Benedict Arnold: Impact On American History

Benedict Arnold: Impact On American History During the middle of the eighteenth century, many questions arose regarding the future of the American Colonies, a relatively vast collection of British Colonial settlements along the Atlantic coast of the New World. As a schism divided the citizens of the Colonies, war appeared to be the inevitable future. Due to countless years of benign neglect shown by the British to its little child, patriots felt that it was time for an epic revolution. This era of great revolutionary movements is characterized by many popular figureheads in American history. Great minds such as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington are accredited for being most influential. One man, however, is often overlooked in playing a vital role, both positive and negative, in the revolutionary landscape. His name is associated with traitor and he is quite possibly the most infamous person in American history. People have vilified him to the point where they compare him to Judas, betrayer of Jesus Ch rist (Martin). Benedict Arnold, one of the most controversial men to have called himself an American, is considered to be one of the greatest military minds in the history of the world. The question is: what made him switch sides? His impact is undeniable, but unfortunately, his actions against the United States are, quite simply, too immense to forget. SIGNIFICANCE: Background: Early Life and Pre-Revolution Benedict Arnold was born January 14, 1741 in Norwich, Connecticut. His Father, Benedict, was a successful businessman and his mother, Hannah Waterman-King, was a wealthy widow prior to re-marrying. His familys financial stature in Norwich was well recognized. Benedict was enrolled in a private school at a young age with the expectation that he would go on to be educated in an elite university (Creighton). His Fathers mismanagement of money, however, saw Benedict drop out of school, forcing him to take an apprenticeship with his mothers pharmaceutical business. Four of Arnolds siblings would eventually succumb to Yellow Fever. The combination of the death of his children, mismanagement of the fortune, and eventually, the death of his wife in 1759, saw Benedicts father to become a severe alcoholic (Sheinkin). Arnold would eventually see his first military action during the French Indian War, leaving his apprenticeship to join the cause. He enlisted in the Connecticut militia and march ed to Lake George and Albany to oppose the French in the Battle of Fort William Henry. The Indians supporting the French would go against the will of their French leaders who had promised them scalps and booty, going on to mercilessly massacring several hundred men in the militia (Hickman). From this moment, Arnold despised the French, which have said to influence him later on. After the crushing defeat, Benedict grew tired of the constant discipline and returned to his apprenticeship. http://www.ushistory.org/valleyforge/served/images/arnold.jpg Sons of Liberty Benedict Arnold grew to become a successful businessman. His rich cousins supplied him with enough money to go out on his own in the pharmaceutical business. Arnold traveled to Europe, where he bought necessary supplies for his own pharmaceutical business which he would go on to establish in New Haven (Benedict Arnold). His business ambitions soon expanded after he made significant profit in his first business venture. He involved himself in the West India Trade and also traded with Canada. Arnold acquired three ships in partnership with his friend, Adam Babcock (Hickman). Their business was successful, until Englands implementation of the Sugar and Stamp Acts. Arnold became displeased with Britains overwhelming taxation on imported goods in order to make up for their indebted crisis after the French Indian War. His outrage led him to become the passionate leader of the Sons of Liberty in New Haven, building up his anger towards the British stranglehold placed upon t he Colonies. Arnold, however, was not the only one with growing hatred towards the British. http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/4/48363/1108061-sons_of_liberty_poster_p228640904795152089trma_400_super.jpg In the middle of the 1700s, Britain began to impose several acts, taxes, and laws that paralyzed the progression of the Colonies. For example, in 1764, Britain imposed the Sugar Act, which increased the duties on non-British goods being traded with the Colonies. Later, in 1765, Britain passed the Quartering Act which forced the Colonies to supply and provide barracks for British troops. The last of the three initial Acts in the 1760s was the Stamp Act of 1765. The Stamp Act was the first direct taxation of the citizens of the Colonies, taxing all paper goods such as newspapers, pamphlets, and even playing cards. As a way of rebelling against the British oppression, the Stamp Act Congress was convened. The Stamp Act Congress passed a Declaration of Rights and Grievances, which claimed that American colonists were equal to all other British citizens, protested taxation without representation, and stated that, without colonial representation in Parliament, Parliament could not tax colon ists. In addition, the colonists increased their non-importation efforts (Morris). In the big scheme of things, this was just the beginning of tensions between the Colonies and Britain in the events before the Revolution. The tumult regarding the impositions put in place by the British initiated a power struggle within the colonies. Britain was consistently attempting to stamp out the flame that the Colonists were trying to start. Although the Brits repealed the Stamp Act in 1766, they fired right back by passing the Declaratory Act. This Act stated that the British government could establish laws in the colonies in all cases whatsoever (Morris). This squashed the Americans slogan of no taxation without representation. The first real call for revolution came in the form of Samuel Adams, who issued his Massachusetts Circular Letter which attacked Parliaments audacity to tax them at free will. Adams called for a unified revolt within all the colonies, which raised the question of, Can we really do this?. That question was answered by Thomas Paine, who wrote his famous pamphlet, Common Sense, to stimulate thought within the American population. Paine wrote in a manner that was well understood by all peop le, making his writings very successful. Paine said that it was only logical for the colonists to rebel, which caused many neutral thinkers to choose sides. This, however, only highlighted the schism between the American people. Commonsense.jpg An indicator of how tensions were breaking in this era is shown in the Boston Massacre of 1770. The arrival of British troops in Boston marked the beginning of conflict