Harley-Davidson motorcycle Essay Example for Free

Harley-Davidson motorcycle Essay Introduction Harley-Davidson Motorcycles have been around for just over 100 years. They became popular after World War II and had continued success until the 1970A? a‚Â ¬a„? s when the company was sold. In 1981 a group of executives bought the company and turned it around into what it is today. Harley-Davidson has had some hard times and some images to shed to get to where it is now, but it has been and are still the front runner in the motorcycle industry. Industry and Competition Analysis A? a‚Â ¬A? General economic characteristics. The current market for Harley-Davidson motorcycles is mostly baby boomers who want to recapture the freedom of when they were young. Most consumers today are middle to upper class. A? a‚Â ¬A? Driving Forces The main driving force behind changes made in Harley-Davidson is image. The company has had to continually change to fit or change an image that accompanies the products A? a‚Â ¬A? Five Forces Model There is not much rivalry between Harley-Davidson and other manufactures in the United States. The only company that comes close to competing with them is Honda, however Honda does not specialize in the same type of motorcycle that Harley-Davidson does. The only substitute product would be a different type of motorcycle such as a street bike, but Harley-Davidson mainly produces touring bikes. A? a‚Â ¬A? Competitor Analysis There really are not any true competitors in the United States. BMW is competition in Europe as well as other companies that manufacture street or racing bikes, but as far as touring motorcycles, Harley-Davidson does not have any real competition. A? a‚Â ¬A? Key Success Factors Key success factors include marketing to improve or change image, production to produce enough bikes for consumer demand and distribution, having the right dealerships in place to sell the product. 2 A? a‚Â ¬A? Attractiveness This is a very attractive industry for Harley-Davidson; however it would not be a good industry for a new company to try to gain entry into due to such large brand loyalty. Company Situation Analysis Harley-DavidsonA? a‚Â ¬a„? s business strategy to become more profitable is to market a lifestyle instead of a product. They show the Harley image as being free and fun. Consumers want to get that feeling and while most people buy the motorcycles, Harley-Davidson has managed to create a market for their products even for people who do not own a motorcycle. Harley-DavidsonA? a‚Â ¬a„? s main strength is brand loyalty. People see a motorcycle they automatically think of Harley-Davidson. Their weakness however is diversification. While they are extremely successful at producing and selling touring motorcycles, they can not capture the market on other types of motorcycles. Suzuki and Honda are better known for their street bikes that HarleyA? a‚Â ¬a„? s Buell Company. This leads to their opportunities. Harley-DavidsonA? a‚Â ¬a„? s biggest opportunity is to develop a street bike that can compete effectively with a Honda or Suzuki motorcycle. Threats to Harley-Davidson include a changing culture. As Baby Boomers are becoming too old to purchase new motorcycles, they need to refocus their attention to the younger generation. In order to capture the younger generation, Harley-Davidson needs to develop a street bike as not many younger people are as interested in touring motorcycles. Financially, Harley-Davidson is doing very well. Revenues have grown at a rate of 16% over the past 10 years and have reached 4. 6 billion dollars. This is huge growth considering that the company almost went bankrupt in 1985. Key Issues That Need To Be Addressed The main issue that Harley-Davidson is facing is the aging of their buyers. As talked about earlier, the new consumers of motorcycles are going to be younger people who are looking more for performance motorcycles than touring ones. Right now Harley is expanding their current business keeping it the same as it has always been instead of diversifying the products that they manufacture. Harley has such a large brand loyalty and has finally changed the image of a Harley rider into a positive one that the company will be okay; there is just not much more room for growth. 3 Strategy Alternatives One potential strategy alternative would be to either merge or acquire another company. They have already tried doing this with Buell motorcycles, however, the Buell brand is not that well known and only make up . 8% of the market for motorcycles. If Harley-Davidson could acquire a smaller company such as Ducati that is already successful in Europe, it could market it better in the United States and gain even more market control over the industry and continue to increase profits. One weakness to this strategy however is image. Harley-Davidson has the All American image and buying a foreign company and marketing a foreign product could hurt the image to some Harley Owners. Recommendations Harley-Davidson is such a well known and well respected company that I do not necessarily think that they should change their strategy. They have already tried to incorporate new types of motorcycles into their product line with little success. While the V-Rod is vastly different from the bikes they previously made, sales are not as high as on the traditional motorcycles. Their only real option is to better market the V-Rod and Buell motorcycles to try to build a new customer base so that they can increase sales if sales really do decrease on their traditional touring motorcycles.

History and Demographics of Myanmar

History and Demographics of Myanmar Introduction Myanmar (Burma renamed Myanmar in 1989) has never seen sustained conflict-free periods since its independence in 1948. The military has ruled the country since 1962. In 1988, pro-democracy protests were crushed. In 1990, free and fair national elections were held in Myanmar for the first time in 30 years. The National League for Democracy, the main political movement led by Mrs Aung San Suu Kyi (1991 Nobel Peace Prize laureate), won 62% of the votes and 82% of the seats in elections.[1] While the purpose of these elections was never made fully clear (either to create a Constituent Assembly or a legislative Parliament), the military regime refused to honour the result. Since then, the senior political leaders and the army have remained the beneficiaries of the countrys self and externally imposed isolation. The population continues to live under political oppression, aggravated by economic difficulties. Detentions, intimidation and political oppression of activists are common place. In 2003, the military government presented a seven-step ‘roadmap for constitutional and political reform towards a ‘disciplined democracy. The first face of this roadmap was launched in 2004, with the reconvening of the National Convention to deliberate on basic principles for a new Constitution. Then in December 2007, the process of drafting a Constitution, based on those basic principles, began.[2] Unlike other political groups invited, the NLD refused to take part in the process. Although these first steps might indicate progress, the roadmap has come under criticism for being non-inclusive and lacking credibility. The economic situation stays highly problematic and potentially de-stabilising. The poor data quality and dubious governments statistics, which point to double-digit economic growth, are highly misleading to outside observers and attempt to obscure the countrys dire humanitarian situation. Because of political constraints, donor assistance levels to Myanmar remain grossly insufficient to cover the needs of the general population. In mid-August 2007, as a result of the dismal economic situation, street demonstrations were sparked over a sudden increase in fuel prices. The demonstrations grew into a nation-wide protest against the regimes policies. The Myanmar Sangha an influential institution in society showed overwhelming support for the protests. The government responded with a violent crackdown on the peaceful protests. This crackdown was condemned by the international community, which consequently renewed its pressure on the regime for political reform. As a result the European Union extended their existing sanctions on Myanmar in November 2007. Thus far, European sanctions do not seem to have pushed the government in the desired direction, and they may even have produced counterproductive effects. These include a hardened stance by the government, negative impact on Myanmar civil society and an undermining of the economy at large. Its often said that sanctions are, in and of themselves, a form of violence, employed as a political