm or pain to them. In the past, dedicated researchers have donated themselves as dummies. However, this is neither safe and causes pain to the living researchers. Cadavers are better candidates, since they are not only human, but they also feel no pain a nd cannot sustain injury. During this section of the book, Mary Roach visits a facility where a simulated car accident is taking place on cadaver UM 006. The results from the car accident will help the car company know if the particular model will keep a person safe if a crash were to occur. Then, they can adjust the car to provide better safety. So someday, when a live human survives an accident, he or she has UM 006 to thank. In chapter six, Mary Roach discusses cadavers who are used to understand how bullets and bombs work, and how they affect the human body. Quite often, the bodies of people who choose to donate themselves to science are sent to facilities where the main goal of research is to figure out how to better protect those who are often exposed to danger. As with most tests, researchers need subjects who give results that are realistic and accurate, and that do not feel pain. Cadavers fill these needs when it comes to testing items such as bulletproof vests, army-strength footwear, and other protective wear. To ensure that our soldiers and police officers are safe, it is essential to guarantee that their equipment is safe and will withstand whatever circumstances they may endure. To do so, experiments are conducted to test these different items. Through these tests, researchers can tell if bulletproof vests will withstand the force of a shot, if boots will withstand the effects of a roadside bo mb, and if miscellaneous protective wear can handle under pressure. All of these tests are important in protecting those who give their life to protect us. In chapter seven, Mary Roach discusses a controversial experiment that many people choose to donate themselves to. These trials have become known as the crucifixion experiments. Throughout history, a number of scientists have been engrossed by the idea of recreating the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Through trial and error, these scientists have each created their own theory about how Jesus was positioned on the cross and each event that took place during this time. Not only do some people choose to have their cadavers donated to this experimental process, but some actually volunteer themselves while they are still living. Although most people dont choose to take this path when donating their body, it is always another option that could be considered. Throughout the book, Mary Roach touches a couple of times on the subject of organ donation. I believe that organ donation is one of the most beneficial and practical means of donating yourself to science. In all other cases of donating yourself to science, your body is not used to provide direct help to others. In these cases, your body is used for studies and research that could one day hopefully help someone else. When you choose to donate your organs, you are directly giving yourself to someone else. The second you are considered dead (whether your heart has stopped beating or you have been considered brain dead) your organs are give to another person who is in need. In a sense, you are able to live on through another person, or at least a piece of you is. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, every eleven minutes a person is added to the waiting list to receive an organ. Seventy-five people receive an organ transplant each day. However, twenty people die every day waiting for an organ, because of the shortage of donated organs. When one person alone decides to become an organ donor, he or she could possibly save up to eight lives. So if you dont want to join the body farm, be used as a surgical patient, or become a human crash test dummy, I believe that deciding to become an organ donor is the easiest way to save lives. The book Stiff gave me a much better understanding of what it means to donate your body to science. Making the choice to give yourself to scientific research could help an endless amount of people. After all, what are you planning to do with your body when you die? Why not give yourself to something rewarding and beneficial? If you dont want your dead body to be shot for scientific study or to receive a facelift once you have passed away, choose to become an organ donor. You could save up to eight lives, and die knowing youre going to continue to help others. One day, I will certainly choose to donate my body to science, and potentially make life better for those who are still on earth. Personal Review I have always enjoyed reading, and throughout the years I have read all kinds of different stories. However, I have never a book quite like Stiff. In Stiff, Mary Roach talked about a topic that most people would find repulsive and somewhat hard to even think about. Cadavers arent a usual subject when it comes to writing books. Yet, I absolutely loved it. Roach found a way to write about death in a humorous way without ever being disrespectful. Who knew reading about dead bodies could be so funny? The book was filled with interesting facts and never had a dull moment. Most of the time, I had trouble putting the book down. I could also see all the hard work and research Mary Roach put into it. She knew what she was talking about inside and out. She traveled to different countries, researched a countless number of events in history, and interviewed numerous people who were somehow related to the topic. She also mentioned every little detail about what was going on, which made it that mu ch better. Roach never sugar coated anything. She always told everything like it was. Yet she always respected the cadavers and treated them like they were still alive. After reading this book, I feel much better informed about what it means to donate your body to science. I never understood all the possibilities of what could happen to you if you made the choice to donate your cadaver. Mary Roach wrote everything on a level that I could understand without getting confused. I now feel much better prepared about deciding whether to donate my body or not. I have decided that I definitely would like to donate my body to science and make my contribution to society. I would like to be able to help others even after I have passed away. Without this book, I dont think I ever really would have considered donating my body as an option. I didnt understand what it meant or what would happen. Mary Roach convinced me to donate my body to science, and I believe others would feel the same.