between soldiers and citizens. A group of three British soldiers were surrounded by an angry Bostonian crowd, which inexplicably caused the soldiers to fire randomly into the crown, killing three and wounding two more (Morris). Crispus Attucks, one of the casualties in the Massacre, was said to be The first death of the Revolution, as he lay mercilessly slain on the cold ground. Later, in 1773, Parliament instituted the Tea Act, considered to be the last revolutionary spark in Boston. It was a last ditch attempt to save the East India Company, forcing colonists to buy British tea with the Townshend taxes still in place. The colonists saw this as a direct attempt to undercut the revenue of local merchants. As reaction to this Act, the famous Boston Tea Party resulted in men dressed up as Indians and dumping all tea into the harbor. Tensions had reached their breaking point, and it was time for organized revolution. It is out of this revolution that gave rise to one of the greatest generals in American history, one that would rival Patton, Washington, and Eisenhower. However, his name is more despised than it is revered, but his impact in nonetheless undeniable. Benedict Arnold: American General With his livelihood significantly impaired by the British involvement imposed in the colonies, Benedict Arnold devoted himself to the resistance of British tyranny. As tensions with London increased, Arnold increasingly became interested in military matters and was elected a captain in the Connecticut militia in March 1775 (Hickman). When word was spread about the first shots being fired in the Revolution at Lexington and Concord, Benedict jumped at the chance to ruin the British. Arnold assembled his 60 troops in the college green, and decided to have them march north to partake in the Siege of Boston. Fort Ticonderoga As Arnold approached Boston from the south, he proposed an aggressive siege upon Fort Ticonderoga in New York to the Massachusetts Committee of Safety. He was commissioned as a colonel to lead the mission. He soon found out, however, that Ethan Allen and his Green Mountain Boys were set to accomplish the same task. When Arnold and Allen met up, they clashed and battled for the right to control the siege. In the end, cooler heads prevailed, and The Green Mountain Boys fought with Arnolds men in a convincing takeover of Fort Ticonderoga under the joint command of Allen and Arnold. The battle itself took about a total of ten minutes, as the American revolutionaries attacked the fort at 3:00 AM, catching the guards totally off guard. After the siege, Allens men decided to have a party by plundering the fort. Arnold was far from amused, and reported to the Massachusetts Committee of Safety, There is here at present 100 men, who are in the greatest confusion and anarchy, destroying and plu ndering private property, committing every enormity, and paying no attention to public service (Sheinkin). Arnolds hatred of stagnation and inactivity made him want more. He had control of the southern portion of Lake Champlain, but sought full control of the lake. A fort on the opposite bank of the lake, Fort St. Johns, had possession of the greatest warship on the lake, the George. Arnold selected his 30 best troops to join him as they sailed across the lake to seize control of Ft. St. Johns, their primary objective being the seizure of the George. They reached the opposite bank on May 18, and were able to secure control of the Fort and the George without firing a single shot (Sheinkin). Arnolds quick actions and bravery were evident from the get-go, and it was only uphill for him from then on. http://www.lcmm.org/images/img_education/img_outreaches/brassier_map.jpg Benedict Arnolds brash and bold manner was recognized quickly by Congress. In fact, they were scared. Arnolds lightning quick seizure of Fort St. Johns came as a shock to many. The Americans didnt even have an official army yet, and Arnold was eager for more action. Benedict was often characterized when he had too much free time as, restless, frustrated, and irritated (Martin). Fortunately, Arnold wasnt held idle for long, but not for the reason he hoped. He returned to see to his sickly wife, who died at the young age of 30. Quebec The Continental Army had officially been formed, but Arnolds return home saw him catch severe symptoms of gout. After his brief term of absence, he returned to Cambridge to meet with George Washington. Their plan was to invade Quebec, and Arnold was to be Washingtons right-hand man. Arnold pitched the idea that he would approach Quebec from an uncharted and treacherous route through the dense forest of Maine. Arnold hand chose 1000 men to aid him on his perilous journey to seize Quebec. Arnold brought along Jacataqua, a friend of young Aaron Burr. She knew the areas around the Kennebec River, and proved to be a crucial asset to their journey. The terrain they encountered was characterized by dense, wooded areas with swampy grounds, making traversing them next to impossible. Almost one quarter of the troops eventually turned around and headed back. Conditions of survival were rough also, as many of the boats leaked, which in turn spoiled the food and gunpowder aboard. Once the group f inally reached the St. Lawrence River, only 600 of the 1050 initial troops remained. They had travelled almost 400 miles through uncharted territory and were relatively unarmed. The Battle of Quebec began, however, despite the damage cause to Arnold and his troops. Arnold met up with Major General Richard Montgomery and united their meager forces against the fortified city of Quebec (Hickman). The Americans saw a crushing defeat on December 30, and December 31 at the hands of the British and their reinforcements, almost putting Arnolds perilous journey in vain. Arnold was severely wounded in his leg and along with the death of Gen. Montgomery, the Americans were left with poor spirits. File:American attack on Quebec.svg Question of Character Benedict Arnold was promoted to Brigadier General and commanded the retreat south from Montreal in 1776. After a strong defense at Fort Ticonderoga, Arnolds bravery remained intact, but the trust and support of his troops did not. Some of his officers often called him cocky and even arrogant. Benedict saw many of his troops question his tactics and thought he was overly aggressive. Arnold was, in fact, falsely accused to have stolen war supplies so that he could be replaced. Fellow General, Horatio Gates, saw that Benedicts tight following to the rules and guidelines of war were too great for him to have stolen supplies. The court found him guilty, but Gates blocked this potential decision. Benedict had the right to feel angry over the his treatment by the other men (Benedict Arnold). It was occurrences such as these where he was mistreated that contributed to him eventually switching