tool used for rhetoric rather that to create meaningful change. Nevertheless, it is questionable whether Myanmars progress towards a functional democracy would be accelerated by the absence of economic sanctions. The military government adheres to its Roadmap to ‘disciplined democracy, which can best be described as a fully controlled, slow transition to semi-civilian rule. This proceeds at the pace conducive to the generals in charge, protecting their interests and largely disregarding external criticism or pressure. In the governments point of view, Western sanctions are a hostile reaction towards its declared intention for a (controlled) transition. Since the SPDC can rely on sources of income outside the purview of sanctions (energy, commodities, etc.) it is hard to imagine that the regime will deviate from its declared goals as a reaction to sanctions or Western pressure. While experts often argue that economic sanctions have no impact on a targeted country, this report seeks to provide evidence of sanctions applied against Myanmar that have an economic, social and the political impact. For supporting this thesis the focus will be on the restrictive measures imposed by the European Union. It reviews the European Unions existing policies ‘supporting Myanmar to become a peaceful, democratic and prosperous country. Moreover, it will show that it is not enough to wait for a political breakthrough. Evidence suggests all sides, including the international community should have the courage to move away from these entrenched positions and try a different approach. After having given the necessary background and having shown why restrictive measures are applied by western communities, this report will provide recommendations for a different approach towards democracy in Myanmar. 1. Background In June 1989, the ruling military junta changed its name from Union of Burma to Myanmar, one year after the brutally suppressing of pro-democracy protests, where thousands were killed. The military junta claimed this name would be more neutral for a state of a huge ethnic diversity. Thus it would lead to greater harmony among the countrys desperate people and provide them a feeling of release from their British colonial past. The capitals name was also changed from Rangoon to Yangon.[3] The new name was accepted by most countries, including the United Nations, as a privilege of the Burmese government in power, but was not accepted by the United States.[4] Both terms are commonly used, with some people referring to the country as Burma and others referring to it as Myanmar. The same is also true for Rangoon; most people are more familiar with this name than Yangon. Myanmar is the largest country in Southeast Asia and in many ways a country defined by its geography, isolated and yet with a wealth of opportunities to work with its neighbouring countries. The country borders China, India, Bangladesh, Laos and Thailand. Much of the country is the valley of the Irrawaddy River, which runs north to south, from the icy eastern curve of the Himalayas down over a thousand miles to the brackish tidal waters of the Andaman Sea.[5] To better understand modern Myanmar and the reasons behind its self-imposed isolation, their needs to be a greater focus on historical context. The inherent complexity of the issues involved is easier to understand if the various historical forces are analysed separately. The different strands of history, described below, will finally come together and shape the present and show that current issues which today concern the state are mainly rooted in the countrys complex and often dubious institutions and history. Indeed, it can be argued that the countrys current situation is a result of often well-meaning but definitely foolhardy attempts to apply popular political measures to a fragile system of social imperative. â€Å"Nationalism†, â€Å"socialism†, and â€Å"autarky†, as well as â€Å"federalism†, â€Å"autonomy† and â€Å"centralisation†, are systems that have been used by political rulers in post-colonial Myanmar.[6] 1.1 Colonial Past Myanmar was relatively distinct, coherent, and autonomous for almost 1,000 years before the British annexed the country in the 19th century.[7] The first Burmese empire was founded in the 11th century. Many communities which lived in remote places were rarely brought under central domination, but remained relatively distinct from each other in matters such as language, culture, patterns of production, and political traditions.[8] Burman kings built glorious capitals like Pagan and Mandalay and ruled over a rich and thriving civilisation. Moreover, they benefited from an increasing population and revenues, providing significant military and economic advantages over neighbouring polities. Several wars in the eighteenth century led to territorial expansion, which further strengthened the Burmese state and created a distinctive Burmese cultural identity. At the same time, the growth of external trade, both with China and the western world provided further revenues. But the era of Burman kingdoms could not last forever and ended in 1885 when the British deposed the last King Thibaw in Mandalay and made Burma a province of British India. With the invasion of the British, new powerful political concepts and models for later leaders were introduced.[9] The British annexed Burma in 1886 and divided the country into two main administrative areas: Ministerial Burma, which was mainly populated by the Burman majority, and the Frontier area.[10] The British wanted to establish law and order through a low cost central administration. They secured their economic interest by rationalisation and commercialisation of agriculture. The British occupation did provide certain stability, by unifying diverse indigenous ethnic groups under colonial rule. Nevertheless, the British colonial system significantly changed and damaged the Burmese social structure. The precolonial social organisation largely rested on the authority of local chieftains and Buddhists monks. Buddhism as the common faith shared among the Burman majority, the Arakanese and most Shan and Karen people, was the main source of social stability as this faith emphasises self-reliance and righteous behaviour. Moreover, education was offered by monks to all.[11] With the British occupation, authority of local chieftains was replaced by weak influence of salaried officials, who were more responsible to local government rather than to the local communities.[12] The influence of the monks was weakened and they were soon deprived of their main social function. In order to protect the interests of minorities, the British assigned them some key functions which the Burmans, the dominant ethnic group, could not participate. For example, the British mainly recruited Karens, Kachins and Chins in the colonial army and administration, whereas the Burman were kept out of such activities. According to Josef Silverstein, minority groups living on the frontiers were administered directly by the central British administration. They were separated from the rest of the country, and those living in Ministerial Burma were granted seats in the legislature.[13] Thus, ethnic minority groups were divided along occupational lines.[14] Moreover, the British displaced indigenous and non-indigenous to the South in the fertile delta region. Deprived of their traditional social structure, those newly established cultivators fully adopted the imported rule of law, tenan cy rights and money lending practices. These British policies made the Burmese people conscious of their ethnic and cultural differences for the first time. This led to social division that had not existed in the pre-colonial period.[15] With the British annexation of Burma the structures of foreign trade changed, as well. The Burmese economy under the informal empire had become dangerously dependent on the export of view primary commodities -cotton and teak in particular. At the same time, rice was being imported in ever larger quantities, and soon Burma became the worlds largest rice exporter. However, as a consequence, an exodus of landless farmers in 1930 led to competition between ethnic groups and violent intra-communal riots. The world depressions of the 1870s led to a dramatic decline in the relative prices of nearly all primary commodities, including all of Burmas main exports. But nevertheless, international rice prices stayed the same or even rose. Thus, at this time of attempted reform, in contrast to Siam (Thailand) which enjoyed the profits of growing international trade, Burma was plunged into increasing economic hardship and fiscal collapse.