To Improve Your Grade We Always Ready To Help You

  • 60,000+ Completed Assignments

  • 3000+ PhD Experts

  • 100+ Subjects

Organized Combat or Structural Advantage


Discuss about the Organized Combat or Structural Advantage.



Before cold conflictended in the last decade, is right that it had entered into a dangerous and unstable phase. For instance, first hydrogen test of bomb that was done in the Atoll Eniwetok within the Islands of Marshall provided a proof of how the nuclear age could be so frightening. The trial formed a 25-square mile fireball that could vaporize the entire island, blowing a huge hole in the ocean and its power destroyed half of the Manhattan. Some other dangerous events during this time were the subsequent American and Soviet tests that spewed very toxic radioactive materials into the atmosphere. All these events as presented at the end of the cold war show how dangerous direction the world had taken. The American domestic life had been put into alarms as people ever were issued with threats of nuclear annihilation.

Space exploration presents another dramatic arena during the cold war competition, and this brought the world into the entry of a dangerous phase. In 1957, the world’s initial artificial as well ashumanlyitem was placed in the orbit launched of earth by a Soviet R-7 intercontinental missile. The launch surprised many but did not please the Americans as this was done by the Russian. The Americans felt not to lose too much ground to the Soviets and therefore started their space exploration, as Americans feared the overwhelming force of the R-7 missile that seemed to have possibilities of bring the nuclear warhead into the US.

By 1950, the Soviet Union in its future war is viewed to have equalized with the United States of America as evidenced by the atomic air offensive by U.S that could not manage in defeating the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was also mostly pushing the western abilities away and far from Europe along with the Middle East. At beginning, just immediately after Second World War, both Americans and the planners of Soviet military was viewing bomb made from atomic elements as the only tool that could end the world war. The relationship amid the Soviet Union together with the western authorities worsened in first 5 years after Second World WarI, and the function of nuclear devices was fully adopted in battle. In this case, Truman did not threaten the Soviet Union, but by the fact that there was a nuclear weapon, that was an automatic provoking. The fact that they were threatening each other with nuclear weapons; this provides clear evidence that the cold world war opened a dangerous and unstable phase for the world.

The ongoing conflicts ever witnessed between the Eastern European countries threaten the stability of the newly established European order. There have been serious tensions that occur between the Hungary and the Romania regarding the Romania’s treatment. If the Soviet Union was not present in the region (Eastern Europe) both Romania and the Hungary would have entered into a war over this issue, and this might erupt a war between the two countries in future and hence dangerous and unstable phase brought during the last decade of the cold world war. Warfare that is always witnessed in the Eastern Europe generally would lead to a significant suffering to the Eastern Europeans.

It is also unclear to predict whether there will be a precise balance of the military power in the Eastern European and hence causing the unstable phase of post-cold world conflict. It is unclear also the Soviet Union might regain its powers soon after coming out from the Eastern Europe. In this case, it is evident that the Soviet Union would be stronger than Germany. Probably, Germany and the Soviet Union might equalize in the powers. The only problem will be in the non-nuclear area of Europe, as they would be exposed to these dangers since the security on such zones would only remain with the massive armies, and in such a case, it cannot be maintained without mobilizing the public. In conclusion, it is very true that the last decade of the cold world war has left its most dangerous and unstable phase.

Both Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher are seen to share one quality that is more important unlike their differences of style and temperament. In this case, they are politicians who paint in primary colors. More often than not, their personalities arouse feelings of enthusiastic admiration. Usually, the lasting influence of any political leader is judged by the effect felt by his or her opposition leaders. In this case, is there any opposition party that may be forced to come to a consensus with the changes provoked by such a leader? Both Thatcher and Ronald Reagan have tried to have such qualities of insinuating for changes that reflect the saying that the government was not the solution to the troubles that face the U.S but was the problem.

By cutting income tax

Both of them are known to have reduced the revenuestrictlyand creating it tough for leaders who were to come after them to reinstate such tax charge to their priorranks in either nation without providing a good excuse1. In this case, Ronald managed to allow for low taxes as one of the sacred cows of American politics. Even after Reagan leadership, his successor was forced by some other leaders into exaggerated protests aiming to raise the tax rates impurely. The Reagan successor as the vice president of the Reagan leadership could not adhere to what other politicians kept on forcing him to do since Reagan had made it a more embarrassing politically for leadership to be involved in raising the tax rates with a significant margin2.

Margaret Thatcher also contributed to changing the governments of the 1980s through her privatization program. The plan could be modified by another administration; however, it still makes a historic change of ownership of British industry. She also introduced an idea of a trade union that can be reformed by being amended by the Labor government, but it cannot be completely swept away.