sides in the war. Much to Arnolds relief, he was sent back to Rhode Island to report to George Washi ngton in order to rearrange defenses in response to the British occupation of Rhode Island. Arnolds Frustration Arnolds first feelings of discontent with his treatment by Congress and his peers were evident as he was consistently passed up to be promoted to Major General. His peers, who were also inferior officers, generated rumors about him that permanently damaged his reputation. Arnold had evident jealousies also, which were seen as weak because such a minute outside interference could affect him on the inside. Virtue is a key concept in the Revolution, and Congress repeatedly insulted Arnolds virtue (Martin). Arnold twice withdrew from the army with the firm belief that his honor and hard work were not being recognized. Benedict was deeply unhappy with his treatment, and it wouldnt get much better. Redemption at Saratoga Commander Philip Schuyler was the man who convinced Arnold to stay in the Continental Army. He saw Arnold as someone who could provide a spark in the Northern Army, a unit with some disunion and lack of firepower. He was dispatched with some 900 men to relieve the siege at Fort Stanwix (Henretta). This siege was almost too easy for Arnold, who was surprised to return to find out it was now Horatio Gates who was in command. Gates, who is defined as a generally defensive commander, would not gel well with his polar opposite in terms of military mindset, Benedict Arnold. As General Burgoynes army moved south, Arnold sought aggressive attack on the vulnerable Brits. Gates, however, was reluctant, and held his men back. At the pivotal Battle of Bemis Heights on October 7, 1777, Arnold defied Gates authority and took command of a group of American soldiers whom he led in an assault against the British line. Arnolds attack threw the enemy into disarray and contributed greatly to the America n victory. Ten days later, Burgoyne surrendered his entire army at Saratoga (Benedict Arnold). Arnolds brave and risky actions actually saw himself relieved from Gates command. This, however, is just an example of how inferior minds were above Arnold in caste system of the Continental Army. The Battle of Saratoga is often considered to be the turning point in the war, and without Benedict Arnold, it all couldve gone in a disastrous direction. https://bmshistory7p8.wikispaces.com/file/view/fauvel-the-surrender-of-general-john-burgoyne-at-the-battle-of-saratoga-7th-october-1777.jpg/198767254/fauvel-the-surrender-of-general-john-burgoyne-at-the-battle-of-saratoga-7th-october-1777.jpg After the battle of Saratoga, a great momentum shift was recognized throughout the world. France decided they might finally have a chance to be part of a victory in a war, so they took up the prospect of joining the rebel campaign. The Continental Army was having a hard time matching man for man the numbers that the British had. If not for the British having to travel a vast ocean to re-supply and send troops, the results could have shifted in their favor. Benedicts Demons What may have been the final straw for Benedict Arnold was when Horatio Gates peevishly took all credit for the defeat of mighty Burgoynes troops. At the time, Arnold was bedridden in an Albany hospital due to a near fatal wound to the same leg wounded in the Battle of Quebec. Bedridden and helpless, Benedict Arnold gnashed his teeth at the distressing thought of Granny Gates receiving honors won by the blood and grit of better men (Creighton). Arnold then was forced to reassess his sacrifices and his rewards. The more he thought, the more bitter he grew. Describing his situation in the hospital, a firsthand account of a hospital worker said, Poison may have stopped oozing from his leg, but his heart remained full of rancor. Arnold wrote about his frustration with the American cause, he believed the patriots to be worse off than at the beginning of the war. Popular support for the Revolution was waning, and many saw loved ones lost. Much of his anger also focused on civilians in Cong ress who shorted supplies for the military and failed to acknowledge the contributions made by fighting patriots. How can Congress allow this army to starve in a land of plenty? he penned. The Turning Point George Washington, who still had bountiful faith in Arnold, told the permanently crippled Benedict that he was to protect the recently seized Philadelphia. Benedict even partook in the first recorded Oath of Allegiance, ironically, which shows ones loyalty to the United States (Sheinkin). Once in command of Philadelphia, Arnold began to envelop himself in questionable business deals in order to regain his previous financial losses suffered during much of the Revolutionary War. Basically, Benedict used his position as Military Commander to profit from war-related supply movements. Many people in the city recognized his sketchy behavior, and many began to accumulate significant evidence against him. Arnold learned to live extravagantly in Philadelphia, which despite its recent change in occupants, remained to have Tory influences (Henretta). These influences are known to have helped convince Benedict to switch sides. On top of all his newfound wealth and stature, Benedict re-married a woman by the name of Peggy Shippen, daughter of judge Edward Shippen, a notorious advocate of the loyalist cause. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e2/Peggy_Shippen_and_daughter.jpg/220px-Peggy_Shippen_and_daughter.jpg Arnold would eventually be tried by a court-martial on two accounts of illegal activity as Military Commander in Philadelphia. Eventually, the judge reached a verdict that he should be reprimanded by the commander-in-chief. Washington saw Arnold as being used as a scapegoat and as a victim or persecution. George Washington pushed the matter aside, instead granting Arnold complete control over the seizure of West Point. Washington was oblivious to Arnolds sense of unhappiness, and now is the time when Benedict jumps ship. Espionage Arnold grew tired of the American stagnation; he had seen the cost at which freedom comes. Arnold saw the atrocities that followed the rough winter at Valley Forge, where soldiers were reduced to eating shoe leather outside of British occupied Philadelphia. The only question in his mind was, Does the end really justify the means? Arnolds disgust towards the American causes reached its boiling point at the time of French intervention in the war. Arnold had grown to despise the French, ever since his early days of contributing in the French Indian War. He had been affected by the Tory influence that resided in Philadelphia, which played a crucial role in his change of mindset. Benedict Arnold was said to have first reached out to the enemy in May of 1779. Major John Andre, a British officer, acted as a courier between