[16] Efforts to promote economic development failed as the state lost its autonomy to colonial powers and the economy became more fully integrated into global markets. Local reactions to European expansion lead to crisis and intervention. The failure of British rule in Burma, instability and state insolvency were caused largely due to underpayment by Western countries for goods and services. The rise and fall of cotton prices and, more generally, dependence on western markets, weakened the Burmese government, desperate to find the funds with which to finance reform.[17] This demonstrates that these conditions created an opportunity for Western nations to dominate the country, eventually leading to British colonial rule. Following the British withdrawal, the Japanese occupied Burma in summer 1942. But throughout their four years of control over Burma during the Pacific war, the Japanese did not succeed in bringing the Burmese population under their rule, nor could they manage to lessen the external menace of allied forces. To secure their position they promised to bring independence to Burma and support an indigenous army. By not following through on their promises, the Japanese precipitated the emergence Burmese nationalists, who consequently allied with the British. In March 1945, the Anti-Fascist Peoples Freedom League was formed. Aung San, Chief of this Burmese army, became the head of the Anti-Fascist Peoples Freedom League. The AFPFL was first a resistance movement founded on Buddhist philosophy and open to all Burmese regardless their ethnic background, their political or religious beliefs. It later became a leading political party calling for national unity and federalism. During this transitional period to democracy, a Burmese government was created to handle administrative matters.[18] After the Japanese occupation ended in August 1945, the Burmese feared a regression to the British colonial economic order. Strikes and negotiations led in January 1947 to a meeting in London. There it was decided that a constituent assembly should be elected in April, and those living in Frontier Areas would have to decide whether or not to join Ministerial Burma. In a second meeting in Panlong on the 12th February 1947, the Chin, Kachin and Shan agreed to join the future federal union as autonomous communities. However, the Karen, Karenni, Rakhine (or Arakanese) and the Mon did not sign the Panglong agreement, which seriously challenged its credibility. To this day, dialogue between the Burman majority and ethnic minority groups is a rare and difficult proposition. As expected, the AFPFL won the elections, and Aung San was put in charge of writing the constitution, which espoused â€Å"unity in diversity† that could only be achieved by a federal system. His assassination in July 1947, as well as the deaths of other officials, left Burma without the means to pursue the democratisation process. And so, the declaration of Burmas independence from the Commonwealth on the 4th January 1948 did not prevent the hope of national unity to fall apart. After the Japanese occupation during World War II, the country gained independence from the British in 1948.[19] 1.2 Myanmar and its Ethnic Diversity With its estimated population of 50 million, Burma is one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the world. Due its central location, settlers from many different backgrounds have migrated to Burma. Today about two thirds of the population is Burman (Bamar) and the remaining one-thirds are ethnic minorities. This ethnically diversity is more than ever a critical issue and thus the ground of most of the countrys problems. Largely due to the fact that throughout history, Burma has experienced a great deal of inter-ethnic mingling.[20] Discussions about ethnicity are related to terms, such as â€Å"nationalities† and â€Å"national races†, referring back to the course which was introduced into Myanmar during the colonial era and became concretised with the countrys independence in 1948 when various constitutional models for multi-ethnic states were being discussed. The examples of Yugoslavia, Stalinist Russia, and the United Kingdom were considered as alternatives for Myanmar. It started in the 1930s when ideas of socialist and Marxist concepts had been introduced into Myanmar which took power in 1948 as the essence of the critique of British imperialism and colonial rule. The disproportionate wealth that European and Asian foreigners had gained during the colonial period, creating a situation where the Burmese were poor people in their own rich land, meant that the removal of alien economic domination became a key goal of nationalist policy.[21] The 1974 constitution, which is now being revised, divided Burma into seven ethnic states- the Rakhine, Shan, Mon, Chin, Kayin, Kayah (formerly Karenni) and Kachin and seven divisions, where ethnic Burman people held the majority.[22] Furthermore, the military junta distinguishes 135 sub-ethnic groups among the seven major ones. According to Analysist and social scientists the s can be distributed as following: Bamah 65%, Karen 9%, Shan 7% , Chin 2%, smaller groups like the Mon, Kachin and Wa at 1% each, and Indian 7% at least.[23] Due this huge ethnic diversity, locked into this small geographic zone, over hundreds of different dialects and languages have been identified. Most of the people would not be aware of such classification, if the countries military junta would not use this nomenclature for discriminative purposes. Ethnic minority groups are not excluded in cities populated by Burmans, but with the juntas assimilation into the Burmese Buddhist system, called â€Å"Burmanization†, they are faced severe discriminations, such as the deny of social, cultural and religious rights of ethnic minorities.[24] Moreover, with its xenophobia and oppressions against minorities, the military rule is responsible for the eclipse of huge parts of the peoples history. Minorities culturally and racially different from the dominating Burmans have been uprooted from their localities under the pretext of being â€Å"Kula†, â€Å"non- natives†, or even outright â€Å"foreigners†. In a multiethnic country like Myanmar, instead of following the democratic policy of unity and diversity, the military junta uses Burmanization as a guide and prosecutes the minorities, renames places, destroys minority places and replaces them with their ethnic names. The discrimination of minorities is reinforced by religious consideration, especially Christians, Hindus and above all Muslims communities are often target of many human rights abuses. Christianity is often associated with the Chin, Kachin and Karen, Hinduism with Indians, and the Islam, accounting for about 13% of the population, is mainly represented in Arakanese, Indian and Pakistanis communities. They often have no access to certain jobs, mainly in administration and in the army. Those who live in the remote zones are subjected to atrocities committed by unleashed military groups. The juntas propaganda portrayed ethnic minorities as trouble makers, and ordinary Burmans, besides the Tatmadaw, progressively share this view. Most popular targets of discrimination are the Royhingas, who are Muslims in religion and live in the Mon-State, bordering to Bangladesh.[25] ‘One party, one blood, one voice and one command was already the slogan of the Dobama movement, a motto which still lives on in the Burmese armed forces, the Tatmadaw.[26] Nevertheless, given the fact that Burma is struggling with ethnically and political problems it may be impossible to build unity with such a slogan, especially when 40% of the population is not seen as part of the Burmese society. 1.3 Post Colonial Era The country has been ruled by military dictatorship since 1962, when General Ne Win seized power from the Prime Minister U Nu. Only between 1974 and 1988 there is the exception of a period of one party rule. Ne Win introduced the â€Å"Burmese Way to Socialism†, which systematically referred to the decent of a country which had a 90 percent literacy rate and was rich in natural resources. Together with its regime, he dismantled the independent judiciary, the legislature, the multiparty system and finally cut Burma off from the outside world. This regime has been engaged in military operations against the Communist Party of Burma and various ethnic minorities fighting for autonomy or independence from the central government, which has traditionally been dominated by ethnic Burmans.