Huckleberry Finn vs. Tom Sawyer Essay

Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer are very different characters. I think that is what made them such great friends. Tom is always out to have a good time and doesn’t care who he hurts to do it. Huck always follows Tom’s lead even though sometimes he shouldn’t. Huck Finn grew up in a very rough environment. His father was a drunk who would disappear for months on random occasions. Huck is typically dirty and homeless. Eventually he goes to live with Widow Douglas who continually tries to reform Huck, but he resists and keeps his own ways. He said â€Å"The Widow Douglas she took me for her son, and allowed she would sivilize me; but it was rough living in the house all the time, considering how dismal regular and decent the widow was in all her ways; and so when I couldn’t stand it no longer I lit out. I got into my old rags and my sugar-hogshead again, and was free and satisfied.†(2) Huck is also a follower mostly of his good friend Tom. â€Å"But Tom Sawyer he hunted me up and said he was going to start a band of robbers, and I might join if I would go back to the widow and be respectable. So I went back.† (2) This is really the first time Huck has been educated and is taught about religion. Huck grew up in a much tougher environment then his close friend Tom, but he still has a good heart and was an easy going guy. He says â€Å"We said there wasn’t no home like a raft, after all. Other places do seem so cramped up and smothery, but a raft don’t. You feel mighty free and easy and comfortable on a raft.† (42) Tom is Huck’s best friend. They are about the same age but grew up in completely different situation. Tom grew up in white middle class family in a nice comfortable environment. Tom is clearly the leader of the two because Huck is always following his lead. Huck says â€Å"Tom told me what his plan was, and I see in a minute it was worth fifteen of mine for style, and would make Jim just as free a man as mine would, and maybe get us all killed besides. So I was satisfied, and said we would waltz in on it.† (66) Also Huck says â€Å"Tom Sawyer wouldn’t back out so I won’t.† Another thing that is different is Tom is willing to keep a secret that hurts a lot of people. He knows Mrs. Watson has died, but keeps it a secret for his own enjoyment. He could have told and Jim would have been free, but all he cared about was his plan to escape and how fun it was going to be. You  can clearly see the differences between Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer. There are many examples in the book that show that. Tom is the leader and Huck is the follower. The biggest difference is the morals of the two. Tom kept a secret that hurt people and all Huck wanted to do was free Jim. After everything said Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer are best friends. They get along so well and will be friends for life.

Why Everybody Is Talking About Essay Writing Topics for Grade 6...The Simple Truth Revealed

Why Everybody Is Talking About Essay Writing Topics for Grade 6...The Simple Truth Revealed Within this instance you are able to approach SameDayEssay. As you pay for homework, we provide those options free of charge. A minumum of one parent should work at home. There are lots of things to consider and most importantly, is the trustworthiness of the service you decide to use. This is done so you've got more time to unwind and play without the load of worrying about your final choice. You should have your reasons, and our primary concern is that you wind up getting a great grade. It is also helpful to fight beloved laziness. All teachers are extremely hard working. Utilise the assistance of our service and don't be concerned about how you complete the school. Our school indicates an extremely good outcome. My very first morning in some kind of latest school. The computer software moves deeper. Unfortunately, when any true money on-line casino in the USA is sold to a brand-new company this whole process has to be repeated. This way you don't risk your money since you can ascertain the price before finalizing your buy. An excessive amount of money isn't a good thing. What the In-Crowd Won't Tell You About Essay Writing Topics for Grade 6 The ESL essay ought to be grammatically accurate. That's the reason why we must aid them in any assignment. There are over a hundred teachers in our school. Try a few of these topics. Gun ownership ought to be tightly controlled. School should happen in the evenings. Recycling should be mandatory for everybody. Pregnant couples should get parenting lessons. Parents should speak to kids about drugs at a youthful age. Teens should have to take parenting classes. They should be able to choose their bedtime. Together with the UK Essay Help undergraduates can't be worried about the time but delight in a complete life. It is possible to subscribe on the webpage at Join Us An essay is a brief bit of writing that generally provides the writer's individual viewpoint on any particular subject. Yet another secret is that for us, you're not average. For instance, some of them just have zero time to deal with dozens of assignments that keep bombarding from every side. The reasons could possibly be absolutely different. Each one of your wishes about the order matters for the writers. Luckily you will discover tons of information online inside this regard. In other sorts of essays, the content can fluctuate. Our site features custom writing help and editing support. This is a web site that has left space for a number of improvements in terms of consumer assistance, but nonetheless, it definitely has the potential of becoming one of the most popular essay writing services on the net. You would like the readers to agree to your views and share the exact opinion on the subject. After discovering our website, you will no longer will need to bother friends and family with these kinds of requests. Describe how folks live, and new inventions as well as the things which won't change. Locate a few topic questions you prefer or know a lot about. Whether you need to make a paper of one-of-a-kind flawlessness, just purchase an essay here and our writers will provide help. In fact, a seasoned writer can get the job done much faster than any student as they've been writing academic assignments during their entire life. In addition, it provides the explanations for why the writer chose the topic. As our group of writers is pretty big, we always have free writers eager to bring a manageable and well-paid purchase.