Arnold and Sir Henry Clinton. It was through Andre that the two men delivered secret encrypted messages regarding the possibility of a tradeoff. Benedict Arnold was in a particular position that would allow him to give the British what they had wanted since the beginning of the Revolutionary War: the Hudson River (Hickman). In exchange, Arnold was to receive around three million US dollars (in todays currency). Another influence in Arnolds decision was his new wife. Peggy Shippen proved to have been a close friend of Andres, and is credited with having set up the whole communication system.http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mafy5aVDpp1rtn3ufo1_400.jpg Arnold resigned his post as Military Commander of Philadelphia, and gained total control of West Point on August 3, 1780. On August 15, Arnold received an encrypted letter from General Clinton, which included his final offer of  £20,000. In return, Arnold sent his acceptance of the offer and inside information regarding French reinforcements and the movements of Washingtons troops. Arnold became more and more comfortable at West Point, and systematically weakened his defenses in order to let his scheme flow better. The goal was for a siege without a single bullet. Arnold drained West Point of supplies to the point that his subordinates thought he was crazy. An eventual meeting was scheduled between Andre and Arnold to meet face to face on September 21. The HMS Vulture, the ship meant to carry Andre back to New York, was fired upon, causing it to retreat back down the Hudson River. Andre, as a result, had to return to New York on foot. He was given instructions and maps to wiggle hi s way through enemy lines, but he was eventually caught two days later with Arnolds documents in place. George Washington was said to have been calm at the time he found out, but one thing was on his mind. Washington knew that they had to destroy this guy top, bottom, and sideways and forever associate him with treason (Martin). There was nothing Washington wanted more than Arnold at his feet, begging for his mercy. Washington negotiated with the British, hoping to get an exchange for the captured Andre. To no avail, Andre was hanged October 2, 1780 on account of being a spy. The New Arnold Theres an old saying Ive always known, and it says: No one likes a traitor, even if hes your traitor. And this couldnt have been more evident than the case of Benedict Arnold. He was never trusted by the British, whether it was on the battlefield, or just in general. He was never promoted above the rank of Brigadier, and he was never handed any major military operations under the Crown. Until the eventual fall of Cornwallis at Yorktown, Arnold was never considered to be a major factor in the British scheme of the Revolutionary War. George Washington ordered his immediate hanging should he be caught. All Americans knew about his becoming a traitor; his name was wiped from all military records and was essentially deleted from the very country that revered him as a Revolutionary hero. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/WestPoint1780.jpg/220px-WestPoint1780.jpg Arnold, however never lost his military touch. He acted as an advisor in the British Army, and begged that Cornwallis flee Yorktown in favor of a landlocked base instead of one bound by land and sea. This, however, lead to the eminent downfall of the British Army. They were surrounded by the French Navy by sea, and the Continental Army by land. This lead to the surrender at Yorktown on October 19, 1781. Legacy Arnolds legacy is best represented by Benjamin Franklins quote, Judas sold only one man, Arnold sold three million. Biographers over the times have characterized him as a demonic and miserable figure. Some have even told stories about how he entered the world as the antichrist. Benedict Arnolds military gains shouldnt be overlooked, however. His impact on the Revolutionary War goes without saying, albeit both positive and negative. He played the most significant role in the turning point of the war, along with being one of the bravest and most intelligent military leaders of all time. Unfortunately, in the end, his negatives greatly outweigh his positives. His legacy has been so tarnished, that a memorial commemorating his honor and valor cannot show his face. Instead, it shows his leg, commemorating the Battle of Saratoga and all he did for his nation that day. It reads, In memory of the most brilliant soldier of the Continental army, who was desperately wounded on this spot, winnin g for his countrymen the decisive battle of the American Revolution, and for himself the rank of Major General. He deserted the country that had learned to embrace him. He deserted the country that turned out to be the greatest country to ever exist. And he deserted those who believed in him, like his brothers on the battlefield and his children back home. Benedict Arnold was the first traitor in the history of the United States of America, and hopefully there will be no more. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/56/JeffersonDavisBenedictArnoldTreasonCartoon1865.jpg/240px-JeffersonDavisBenedictArnoldTreasonCartoon1865.jpghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/Arnold-boot.jpg/220px-Arnold-boot.jpg Significance Words cannot describe the significance of Benedict Arnolds impact on the United States of America. You could ask the majority of the people in the country, and the very thought of him will make some people gag. How someone could rise to the prowess of being a Revolutionary hero to the pit of being the most despised man in American history is beyond me. On the positive side of his significance, Arnold exemplifies all characteristics of being a great General. Whether its his bravery to throw himself and others into a situation with confidence shows his great ability as a military mind. Without the confidence to throw yourself into desperate situations, how could you possibly win over the respect and confidence of your men? His military mind is unmatched in regards to other Generals of the Continental Army. George Washington is revered in the United States as the Golden Boy. In hindsight, he was nothing more than an average military leader. Washington overshadows Arnold all because of Arnolds inability to stay true to the Revolutionary cause. Lastly, Arnold wasnt afraid to stand up for what he believed in. Arnold had an ability to actively express his opinions, which most of the time were right. Even in the time he was down and out on himself, he attempted to help the cause by expressing his knowledgeable opinion, one thing many peopl e dont have the ability to do. Arnolds contributions for the construction of the United States shouldnt be overlooked because what he actually did was truly astounding. On the negative side, Arnold is significant because he is, quite