[27] The current executive body, the State Peace and Development Council is a group of a dozen high-ranking soldiers. On state and division level, military Regional Commanders enjoy a limited autonomy granted by the regime. On township and village level, local Peace and Development Councils exist. In the cease-fire areas, ethnic leaders determine and implement policies, depending on the degree of their autonomy vis-à  -vis the Regional Commanders and SPDC. Although the system of government seems centralised, from the outside world, in reality, it is highly fragmented, with opaque decision making procedures and means of governance.[28] The military is entrenched in every instant and institution of the state, including the Union Presidency, the Union Government, the Union Assembly and the Regional or State Assemblies. The constitution is fleshed out with repetitions and irrelevant provisions. In many respects the constitution is vague and confusing and open to conflicting interpretations. The military is above the constitution and above the law. The Chief of staff of the Defence Forces is the most powerful person under the constitution. His appointment and removal are not referred to the constitution. It is anticipated that he will be beyond the control of a civilian government. The Chief of staff of the Defence Forces and the military are regulated by the militarys own regulations, which enables them to override the constitution and serves as a justification for the military regime to stay in power. The President appoints the Chief Minister for each state and region. A partially elected Legislative Assembly is also established in each state and region.[29] The military regime, then under the name of State Law and Order Restoration Council, seized power in 1988. In August, widespread popular riots against the military regime, which were initiated by university students in Rangoon, were brutally suppressed and thousands were killed. People took to the streets and demanded an end to decades of military dictatorship and international isolation. The protests have been rumbling on for months, starting with students at the select Rangoon Institute for Technology, spreading through the sprawling capital and then upcountry. The price of food skyrocketed, and a mood of opportunity and imminent upheaval fused with long-pent-up anger and resentment against the authorities. In 1990 the SLORC held elections for a multiparty parliament. The NLD as the main political movement under the leadership of Mrs Aung San Suu Kyi won 82% of the seats in the National Assembly. However, the results of the elections were never recognised by the military regime whi ch maintained power. The military refused to step down and since then have kept tight control of the country. Aung San Suu Kyi has been under house arrest most of the time and only the leadership and the army have benefited from self-imposed and external isolation.[30] In October 1992 the SLORC formed the Commission for National Convention in order to draft fundamental principles of constitution. These principles underscoring six major points: Solidarity of the Union for Myanmar Solidarity of the national unity Perpetuation of national sovereignty Development of parliamentary democracy Development of justice, freedom and equality in the political arena The participation of Tatmadaw in the future states national politics. To determine these basic principles above, the SLORC convoked National Convention for Myanmars new constitution in August 1993.[31] The convention assembled less than 15% of the representatives elected in 1990 and the principles which were discussed had to conform to the objectives of the convention, pre-defined by the SLORC. Western States have passed many resolutions to encourage the junta to give a timetable for the convention. But so far, there is no clear sign of its near conclusion, and the NLD, which has left the Convention in 1995 due to undemocratic procedures, has been banned permanently from the convention by the SLORC. The SLORC was officially dissolved on 15 November 1997, reformulating itself as the State Peace and Development Council.[32] 2. Recent Development During the last four decades the regime has been effectively functioned under self-imposed isolation in an attempt to revitalise the ailing economy and avert popular pressure for political reform. To do so the regime operates without any respect of humans basic freedoms and rights. It is in particular the absence of an effective judicial system, and with that the fact that rule of law is not guaranteed by any means, which makes a transition to democracy incessant. The military junta keeps all media under tight control and limits the development of civil society. Torture and extra-judicial executions as well as forced labour also remain widespread measures in the regimes fight against political opponents and certain ethnic groups. By that, forced village relocations and armed resistance of especially Karen and Shan populations continue to cause internal displacement and a refugee influx in particular into Thailand.[33] The lack of good economic governance has led to widespread poverty among Myanmars population, structural un- and underemployment as well as under-funded health and education systems. Engagement of the international donor community remains limited due to the countrys political situation. It is also worrying that the junta spends high percentage of its budget for military hardware; as opposed to the few resources spend for public health and education. Concerns by the international community are aggravated by the widespread corruption inside the country as well as the uneven distribution of opportunities in urban and rural areas. So far, military rulers have been resisted external demands to turn over power to a democratic government and it seems that pressure from the international community has been mainly failed. Obviously it could not prevent the junta to seek almost total autonomy, although it seems that the present regime has opened up the country to some extent. However, the regi me remains suspicious of and resistant to external criticism and interference. This chapter seeks to present the countrys recent development on the economic and political front. It shows Myanmar from the perspective of the international community. Moreover, it will provide a deeper understanding in Myanmars economic structure and thus gives a basic background to understand how EU measures affect the country. 2.1 Myanmars Recent Economic Development-An Analysis With a real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of 4.0 per cent in 2008, Myanmar is one of the poorest nations in the world.[34] Today, Myanmars economy is based on agriculture, gems, timber and oil. Although, the country is rich in natural resources, it has only weak linkages to the global economy. Over the past four decades, deep structural problems caused by the military-inspired policies and the absence of any rational economic and developmental strategies have led to diminishing living standards and widespread poverty among the general population in Myanmar. Political repression and impoverishment have drastically reduced the ability of communities to handle political or social change.[35] To give an economic overview and analysis of Myanmar, the focus in this section will be on macroeconomic indicators, such as GDP growth, exports and imports, inflation, investment and interest rates. Economic data, including s on foreign debt and investment are scarce. Data from the states Research Centre are mostly inaccurate or distorted. This can be explained partly through the fact that the SPDC are noted to be using older methods of calculating some key indicators, which are therefore difficult to compare to data used by most other nations today. For instance, the IMF suggests that official s used are significantly overestimated.[36] GDP Growth: According to the IMF, over the period 1997/98-2007/08, GDP growth has remained at an annual average of around 5 per cent, with the exception of 2003/04 when the banking system belatedly to fall out of the Asian Markets Crisis of 1997. The annual growth of 5 per cent would be considered quite healthy in comparison to regional GDP growth, were it not for the rampant inflation in the country, which dramatically undermines any gains made. To clarify, any additional GDP revenues would be swallowed up by the even higher rising costs. The EIU suggests that there has been solid growth in the energy and mining sector as well as significant growth in the service sectors over the last decade.[37] This would be somewhat encouraging, were those gains not negated by inflation. Evidence supporting this can be found by looking at the continued poor social development indicators and widespread poverty in the country.