Leopold and Loebâ€Murder Just for the Thrill of It

On May 21, 1924, two brilliant, wealthy, Chicago teenagers attempted to commit the perfect crime just for the thrill of it. Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb kidnapped 14-year-old Bobby Franks, bludgeoned him to death in a rented car, and then dumped Franks body in a distant culvert. Although they thought their plan was foolproof, Leopold and Loeb made a number of mistakes that led police right to them. The subsequent trial, featuring famous attorney Clarence Darrow, made headlines and was often referred to as the trial of the century. The Leopold and Loeb case is similar to other teen partner killings, such as the murder of Micaela Mickey Costanzo. Who Were Leopold and Loeb? Nathan Leopold was brilliant. He had an IQ of over 200 and excelled at school. By age 19, Leopold had already graduated from college and was in law school. Leopold was also fascinated with birds and was considered an accomplished ornithologist. However, despite being brilliant, Leopold was very awkward socially. Richard Loeb was also very intelligent, but not to the same caliber as Leopold. Loeb, who had been pushed and guided by a strict governess, had also been sent to college at a young age. However, once there, Loeb did not excel; instead, he gambled and drank. Unlike Leopold, Loeb was considered very attractive and had impeccable social skills. It was at college that Leopold and Loeb became close friends. Their relationship was both stormy and intimate. Leopold was obsessed with the attractive Loeb. Loeb, on the other hand, liked having a loyal companion on his risky adventures. The two teenagers, who had become both friends and lovers, soon began committing small acts of theft, vandalism, and arson. Eventually, the two decided to plan and commit the perfect crime. Planning the Murder It is debated as to whether it was Leopold or Loeb who first suggested they commit the perfect crime, but most believe it was Loeb. No matter who suggested it, both boys participated in the planning of it. The plan was simple: rent a car under an assumed name, find a wealthy victim (preferably a boy since girls were more closely watched), kill him in the car with a chisel, then dump the body in a culvert. Even though the victim was to be killed immediately, Leopold and Loeb planned on extracting a ransom from the victims family. The victims family would receive a letter instructing them to pay $10,000 in old bills, which they would later be asked to throw from a moving train. Interestingly, Leopold and Loeb spent a lot more time on figuring out how to retrieve the ransom than on who their victim was to be. After considering a number of specific people to be their victim, including their own fathers, Leopold and Loeb decided to leave the choice of victim up to chance and circumstance. The Murder On May 21, 1924, Leopold and Loeb were ready to put their plan into action. After renting a Willys-Knight automobile and covering its license plate, Leopold and Loeb needed a victim. Around 5 oclock, Leopold and Loeb spotted 14-year-old Bobby Franks, who was walking home from school. Loeb, who knew Bobby Franks because he was both a neighbor and a distant cousin, lured Franks into the car by asking Franks to discuss a new tennis racket (Franks loved to play tennis). Once Franks had climbed into the front seat of the car, the car took off. Within minutes, Franks was struck several times in the head with a chisel, dragged from the front seat into the back, and then had a cloth shoved down his throat. Lying limply on the floor of the back seat, covered with a rug, Franks died from suffocation. (It is believed that Leopold was driving and Loeb was in the back seat and was thus the actual killer, but this remains uncertain.) Dumping the Body As Franks lay dying or dead in the backseat, Leopold and Loeb drove toward a hidden culvert in the marshlands near Wolf Lake, a location known to Leopold because of his birding expeditions. On the way, Leopold and Loeb stopped twice. Once to strip Franks body of clothing and another time to buy dinner. Once it was dark, Leopold and Loeb found the culvert, shoved Franks body inside the drainage pipe and poured hydrochloric acid on Franks face and genitals to obscure the bodys identity. On their way home, Leopold