clearly, one of the most hated men in American history. He is an example for all people in the world, not just the United States, as to what exactly you DO NOT want to be. Arnold shows the world why you shouldnt turn your back on your country, it tarnishes your name forever, and you will never have the chance to amend for your mistakes. Not one person should aspire to turn on your country; it makes you seem to be a coward and spineless. Arnold is also significant because it shows us how we must respect and treat our military with the utmost concern and respect. Albeit Arnold was frequently outspoken and a diva, he recognized early on that the early Unites States didnt properly recognize all of its prized military officers. In the end, Arnolds reasoning for deserting the United States doesnt justify him doing it. Although he wasnt respected as the military genius he knew he was, Arnold was too easily tempted by money and by concrete things. His temptation for money and greed overshadowed the love and respect for his country that all men and women alike should have. Not just in the United States, but in all other corners of the Globe as well. What-Ifs What-If #1: What if Benedict Arnold hadnt changed sides? Had Benedict Arnold not changed sides, he most certainly would have been revered up in the same ranks as George Washington. Washingtons accomplishments are incredible, no doubt, but Arnolds are a close rival. The impact Arnold played during the war was something most people probably dont know. You could ask someone about Arnold, and they would probably call him a traitor because he gave Britain information. Little do most people know is that he was in many opinions the greatest General of the Revolutionary War. If you look at how he climbed in the ranks of the Continental Army, you would see him go from just the Commander of his local militia into a Major General in the span of about three years. In todays military, that is something that takes years, decades even. Had Arnold remained true to the United States, he would be revered as a hero, and up in the ranks with the likes of Franklin, Jefferson, Hancock, John Adams, Sam Adams, and Alexander Hamilton. He would be attributed with h elping build this country not through speech or on a piece of paper like most of the Founding Fathers, but through his bravery and active duty in the Revolutionary War. Had he remained true to the United States, there would be memorials in his honor. For example, the one at Saratoga wouldnt be just an unspecified leg; it could be of him standing on a hill symbolizing his complete domination of the most crucial battle during the Revolutionary War. It could have been Arnold who would have strategized the defeat of the British at Yorktown, that would surely make him an American hero, wouldnt it? Its sad to see such a great General fall from fame in the manner of which Arnold did. He couldve become the most iconic spectacle in all of American history. If only he couldve had the vision that Washington had for this country, or Jefferson, for that matter, he quite literally could have been great. What-If #2: What if Arnolds scheme had worked? Had Arnolds plan of giving up West Point to the British worked, it could have completely changed the outcome of the war. West point was considered to be so valuable due to its prime location, right on the Hudson River. West Point was the most wanted object by the British. They saw West Point as a crucial port where they could control what went in and what came out. The spot was hand selected by Washington because of its great natural fortifications and geographic spot. Had the British succeeded in their attempt to capture West Point, momentum could have greatly shifted in their favor. Americans would be disappointed and low on morale because one of their own had plotted their downfall, and the British could have capitalized by crushing the demoralized Continental Army. To this day, we could be under British control, having our daily tea and crumpets along with having a monarchial body in our government (Weird to think about, huh?). This is why it was so important that Arnold was caug ht, however. That very moment in our history could have very well dictated the very outcome of the war. If not for Arnolds plan being foiled, The United States of America may not exist. Talk about something that would not only impact us, but

A Semiparametric Analysis of the Relationship of Body Mass Index to Mortality Essay

Gronniger, J. T. (2006). A Semiparametric Analysis of the Relationship of Body Mass Index to Mortality. American Journal of Public Health, 96(1), 173–178 This article review is on the above cited work. The purpose of Gronniger’s work was to check the adequacy of conventional Body Mass Index (BMI) categories for planning public health programs to reduce mortality. Body Mass Index (BMI) is a measure of an adult’s weight in relation to height, and it is calculated metrically as weight divided by height squared (kg/m2)† (Foster). This work is timely and important because of the wide publicity given to the contribution of surplus body weight to mortality and morbidity, with numerous accounts showing that obesity causes hundreds of thousands of excess deaths and billions of dollars in excess medical spending each year. Obesity has been put on par with smoking as a growing health threat and has become the focal point of many policy initiatives. The studies cited by Gronniger on the subject showed that individuals with BMIs of 20 to 25 kg/m2 were regarded as the reference population and compared their health outcomes with those among overweight (BMIs of 25 to 30 kg/m2) and obese (BMIs of 30 kg/m2 and above) individuals. While Gronniger agrees that obesity is associated with clear increases in risk of mortality, and that overweight is a risk factor for obesity and thus should best be avoided, he states that â€Å"relying on broad categories such as overweight and obesity could provide misleading estimates of BMI’s association with mortality if that association is heterogeneous or not monotonic within categories†. He further stated that the definition of these categories â€Å"grew out of a consensus among various health bodies (including the World Health Organization, the National Institutes of Health, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) that health risks increase with increasing body weight above a BMI of 25 and become serious near a BMI of 30†. This he showed in his study. Summary For the study, the author used the 1987 Cancer Control and 1989 Diabetes supplements of the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) to obtain baseline personal and biometric information on the survey respondents which were linked to the NHIS Multiple Cause of Death File, where mortality follow-up information was obtained. Information from this source was available