[38] A household survey conducted by UNDP shows that union-wide 32 per cent of the population lie below the poverty line and 10 per cent below the food poverty (i.e. cannot afford to buy food for basic nutritional requirements). This is also well illustrated by the fact that across the union 34.4 per cent of children under 5 years of age suffer from moderate malnutrition.[39] GDP by Sector: About 70 per cent of enterprises and firms (small and middle sized businesses) are in private poverty, the remaining 30 per cent (in particular large scaled enterprises) are still owned by the state, which work more often in deficit. The private sector is dominated by business people who are trusted by the government and often employ relatives of senior SPDC members. It has a share more than 90 per cent of the economic performance. However, Myanmars economy is predominantly shaped by agriculture.[40] Therefore the agricultural sector gains approximately 50 per cent of the countrys GDP. An estimated two thirds of all citizens are working as farmers or labourers. Contrary, the industrial sector including natural gas export segment contributes only 20 per cent of GDP and trade and services 36 per cent.[41] Myanmars economy was fully regulated by the state, but obviously the government is taking approaching steps to liberalize agriculture. Though it has ended some production controls and mandatory procedures as well as allowing to grow rice as a dry-season crop in irrigated areas. Some of the state owned enterprises which are contributing to the processing and supplying inputs of agriculture have been privatized. Myanmar has been one of the major rice exporters in the world until the government banned exports of rice and some other agricultural products to held domestic prices down. Only in 2006, the export ban could relax a bit and eased further in 2007.[42] GDP by Capita and Purchasing Power: As the chart below clearly shows, Myanmars GDP per capita in 2006 was, by some significant margin, the lowest in the region. This is partly down to the low levels of annual GDP gained by the economy. This could be attributed to numerous factors, such as poor productivity levels, significant trade restrictions and consequent low levels of trade, poor foreign direct investment and poor taxation collection system. According to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and IMF estimates, Myanmar has the lowest GDP per capita at Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) of all neighbouring countries (as shown below). To clarify, PPP is an indicator designed to negate the relative costs of living in the country data and show a comparable income level per person on an equitable basis. Needless to say, the low relative GDP per capita, even at PPP rates shows how low general income levels a

Chaucer The Father Of English Poetry English Literature Essay

Chaucer The Father Of English Poetry English Literature Essay Chaucer is generally considered as the father of English poetry; looking specifically at The Canterbury Tales we can see that Chaucer attempted to portray a depiction of society as he knew it. It is also evident that he attempted to provide his own commentary on his society. Chaucer distances himself from the comments made in The Canterbury Tales as he tells his audience Blameth nat me (Chaucer, 2006, line 73) if they are to take offense from what the Miller says as it is not Chaucer, himself, saying it, he simply has too repeat what was said. This is a very clever technique that Chaucer uses so that he cant be faced with controversy or come under attack from any one as he has only repeated this tale. Chaucer would have had to ensure that his work did not offend those in the church, seeing as the church was the only place where literature was preserved. However Chaucer still attacks society, and the greed of the church amongst other social issues, by not personally saying it, he skilfully distances himself from the issues he highlights in this tales. Chaucer also manages to tactfully deal with these issues, resulting in highly enjoyable tale, which offers a social commentary on a society faced with corruption and hypocrisy. The Canterbury Tales was written in a time where an audible, social reading of literature (Ford, 1976, p86) was preferred, this is possibly because of the influence that the church had on Medieval Literature. One of the main reasons for this may be due to the church, as they supplied the only form of education, everyone at church would have been listened to preachers, and as preaching itself had throughout the Middle Ages a great influence on other literature of all sorts (Ford, 1976, p85) it is not unreasonable to assume that this is why oral forms of literature were preferred in the medieval period. The Canterbury Tales were written as thought hey were being spoken aloud, so they fit in well with this medieval trend. The language and diction used in both The Millers Tale and The Wife of Bath conforms to a plain, low style (King, 2000, p47). Chaucers dominant sentence structure is paratactic (King, 2000, p47); with a rhyme scheme consisting of couplets of iambic pentameters (King, 2 000, p47). The purpose of Chaucers use of language, allows both tales to be easily read aloud for a group of people, rather than just read alone. Aware of his language choices, Chaucer will have also been attempting to make the background story to The Canterbury Tales seem authentic. The narrator is telling these stories on a pilgrimage to Canterbury, so as we read the tales to ourselves we can get a sense of the pilgrimage, and the way these tales would have been told. Chaucer uses The Canterbury Tales as a social commentary. Through the general prologue we can see how he feels about whole sections of society by making individuals represent whole groups of medieval life (Bunting, 2003, p6). These representations slowly begin to build up an entire view of Chaucers life in the medieval period. The Canterbury Tales is famous for upsetting the social hierarchy. Despite the conventions, after the Knights tale is told at the very beginning the rest of the tales are not told in order of those with the higher social standing, as would be conventionally expected. Certain characters interrupt, pushing their tales over others, making The Canterbury Tale humorous as it does not follow the conventional order as som bettre man shal telle us first another (Chaucer, 2006, Line 21). Chaucer also satirises the medieval idea of romance, through the tales, he satirises courtly love, and how it is portrayed as being the ideal way to create a romance. The Millers Tale, in particular, satirises this concept as it is a parody romance (King, 2000, p73). This medieval concept is often found ridiculed in these tales. In the Wife of Bath she admits that I have wedded five! (Chaucer, 1995, line 44), if this had been a courtly love, surely it would have lasted and the Wife of Bath would not have been able to marry again, out of love for her previous husband. Absolon in the Millers Tale attempts to woo Alison using techniques expected of a courtly lover, however he fails to impress Alison and his efforts go unrecognised. Chaucer uses Absolon to demonstrate just how ridiculous the efforts of the courtly lover can be. Chaucer is viewed as inheritor of a great tradition as well as the inventor of a new one (Saunders, 2001, p5) he stuck to particular conventions of the medieval p eriod, and is work is characteristically medieval, however as he does question some of the medieval literary ideas, and many issues in society he can be enjoyed by a contemporary audience who can read the subtleties of his satirical prose narrative, without him alienating either his own audience or a more contemporary one. The main social issue that Chaucer is seen to satirise in both these tales is the idea that women are repressed. Chaucer seemed able to perceive the genius and subtlety of the female mind in making the best of their situation in life, while still allowing the men to think they were in control (Bunting, 2003, p5). This is perhaps best envisioned in The Wife of Baths Prologue. She mentions her having had wedded five! (Chaucer, 1995, line 44). However she is able to defend this position that she is in as God says that to be wedded is no sinne (Chaucer, 1995, line 51), she also asks when God commanded he virgintee? (Chaucer, 1995, line 62). She speaks out against the church and what they are saying in the medieval period, where women were given two stereotypes, either compared to the treacherous Eve, or had to live up to the standards of the Virgin Mary with her being both a virgin and a mother this was an impossible role model for women to achieve. The Wife of Bath is unashamedly a larger than life character designed to squash the constraints that medieval Christianity have placed upon women.

