Describe the social implications of business

Russia does not pursue the objective of destroying the United States. Paradoxically, this abyss is not where many do admit it—such as the RS Sarmat ballistic missile, whose existence and approximate characteristics were more or less known for years.

After that he proceeded with what can only be described as a military-technological Pearl-Harbor meets Stalingrad. Those who have such weapons, simply own vast spaces of the sea limited by the ranges of the Kinzhal and its carriers.

It is prudent to predict today, against the background of an American approach to war that there will be no sensible technological American response to Russia in the foreseeable future.

The effect is multiplicative and it is profound. What happened on March 1st this year with the announcement and demonstration of new Russian weapons is not asymmetry, it was an acknowledgement of the final arrival of a completely new paradigm in warfare, military technology and, as a consequence in strategy and operational art.

In the end, to be attacked from the South Pole, through South America, is not a contingency the US military is capable of facing. In fact, they are historic in nature. It is an appropriate term once one recalls what truly was at stake then. Russians did win that war and, indeed, coerced Georgia into a much more peaceful mood.

The United States simply has no resources, other than turning on the printing presses and completely bankrupting itself in the process, to counter. In other words, Russia brought the gun to a knife fight and it seems that this is the only way to deal with the United States today.

The United Sates was not and is not prepared for this, despite many real professionals, including in the US itself, warning about the new unfolding military-technological paradigm and a complete American myopia and hubris in anything military related.

American self-proclaimed hegemony is over where it really matters for any real and perceived hegemon—the military field. This is a complete game changer geopolitically, strategically, operationally, tactically and psychologically. The American global track record of the last few decades does not require any special elaborations—it is a record of military and humanitarian disasters.

It completely annuls hundreds of billions of dollars investment into those platforms and weapons, which suddenly become nothing more than fat defenseless targets.

It made large surface fleets and combatants obsolete. American power elites, the majority of whom have never served a day in uniform nor ever attended serious military academic institutions and whose expertise on serious military-technological and geopolitical issues is limited to couple of seminars on nuclear weapons and, in the best case scenario, the efforts of the Congressional Research Service are simply not qualified to grasp the complexity, the nature and application of military force.

It finally moves aircraft carriers into the niche of pure power projection against weak and defenseless adversaries, and away from the remote sea zone of Russia, be it the Mediterranean, Pacific or North Atlantic. Several of my articles on this resource have been focused precisely in the area where the United States was more than lagging— cruise missiles, all kinds of them.

Probably not for very many years. This also means a complete no-go zone for any of the 33 Aegis-equipped US Navy destroyers and cruisers which are crucial for American Ballistic Missile Defense ; It makes classic CBGs as a main strike force against a peer or near-peer completely obsolete and useless, it also makes any surface combat ship defenseless regardless of its air-defense or anti-missile capabilities.

As Jeffrey Lewis, in a surprising moment of sobriety for Foreign Policy magazine put it:Describe the social implications of business ethics facing a selected business in its different areas of activity.

The organisation BP BP is a British public limited company which provides gas and oil.

Describe the social implications of business ethics facing a selected business in its different areas of activity For this task I am going to use Tesco plc. The social implications for Tesco direct to the actions of the organisation having consequences on society and there are many areas of activity that the business does that have implications.

The social implications of an event or action are the results, on society or part of society, of the event or the action. The idea of social implications can also be extended to a law or a policy, that is, a planned set of repeated actions. Social Implications of Business Ethics Executive Pay Ethics in Finance Bribery Social implications refer to those actions of business that have an efect on society as a whole.

Consider these ethical issues and describe how they affect society as a whole. Describe the social implications of business ethics facing a selected business in its different areas of activity. (Pass 3) For this part of my assignment I have been asked to describe the social implications of business ethics which face my chosen company.

The Social Implications of Business Ethics Social implications refer to those actions of business that have an effect on society as a whole. These .

Download
Describe the social implications of business
Rated 3/5 based on 62 review