for a total of 33,558 individuals, of whom 1,109 were dead or presumed dead. He then constructed nonlinear estimates of the association between BMI and mortality using a semiparametric regression technique. The results showed that the mortality risk among â€Å"normal† weight men (i. . , those in the BMI range of 20 to 25 kg/m2) was as high as that among men in the mild obesity category (BMIs of 30–35 kg/m2), with a minimum risk observed at a BMI of approximately 26 kg/m2. Among women, the mortality risk was smallest at approximately 23 to 24 kg/m2, with the risk increasing steadily with BMIs above 27 kg/m2. The results also suggested negligible risk differences with minor differences in weight for much of the population. This is contrary to predictions of high mortality risks among overweight individuals as the â€Å"optimum† BMI appeared to be 26 to 27 overall, 23 to 24 for women, and 26 to 27 for men. Interestingly, mortality did not increase sharply with BMI until the range of about 27 or above (33–35 for men), which is well into the range of overweight and obesity. The semiparametric mortality estimates also showed that in US adults the mortality among clinically underweight individuals is quite high, although estimates near the tails of the BMI distribution are imprecise as a result of small local sample sizes. Critique The semiparametric approach used here provides a clearer picture of individual mortality risks because restrictive categories were eliminated and the data were allowed to shape the functional form. Therefore the present results can better be used to consider broad trends over at least several BMI units and to contrast such trends with findings derived from categorical studies. Also the author in his work used information from a valid source from which a complete smoking data was not available. The respondents were only group as â€Å"current† or â€Å"not current† smokers. This would affect the result considering the effect of smoking habits on mortality. Another limitation in this study was the arbitrary character of the intercept estimates derived using the semiparametric approach which would result in complication in interpretation. This however does not cause bias in the results. The present study was also unable to solve the heterogeneity problem, as the BMI can be tied to manifold variables that influence mortality. Many of these omitted risk factors might be correlated with BMI, leading to misestimation and gross error in the calculation of the risk of increasing BMI itself. Therefore one can not actually identify the mortality-minimizing or â€Å"optimal† BMI from this study. Furthermore, this study involves single-point-in-time measures of BMI. Therefore there is no guarantee that losing weight will bring the mortality of a severely obese person’s to the optimal level. Therefore the optimal BMI is only based on the current weight. Finally because of the absence of standard errors, the semiparametric estimates presented here cannot be used in hypothesis testing. Thus the expected mortality at a BMI of 29. 99 cannot be statistically compared with the expected mortality at a BMI of 30. 01. Recommendations To give a more comprehensive result, the actual smoking habits of the sample group must be obtained and considered in the study because of its effect on mortality. Also there is little information about the underweight group in the study. Therefore a more thorough consideration of this group would be appropriate. Conclusion Notwithstanding the limitations in the study, it is a valid research as the results raise questions about whether overweight and mildly obese individuals are classified correctly under current health guidelines. Health professionals are therefore to consider the large number of people involved in the modest mortality differences between BMI units in drafting health guidelines and planning public health programs.

Life Span Development and Personality

This paper will discuss the life span of a business man, movie producer, aviator, and billionaire, Howard Hughes. It will also explain the psychological development and personality characteristics of the young man that was raised by a financially driven father, and mentally disturbed mother. Mother and Father Howard Hughes was born in 1905 in Houston, Texas to Howard Hughes Sr. and Allene Hughes. Allene Hughes was the biggest influence on Howard junior’s life; she constantly worried about the germs and sickness that her son came in contact with. Allene Hughes suffered from the mental disorder Obsessive Compulsion Disorder (OCD). Howard Hughes Sr. spent most of his time following oil rigs and trying to improve the process of drilling into rock. In 1908/1909 Hughes Sr. invented a drill bit that would penetrate rock, which later made him a millionaire. Hughes Sr. was the owner of Hughes Tool Company. Howard Hughes Junior attended private schools in Boston, where his interest in academics were lacking, and just as his father was mesmerized by anything mechanical. Against his mothers’ wishes, Howard Junior built a bicycle with a motor, later called the motorcycle. Orphaned In 1922, Allene Hughes went into the hospital for minor surgery, but never woke up. Allene Hughes died at 39 years of age, and Howard Junior lost his mother when he was only 16. The death of wife and mother caused a tremendous amount of grief for Howard Sr. , and Jr. Life changed for them, but especially Howard Junior. His father was unable to recover from the death of his wife, and spent the next couple of years subjected Howard Junior to many women, looking for that same happiness again. In January 1924, Howard Senior was working at his desk when he suffered a heart attack and died at age 54. At age 18, Howard Junior was an orphan, and the owner of 75% of his father’s company, making him a very rich young man. Since Howard was not considered to be an adult an unable to make business decisions, he went to court and convinced the judge that he should be declared an adult so that he could run his own affairs. Soon after the judge granted his request, Howard bought all the shares to the company from his relatives, which made him the sole owner of Howard Tool Company, which made a very nice amount of money that he used as a foundation for his future fortune. In 1925 a will was made that stated upon his death, all of his money was to be put into a medical research facility. Movies to Aviation Howard was not satisfied with just running the business that his father had left him, so after his marriage to Ella Rice in 1925, they moved to Hollywood California where he would try his hand at making movies with his uncle Rupert. In the beginning of his movie career, there were two or so flops, but soon he directed the film â€Å"Two Arabian Nights† which won the Academy Award. He went on to do â€Å"The Outlaw, Scarface, and Hells Angels†. During