Children and Nurture Essay -- Argumentative Persuasive Essays

Children and Nurture I grew up in an environment that allowed me to accept almost everything that was told to me without any questions. My parents and teachers never told me anything that didn’t feel right, so I was under the impression that anyone with authority would always tell me the truth and that was that. My bubble burst about a year ago. That was the first time that I came across something that the â€Å"experts† had to say, that did not jive with my feelings on a matter; and I was not willing to just accept what they had to say. I came across then and continue to come across articles that say in essence, that it doesn’t matter if children are cared for by their mothers or day-care and in fact that sometimes day-care is better for the child. Some go on to say that parents don’t matter at all. This could not be, after-all, doesn’t the proclamation say that, â€Å"mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children.†? The proclamation refers to this as a sacred responsibility. If it is a sacred responsibility for mothers to nurture their children, then that must be what is best for the child, right? Some research tends to indicate that mothers are the best nurturers for their children. I set out to find some of this research. Baydar and Brooks-Gunn (1991), found in a study of maternal employment and its effects on children that those children who were left in the care of someone other than their mother for many hours each day had lower cognitive scores as well as more behavioral problems. In another study by Baydar and Brooks-Gunn (1991), they found that the effects of a mother working out-side of the home and leaving their baby boy in someone else’s care was especially de... ... Speech given at the world congress of families II. Ezra Taft Benson (1987). To the mothers in Zion. An address given at a fireside for parents. Gordon B. Hinckley (1997). Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book. Gordon B. Hinckley (1996, November) Ensign (p69). Hawkins, A.J., Spangler D.L., Hudson, V., Dollahite D.C., Klien S. R., Rugh, S. S., Fronk C. A., Draper R. D., Sorensen A. D. Wardle L. D., & Hill E. J. (2000). Equal partnership and the sacred responsibilities of mothers and fathers. In Dollahite D.C.(Eds.), Strengthening our families: An in-depth look at the proclamation on the family (pp.63-82). Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft. Top, B.L. & Chadwick, B.A. (1998). Raising righteous children in a wicked world. Brigham Young Magazine. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.

Terrorism - Lets Terrorize the Terrorists :: Argumentative Persuasive Topics

Let's Terrorize the Terrorists The terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon-anything of this magnitude forces all thinking people to reflect of the state of the world. Questions like, "how could anyone do this", gradually transform into, "how can we prevent similar events in the future." Security measures will be revised, perhaps immigration laws will be tightened and certainly aircraft procedures will be overhauled. But none of these things address the true cause of the attack. When we look at terrorism we assume motives like religious fundamentalism or revenge for perceived injustices. It's true that these factors are present in most terrorist groups but let's delve a little deeper into the mechanism necessary for long term or widespread campaigns against civilian targets. There are several resources that must be possessed if you want to manage a terrorist group... ? Money - Nothing in this world is free least of all weapons. ? Recruits - In this sort of enterprise casualties are high and for each suicidal attack squad there must be at least three times their number of support staff and backup members. ? A base of operations - To store materials, train troops and administer the organization. So, if I were interested in preventing terrorism and if I had the power, what could be done to undermine these three necessary ingredients? Money Even terrorist have bank managers. When you are dealing with millions of dollars in funding, or billions in the case of Osama bin Laden, you can't just hide it in the mattress. Money leaves traces, both in its acquisition and in its expenditure. But government agencies are prevented from exploring these transactions too closely because of the security measures enforced by the worldwide banking industry. Issues of privacy, liberty and sovereignty all serve to bolster the banks' resolution. I personally believe the banks have a responsibility to protect us from the effects of terrorist funds. If the UN identifies international terrorists, then the banks should freeze any and all funds that can be attributed to each group. National intelligence agencies should have limited rights to investigate financial links through the banks in an effort to track these funds down. It's a question of priority. Is perfect privacy more important than the death and suffering of thousands? Recruits Osama bin Laden is said to have thousands of supporters.