and Loeb stopped to call the Franks home that night to tell the family that Bobby had been kidnapped. They also mailed the ransom letter. They thought they had committed the perfect murder. Little did they know that by the morning, Bobby Franks body had already been discovered and the police were quickly on the way to discovering his murderers. Mistakes and Arrest Despite having spent at least six months planning this perfect crime, Leopold and Loeb made a lot of mistakes. The first of which was the disposal of the body. Leopold and Loeb thought that the culvert would keep the body hidden until it had been reduced to a skeleton. However, on that dark night, Leopold and Loeb didnt realize that they had placed Franks body with the feet sticking out of the drainage pipe. The following morning, the body was discovered and quickly identified. With the body found, the police now had a location to start searching. Near the culvert, the police found a pair of glasses, which turned out to be specific enough to be traced back to Leopold. When confronted about the glasses, Leopold explained that the glasses must have fallen out of his jacket when he fell during a birding excavation. Although Leopolds explanation was plausible, the police continued to look into Leopolds whereabouts. Leopold said he had spent the day with Loeb. It didnt take long for Leopold and Loebs alibis to break down. It was discovered that Leopolds car, which they had said they had driven around all day in, had been actually been at home all day. Leopolds chauffeur had been fixing it. On May 31, just ten days after the murder, both 18-year-old Loeb and 19-year-old Leopold confessed to the murder. Leopold and Loebs Trial The young age of the victim, the brutality of the crime, the wealth of the participants, and the confessions, all made this murder front page news. With the public decidedly against the boys and an extremely large amount of evidence tying the boys to the murder, it was almost certain that Leopold and Loeb were going to receive the death penalty. Fearing for his nephews life, Loebs uncle went to famed defense attorney Clarence Darrow (who would later participate in the famous Scopes Monkey Trial) and begged him to take the case. Darrow was not asked to free the boys, for they were surely guilty; instead, Darrow was asked to save the boys lives by getting them life sentences rather than the death penalty. Darrow, a long-time advocate against the death penalty, took the case. On July 21, 1924, the trial against Leopold and Loeb began. Most people thought Darrow would plead them not guilty by reason of insanity, but in a surprising last-minute twist, Darrow had them plead guilty. With Leopold and Loeb pleading guilty, the trial would no longer require a jury because it would become a sentencing trial. Darrow believed that it would be harder for one man to live with the decision to hang Leopold and Loeb than it would be for twelve who would share the decision. The fate of Leopold and Loeb was to rest solely with Judge John R. Caverly. The prosecution had over 80 witnesses that presented the cold-blooded murder in all its gory details. The defense focused on psychology, especially the boys upbringing. On August 22, 1924, Clarence Darrow gave his final summation. It lasted approximately two hours and is considered one of the best speeches of his life. After listening to all the evidence presented and thinking carefully on the matter, Judge Caverly announced his decision on September 19, 1924. Judge Caverly sentenced Leopold and Loeb to jail for 99 years for kidnapping and for the rest of their natural lives for murder. He also recommended that they never be eligible for parole. The Deaths of Leopold and Loeb Leopold and Loeb were originally separated, but by 1931 they were again close. In 1932, Leopold and Loeb opened a school in the prison to teach other prisoners. On January 28, 1936, 30-year-old Loeb was attacked in the shower by his cellmate. He was slashed over 50 times with a straight razor and died of his wounds. Leopold stayed in prison and wrote an autobiography, Life Plus 99 Years. After spending 33 years in prison, 53-year-old Leopold was paroled in March of 1958 ​and moved to Puerto Rico, where he married in 1961. Leopold died on August 30, 1971, from a heart attack at age 66.