the making of the Hells Angels movie, Hughes became fascinated with flying, and received his pilot’s license. Not only did he fly, in 1932 he founded the Hughes Aircraft Company. Later, the military would hire him to build a large plane that would carry troops overseas; this plane was called the â€Å"Spruce Goose†. In 1938 he financed the creation of the Boeing 307, and was the beginning of the Transcontinental and West Airlines, later called TWA. This was his most profitable investment, earning him $540 million. He sold the airline in 1966. He used the earnings from the airlines to form the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. He used this medical facility to put all of his money into, to prevent the IRS from finding it. The End As far back as birth, Hughes was continually inventing or perfecting an invention. After many failed attempts, caused by his obsessive need to be perfect, Hughes suffered a mental breakdown. The obsessive compulsive disorder worsened, and the stress of inheriting his father’s company at an early age caused anxiety and paranoia became evident when he required phone taps, and private investigators. Like his mother he became obsessed with germs with continuous hand washing, and using napkins or Kleenex to touch objects and open doors. In 1950 Hughes was rarely seen in public. He left the United States and moved from country to country, and in 1972 Hughes Tool Company, his father’s company, was sold. His obsession to control his surroundings led him to be a bitter old recluse. He became weakened by the lack of food, and the effects of drug use. On a plane in 1976, flying from Mexico to Houston for treatment, Hughes dies at age 71. Because of his choices later in life, his body was unrecognizable and could only be identified through fingerprints. Conclusion Despite his mental disorders, Howard Hughes accomplished many great things. Best known for his production of movies, and aviation, his mental illness proved to be his undoing. Most diagnostics were done after his death; therefore there is no way of knowing if medical treatment would have helped him. Although he may have inherited OCD from his mother, it is also believed that his contraction of syphilis in 1930 also played a part in his mental stability. In 1976, Dr. Raymond Fowler, the President of the American Psychology Association, was asked to do a psychological evaluation from what he knew and read of Howard Hughes. After the long study Fowler concluded that â€Å"Hughes was not psychotic, he was just a disturbed man†. Life Span Development and Personality IntroductionThe Healer of the World – Karol Wojtyla, gave a breakthrough of acceptance in the world’s aim for peace, prosperity and unity.   His belief on religion was considered to be flexible as to believing that all people are created equal in blood, color, race or belief (Weigel, 2001).   The differences of such religions must not serve as a wall to hinder one from crossing the line of faith but rather, to give respect to the God being served and hailed.   â€Å"We all believe in one God† (Weigel, 2001), remarked the Saint.   His enthusiasm and love for humanity built a bridge which not all Popes were able to fulfill.   Criticized by some followers of Christianity, his motivation on reaching his prayers even to the extent of other religions gave a positive impact on those individuals who have long felt that Christianity, being the most dominant religion in the world, must reign over.Challenges faced by the PopeHis influence to the masses made him a negotiator in uniting the archipelagos of different countries; he had an amazing view of life, like a philosopher who cared for other people more than himself.   Death threats and vicious plans for assassination haunted his living daylights, but he remained calm, his deep sagacity of forgiveness lurked in every pore of his system, believing that people who have gone astray, must not be punished but be guided (Weigel, 2001).Environment’s role in molding his beliefThe factual argument to support such questions on why his perceptions, character and views were â€Å"godly† and unselfish can be traced with the kind of life he was raised, living in Poland, a â€Å"privacy-oriented† country armed with a raging belief on war, his quest in search for unity indulged him to do good, instead of enrolling in a realm where blood is shed (Weigel, 2001), believed that God was calling him for priesthood, to serve with gospels and not with armors.The institutions where he enrol led also played a large factor in molding his character, as human behavior stresses â€Å"the environment by which one is raised and the people surrounding the individual will most likely be the reasons of what you are today† (Freud & Strachey, 1962).   His family, friends and experiences in life are the main reasons why he possessed the highest level of concern for others.Psychological Theory in his behaviorAccording to developmental psychology, the sense of faith of a person is an acquired form of skill or ability, not an innate one.   It is an inherited acquired phenomenon; given the fact that a new-born baby at the time of birth is non-moral, non-thinking and non-aesthetic, all tantamount to innocence (Dimitrius & Mazzarella, 1991).Therefore, such character is gradually acquired through experience.   It can be then taken to assumption that a family, inclined with scriptures and rituals or of religion, will most likely raise religious offspring.However, a deliberativ e argument of such belief would disprove its validity given the fact that change is most likely to happen, since that the kind of environment which will later be experienced and dwelled upon to by the individual will make abrupt changes in his belief, adaptation would be suitable term (Freud & Strachey, 1962).   Not unless the atmosphere also tames such religiousness.ConclusionInstinct Theory and Learning Theory are evident in the life of the Pope, his belief, that he was being called portrays the first kind and his sense of mimicking priests illustrate his form of motivation in venturing to priesthood (Freud & Strachey, 1962). Such theories are the hugest well supported evidences why the Pope, possess the exceptional characteristic of a human being.   Concluding the existence and the explanations in his life clearly shows that there lived a person, influenced with humanistic theories, but utilized what he has acquired in the â€Å"godliest† way possible.References:Dimitr ius, J.-E., & Mazzarella, M. C. (1991). Reading People: How to Understand People and Predict Their Behavior- -Anytime, Anyplace (1 ed.). New York: Ballantine Books.Freud, S., & Strachey, J. (1962). The Ego and the Id. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Weigel, G. (2001). Witness to Hope: The Biography of Pope John Paul II (1st Cliff Street Books Paperback Ed ed.). New York: Harper Perennial.