Hamdi vs Rumsfeld

Hamdi v. Rumsfeld Yaser Esam Hamdi, an American citizen, was captured in Afghanistan shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11th. Hamdi was classified as an â€Å"enemy combatant† by the United States. His father filed a petition of Habeas Corpus that his fifth and fourteenth amendments were in violation. Although the petition did not specify on the actual circumstances of Hamdi’s capture and detention, the record indicated that Hamdi went to Afghanistan to do â€Å"relief work† less than two months before September 11th and could have not received military training.The Special Advisor to the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Michael Mobbs, issued a response, outlining the Government’s position. The district court found the â€Å"Mobbs Declaration† insufficient in supporting the Government’s case. The Mobbs Declaration provided details regarding Hamdi’s trip to Afghanistan, his affiliation with the Taliban during a time when the Taliban was battling U. S. allies, and lastly his surrender of an assault rifle.The District Court found that the Mobbs Declaration, standing alone, did not support Hamdi’s detention and ordered the Government to turn over numerous materials. The Fourth Circuit reversed, stressing that it was undisputed that Hamdi was captured in an active combat zone, no factual inquiry or evidentiary hearing allowed Hamdi to be heard or to rebut the Government’s claims were necessary or proper. If the Mobbs Declaration was accurate, it provided a sufficient basis upon which to conclude that the President had constitutionally detained Hamdi, the court ordered the habeas petition dismissed.The appeals court held that, â€Å"no citizen shall be imprisoned or otherwise detained by the United States except pursuant to an Act of Congress†. This provides that The AUMF’s â€Å"necessary and appropriate force† language provided the authorization for Hamdi’ s detention. Also that Hamdi is entitled only to a limited judicial inquiry into his detention’s rationality under the war powers of the political branches, and not to a searching review of the actual determinations underlying his capture.The results in the judgment were quitted, and the case is remanded. Justices O’Connor, Kennedy, and Breyer, concluded that although Congress authorized the detention of combatants in the narrow circumstances alleged in this case, due process demands that a citizen held in the United States as an enemy combatant be given a meaningful opportunity to contest the factual basis for that detention before a neutral decision maker.First, the Government urges the adoption of the Fourth Circuit's holding that because it is â€Å"undisputed† Hamdi's seizure took place in a combat zone, the habeas determination can be made as matter of law, with no further hearing or fact finding necessary. This argument did not hold, and the circumstances surrounding Hamdi's seizure cannot in any way be characterized as â€Å"undisputed† because Hamdi has not been permitted to speak for himself or even through legal counsel.The â€Å"facts† that constitute the alleged concern are insufficient to support Hamdi's detention. Under the definition of enemy combatant, Hamdi would need to be â€Å"part of or supporting forces hostile to the United States or coalition partners† and â€Å"engaged in an armed conflict against the United States† to justify his detention in the United States for the duration of the conflict. The habeas petition states only â€Å"when seized by the United States Government, Mr. Hamdi resided in Afghanistan. A claim that one resided in a country in which combat operations are taking place is not a concession that one was â€Å"captured in a zone of active combat operations in a foreign theater of war,† does not mean that â€Å"part of or supporting forces hostile to the United States or coalition partners† and â€Å"engaged in an armed conflict against the United States. † So the argument that Hamdi has made concessions that eliminate any right to further process is rejected. The Government's second argument requires that further factual exploration is inappropriate in light of the extraordinary constitutional interests at risk.Under the Government's argument, â€Å"respect for separation of powers and the limited institutional capabilities of courts in matters of military decision-making in connection with an ongoing conflict† ought to eliminate entirely any individual process, restricting the courts to investigating only whether legal authorization exists for the broader detention scheme. The government argues, courts should review its determination that a citizen is an enemy combatant under a very deferential â€Å"some evidence† standard.A court would assume the accuracy of the Government's expressed basis for Hamdi's deten tion, as said in the Mobbs Declaration, and assess only whether that expressed basis was lawful. Hamdi’s response emphasizes that the court consistently has recognized that an individual challenging his detention may not be held at the will of the Executive without alternative to some proceeding before a neutral hearing to determine whether the Executive's asserted justifications for that detention have basis in fact.He argues that the Fourth Circuit wrongfully â€Å"ceded power to the Executive during wartime to define the conduct for which a citizen may be detained, judge whether that citizen has engaged in the proscribed conduct, and imprison that citizen indefinitely,† The District Court, agreeing with Hamdi, believed that the appropriate process would approach the process that accompanies a criminal trial. It disapproved of the Mobbs Declaration and anticipated various military affairs.Both of these positions cause concerns, and both emphasize the tension that oft en exists between the autonomy that the Government asserts is necessary in order to pursue effectively a particular goal and the process that a citizen argues that he is due before he is deprived of a constitutional right. The process due in any given instance is determined by weighing â€Å"the private interest that will be affected by the official action† against the Government's interest, â€Å"including the function involved† and the burdens the Government would face in providing greater process.

Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror

The history of the Right of Habeas and the war on terror, it stated in the article The Tissue of Structure by Anthony Gregory â€Å"It has been celebrated for centuries in the Anglo-American tradition as a means of questioning government power. It is probably the most revered of all of the checks and balances in our legal history—as William Blackstone commented,† â€Å"the most celebrated writ in English law† (Gregory, A. 2011, 2nd par. ). The Habeas corpus is to protect the individual from being imprisoned wrongly and due to a fair trial. Although, questions arise regarding whether proper use of habeas corpus been brought into focus over the last ten years. In this essay I will explore the history of Habeas Corpus and how it has evolved over the many years. I will try to briefly explain how the habeas corpus originated and the role the U. S. has and the current actions being taken with it. I will look into the Bush administration and the way the way they dealt with habeas corpus during his administration. Let’s look at the history of habeas corpus it stated in an article entitled Habeas Corpus The most extraordinary writ that the history of â€Å"Habeas Corpus is ancient†. Although the precise origin of Habeas Corpus is uncertain of its antiquity† (Robertson, J. 2008). The primary effects were achieved during the middle ages by the use of a variety of writs, which gave a comparable effect as the modern writ and current policies. It also stated that â€Å"the practice surrounding the writ has evolv ed over time† (Robertson, J. 2008, para. 2). Since the earliest of times the Habeas Corpus was designed to bring forth any person in custody be brought before the court. While the Habeas Corpus was originally the privilege writ of a King and his courts, over the course of hundreds of years’ time has allowed it to evolve into a privilege for the person being detained, or a person or someone acting on his or her interest. Meanwhile Habeas Corpus was generally unknown by the diverse civil law systems of Europe which were devolved from the Roman or Justinian law and the current war on terror. While the civil law systems of Europe favor authority from the top down, the Anglo-Saxon common law favors the individual. Although the Habeas Corpus is an attribute of common law, let it be understood that it is an important one; the right of Habeas Corpus reveals