Both Reagan and Margaret were very much committed to lessening the power of the government once in office, and they achieved it. In this, there existed a strange difference between them[3]. Thatcher utilized the privatization program while Reagan used a deregulation method, but both of them were in line to the same strategy. The two policies yet with their different ways could transfer economic power from the state into the hands of private sectors. In this situation and within the government, thatcher contributed by taking power away from the local authorities to concentrate it at the center while Reagan handed the power to the states from the federal administration[4].

Encouraging international movement through free markets

Both Reagan and Margaret were prominent champions of this policy of supporting global movement through free markets[5]. The administration delivered an increased prosperity for their people all the time and is set to be a good example to other administrations. In fact, Margaret and Reagan were the first and the most prominent advocates for the free markets.

Reagan brought the faith to his country by projecting a radiant optimism and insouciance unlike his predecessor Jimmy Carter who was diagnosed with malaise as the American condition[6]. Reagan was very comfortable with such governing, and hence the country felt comfortable being governed by such a leader. Another leader, Irangate opposed undermined the Reagan achievement but luckily could not bring it down. On the other hand, Thatcher brought confidence to her country by an implacable determination. She introduced an economic Thatcherism that is greatly accepted by many British people even though this achievement could vary from one country to another. However, when she tried extending her doctrines to the social field, she found herself into political trouble.

Regardless of all the achievements that both Reagan and Thatcher made, there is that limitation for their lasting influence. Such that, despite both of them having a significant impact on their opponents, none of them of can prove to have provided a direct political inheritance. In this case, Reagan was not succeeded by a Reaganiteand Thatcher is unlikely to have been achieved by a Thatcherite. However, it is very imperative to note that both of them have made a huge difference to their own countries[7].

The relationship exhibited by both Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan was personally warmer, and they both shared both ideologies in their governance[8]. In fact, this was very much contrary to any of the previous president and prime minister who came before them. They collaborated and never had any historical impact as evidenced by the Roosevelt-Churchill. In this case, they did not register any world war to fight. However, their various agreements were broader and embraced both domestic and international affairs.


Brzezinski, Zbigniew. The grand chessboard: American primacy and its geostrategic imperatives. Basic books, 2016.

Crosbie, Sylvia K. A tacit alliance: France and Israel from Suez to the Six Day War. Princeton University Press, 2015.

Dalby, Simon. Creating the second cold war: The discourse of politics.Bloomsbury Publishing, 2016.

Gale, Cengage Learning. A Study Guide for Political Theories for Students: CONSERVATISM. Vol. 19. Gale, Cengage Learning, 2015.

Hopkin, Jonathan, and Kate Alexander Shaw. "Organized combat or structural advantage? The politics of inequality and the winner-take-all economy in the United Kingdom." Politics & Society 44, no. 3 (2016): 345-371.

Maier, Charles S. Recasting bourgeois Europe: stabilization in France, Germany, and Italy in the decade after World War I. Princeton University Press, 2015.

Meriwether, James H. "Reagan and Africa." A Companion to Ronald Reagan (2015): 378.

Nye Jr, Joseph S. Bound to lead: The changing nature of American power. Basic Books, 2016.

Oliete-Aldea, Elena. "Britain in the 1980s: The Thatcher Decade." In Hybrid Heritage on Screen, pp. 31-48. Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2015.

Scammell, Margaret. Designer politics: How elections are won. Springer, 2016.

Shaw, Martin. War and genocide: Organised killing in modern society. John Wiley & Sons, 2015. is the best option for those who are looking for reliable academic writing services. To show our genuineness, we submit only high quality assignments so that students never lose out on important grades. Our mission is to provide plagiarism-free solutions at very affordable prices. Students can get assignment help on any subject or topic from us.

Place Your Order

Get help to our Experts
- +

Why Student Prefer Us ?

Top quality papers

We do not compromise when it comes to maintaining high quality that our customers expect from us. Our quality assurance team keeps an eye on this matter.

100% affordable

We are the only company in UK which offers qualitative and custom assignment writing services at low prices. Our charges will not burn your pocket.

Timely delivery

We never delay to deliver the assignments. We are very particular about this. We assure that you will receive your paper on the promised date.

Round the clock support

We assure 24/7 live support. Our customer care executives remain always online. You can call us anytime. We will resolve your issues as early as possible.

Privacy guaranteed

We assure 100% confidentiality of all your personal details. We will not share your information. You can visit our privacy policy page for more details.

Upload your Assignment and improve Your Grade

Order Now