Problems In America Be Fixed - 1490 Words

How Can the Problems in America be Fixed? The United States is one of the most powerful countries in the world. Although right now, we are trying to get up from a big fall. In my opinion, our country has many problems that I think we can solve including health care, immigration, and foreign affairs. Americans want them solved. That way, we can live in a safe and powerful country, and we can restore the American Dream. A problem that can affect people and their families is the unemployment rate. We need to get people back to work and off of welfare and ultimately, off of the streets. Welfare includes programs like Medicaid and Food Stamps (â€Å"What are Welfare Programs? List, Myths vs Facts†). Medicaid provides enough money to afford health†¦show more content†¦We would need a profit from agreements like NAFTA. We need to be willing to renegotiate. President Trump has talked about renegotiating NAFTA ever since he was on the campaign trail. We are not currently gaining much from NAFTA right now. We also have many problems with our foreign affairs. The deal put together years ago known as NAFTA, which stands for the North American Free Trade Agreement needs to be revised. This deal does not benefit our country as much as President Trump wants. Some people would argue that it can benefit us on deals with Canada (Kiersz). In some states though, there are less exports to Mexico than C anada (Kiersz). Over the years, the unevenness of the ratio of trade has hurt the United States, particularly on the job market (NAFTA, 20 Years Later: Do the Benefits Outweigh the Costs?). Since newer items are being made in Mexico, the jobs for these manufacturers are sliding down to Mexico with them (NAFTA, 20 Years Later: Do the Benefits Outweigh the Costs?). Although, President Trump has been lowering the unemployment percentages here in the United States since he took office (Bureau of Labor Statistics). A problem that needs to be addressed now is terrorism. Specifically, over the last few years a terrorist group known as ISIS has claimed responsibility for many terror attacks all over the United States. They are also responsible for some more overseas. There have been a few all over the country ofShow MoreRelatedRacism, Hatred, Skin Color, And Judging Are All Parts Of Racism947 Words   |  4 Pagesare apart of America’s problem today. One reason is there are still s ome hatred towards immigrants coming into the United States. Second there are still people in the United States of America who are biased against colored people. Lastly there are people who judge other people by the way they look. There are so many situations now in America that involves racism; it’s ridiculous. That seems to be a main topic in the U.S. Racism is a problem in America that needs to be fixed. There is still someRead MoreThe Differences Between Developed Nations and Latin America1207 Words   |  5 Pagesï » ¿The primary difference between developed nations and Latin America will be that of cost and competition. America is characterized by excessive competition, primarily in commodity based businesses. In many instances America practices protectionism in regards to its cocoa and sugar manufacturers. As a result, there are barriers to entry that cause foreign candy manufactures cost to rise substantially. Arcor does not have this problem in its home county as it can seamless and efficiently distributeRead MoreAir Pollution Is Something That Every Country Suffer From.896 Words   |  4 PagesAir pollution is something that every country suffer from. The United States of America is one of those countries. According to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), pollution levels in many areas of the United States exceed national air quality standards. With air pollution exce eding air quality, some political parties are willing to take action, while others are not. Understanding the most current presidential candidates’ views on air pollution is vital to ensure who will protect the childrenRead MoreBio Pharma1005 Words   |  5 PagesBioPharma have used its production network in 2009? Should any of the plants have been idled? What is the annual cost of your proposal, including import duties? As Landgraf’s objective is to design a more cost-effective network (cost minimization problem subject to various capacity constraints), the following production network in 2009 should have been used by BioPharma: *All numbers below are in millions *Total Transportation Cost=SUMPRODUCT of each plant’s Highcal production with correspondingRead MoreTelefonica Case Study966 Words   |  4 Pageslargest telecommunications companies by market cap. Its activities are centred mainly on the fixed and mobile telephony businesses, while its broadband business is the key growth driver underpinning both. It operates in 25 countries and its customer base exceeds 264 million globally. Telefà ³nica’s growth strategy is focused on the markets in which it has a strong foothold: Spain, Europe and Latin America. The Group stands in third position in the sector Telco worldwide in terms of market capitalisationRead MoreReport: BioPharma, Inc.1037 Words   |  5 PagesIn 2005, Phillip (Phil) Landgraf faced several glaring problems in the financial performance of his company, BioPharma, Inc. The firm had experienced a steep decline in profits and very high costs at its plants in Germany and Japan. Landgraf, the company s president for worldwide operations, knew that demand for the company s products was stable across the globe. As a result, the surplus capacity in his global production network looked like a luxury he could no longer afford. Any improvement inRead MoreThe United States uses a presidential system of government and is a stable democracy; therefore, it is advisable for new democracies to also choose pr1628 Words   |  7 Pagesexecutive governs using the authority derived from direct election, with an independent legislature. (Hague and Harrop: 269) This is due to a main feature of presidential government where both president and legislature are elected for a fixed term, where neither can bring down the other and so giving each institution some autonomy. Other main features include a popular election of the president who directs the government and makes appointments to it such as choosing the CabinetRead MoreEssay On How To Change A President811 Words   |  4 Pagesto change the problems America may face, especially if that president is following behind a president who may have served for 8 years. For example, when president George Bush 2 term presidency was over, President Barak Obama had to come behind him and create a way to end the war in Iraq which nearly took 3 years, almost his entire first term as president. Depending on who the previous president may be, it may take a full term to fix one to two problems. Then if the problem is fixed, if the presidentRead MoreBiopharma: Costs and Japan Mexico U.s1502 Words   |  7 PagesCase study-- Biopharma Inc. Presented by:Prateek Mittal 2010PMM111 Yatendra Singh 2010PMM115 Himanshu Bhatt 2010PMM132 Main points ‡ Problems faced in financial performance of biopharma Inc. ‡ Steep decline in profits. ‡ Very high costs at Germany and Japan plants. ‡ Stable demand across the globe. ‡ Company could no longer afford to have surplus capacity. ‡ Aims at having an efficient network. ‡ Cutting the costs is the top priority. Background ‡ Biopharma Inc. is a global manufacturerRead MoreAnalysis Of James Coleman s Article On Equality Of Educational Opportunity1517 Words   |  7 Pagesof the famous, â€Å"Coleman Report†. The Coleman Report is an article based on James Coleman’s findings in a major study conducted at John Hopkins University. Professor Coleman worked along side others to conduct a study with the goal of resolving the problems of equal educational opportunities. This report was published by the US Government, under the title â€Å"Equality of Educational Opportunity†. It is noted that the concept of â€Å"equality of educational opportunity† has changed drastically over the years