the challenge between the individual and state. â€Å"Habeas Corpus empowers the individual in holding accountable the exercise of the state’s awesome power to restrain liberty† (Robertson, J. 2008, para. 3). The original purpose behind the Habeas Corpus â€Å"was to bring people to the court rather than out of imprisonment† by the year 1230, this would become a well- known characteristic of English law. Which becomes known as â€Å"the Great Writ† the systematization into the English law would come by way of Parliament through Habeas Corpus act of 1641. This generated what is known today as the Darnell’s case, during the case five English noblemen were thrown into the dungeon for refusing to fight for their country’s war with France and Spain. Giving the fact that the men filed suit, King Charles I refused to give details as to why they were imprisoned, â€Å"stating that the law did not require the King to provide any justification as to why they were being imprisoned,† (Jackson, A. 010) The Kings decision generated a deafening outcry from the public, causing the Parliament to seek action immediately the following year. The Habeas rights were expanded by the Parliament several years later with the Habeas Corpus Act of 1679, making it mandatory that â€Å"charges to be brought within a specific time period for anyone detained for criminal acts† (Jackson, A. 2010). By the year 1765, the habeas corpus was securely rooted within the footing of English law, William Blackstone describes the Great Writ as â€Å"a second magna carta, a fortification of our liberties† (Jackson, A. 010). The Habeas Corpus being a deep-seated English right has navigated the Atlantic Ocean when our founders integrated the doctrine of Habeas Corpus into the U. S. constitution. It also stated in the article that â€Å"The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it† (Jackson, A. L. 2010). This is known as the â€Å"Suspension Clause† it is a provision that places the ability to suspend habeas corpus in the hands of the congress only in the event of rebellion or an invasion. It goes on to state that despite the clarity of the clause, the American debate on habeas corpus is just beginning. (Jackson, A. 2010). However, being the Habeas Corpus has a long history, being a common law of the land that throughout history the Habeas Corpus has only been authorized to be suspended four times in our history, 1. ) President Lincoln put forth an autarchic suspension during the Civil War, 2. ) post-Civil War Congress would authorize President Grant to suspend the Ku Klux Klan act. 3. ) 1902 when the rebellion in Philippines and 4. comes in 1941 after the attack on Pearl Harbor. (Jackson, A. L. 2010) It would seem that the â€Å"Great Writ† of habeas corpus was established to protect our civil liberties; it ensures us that no one could be imprisoned without having a fair trial. From the late seventeenth century the English constitution was common law and protected the rights of the Englishmen and since 1903 it had been a flawless solution. After the Johnson v. Eisentrager, government officials relying on the court’s decision deemed that holding enemy combatants outside the U. S. territory would inadmissibly keep individuals from filing, claims aimed at the habeas corpus review along with other things. In 2002 the United Stated started conveyance of the captured enemies to Camp X-Ray located at Guantanamo Bay, this causing the legal position of the government were to be tested immediately as the enemy combatants started to arrive. February 2002, claim submissions of the writs of habeas corpus starting coming in from the prisoners of Guantanamo Bay Camp X-Ray. One question one would ask is how will the court respond to claims being filed by the prisoners? The answer to the question is that, answers would come as fast as the writs, they came with deviating answers. It states that during the Coalition of Clergy v. Bush, The U. S. Central division of the District of California would approximate the issue in lue of government expectations; although they relied on the Johnson v. Eisentrager decision they deemed that the court would hold several U. S. itizens under the â€Å"Coalition of Clergy, Lawyers, and Professors â€Å"who had filed â€Å"show cause† petitions on behalf of enemy combatants held at Guantanamo Bay lacked â€Å"standing to assert claims on behalf of the detainees† the court would establish that, although a petitioner may have just cause, the simply lacked the jurisdiction to accommodate. Giving the fact that the Military Commission Act, it does not fully guarantee the full protection of American citizen consti tutional rights for the Guantanamo prisoners. Although Congress tried due process for enemy combatants it would come under major scrutiny. It goes on to state in the article that â€Å"The faint beat of the drum that once existed has now grown to a considerable pounding rhythm. The Court expressed the statutory right of foreign nationals detained at Guantanamo Bay to file habeas corpus claims in federal courts regardless of the geographic location of their detention† and that to suspend the â€Å"Great Writ† and ensure a proper level of protection is afforded to all enemy combatants† (Jackson, A. L. 2010). Let’s take a look into what has transpired since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, In 2006 Congress has passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force, this grants the President the power â€Å"to use all necessitous and suitable force† for all those who were engaged or involved or may have gave sanctuary to any enemy combatants (Pond, B. C. 2009). Let’s take a look as to why and how the reasoning for the U. S. confinement policy deviates from the Bush administration’s order of the comprehensive military order on November 13, 2001, this was intended to preside over the â€Å"Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism†(Staab, J. B. 2008). Rumor has it they modeled this after President Roosevelt’s military order during World War II, However President Bush’s order put limits on the use of military commissions any non-citizen for whom the president determines: (1) is or was a member of al Qaeda, (2) has committed, aided or abetted, or conspired to commit terrorist acts, or (3) has knowingly harbored one or more of these individuals. (Jackson, A. L. 2010). In the final conflict with Boumethene v. Bush the supreme court ruled in favor of 5 to 4 that the detainees of Guantanamo Bay were indeed allowed to exercise the writ and were granted use of the justice system. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy stated in the majority opinion: The Constitution is created to survive, and to stay in forced in times of a threat to National security. The Supreme Court brings an end to one of the Nation’s injustices, in giving the prisoners of Guantanamo Bay the justice they are entitled to. This also gives us a lesson on how delicate our constitution rights are in. The role of the President and Commander in chief is Article II of the Constitution states â€Å"The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. † Section 2 of Article II states that â€Å"The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States. † (Levin, 2012) I believe the Role of President would be one of the hardest jobs. Being all the hard decisions he has to make. When dealing with Habeas Corpus and the role of commander-in-chief I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes, because I wouldn’t have a clue as to handle the situation of the war on terror and enemy combatants. Congress’s role in habeas corpus as to when it can be suspended, this is a good thing in them having the right to override the Presidents decision for suspension, we need someone looking out to make sure he isn’t making bad decision or poor judgement. The role of the Supreme Court seems to be the deciding vote to make sure everyone gets their day in court and the right to a fair trial. (Levin, 2010) So in conclusion, Although this has been the most difficult essay I have had to write, I believe the Habeas Corpus is an essential part of our constitution and civil liberties, because you know the ole saying â€Å"innocent until proven guilty† and everyone deserves their day in court and has the right to a fair trial. My thoughts on the war on terror, this is something I don’t fully understand, my question is why we get involved in the problems of other countries why should we get involved if it doesn’t affect us? Why send our soldiers to get killed over another countries problems? Who would have thought that our civil liberties could be so complicated. Why not keep them home and fix some of the problems here at home.