Prius: Leading a Wave of HybridsEssay Preview: Prius: Leading a Wave of HybridsReport this essayCompany Casethe micro-environmental factors affecting the first and second generation of the Toyota Prius are the customers and the competitors.Consumers, getting affected by the gas prices, were looking for an answer to their prayers. Toyota gave them the answer, a vehicle that would allow people to save on gas aswell as provide good and efficient service. Once the first generation Prius was released, although not too pretty or fancy, it served to its purposed and customers were buying it.
The other factor, competitors, is pretty obvious. Everybody wants a piece of the pie. Auto makers such as Honda started developing and/or implementing the hybrid system on some of their vehicles. Toyotas answer was to keep developing what already has been a success, the Prius. A second generation was developed and released. This time the new generation was even more fuel efficient. It also included more technical advances, more room and several other factors that would make all types of clientele to be interested.
The Darfur Conflict[8][9] began in Darfur, Sudan, in February 2003 when the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) and Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) in Darfur took up arms, accusing the government of oppressing black Africans in favor of Arabs. There are various estimates on the number of human casualties. One side was composed mainly of the Sudanese military and the Janjaweed, a Sudanese militia group recruited mostly from the Afro-Arab Abbala tribes of the northern Rizeigat region in Sudan. These tribes are mainly camel-herding nomads. The other side was made up of rebel groups, notably the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army and the Justice and Equality Movement, recruited primarily from the non-Arab muslim Fur, Zaghawa, and Masalit ethnic groups. The Sudanese government, while publicly denying that it supports the Janjaweed, is accused of providing financial assistance to the militia, and of participating in joint attacks targeting civilians.[10][11]
\p>Some of the killings were part of a policy to destabilize the country’s stability. Darfur militants were believed to be responsible for over a half-million deaths and over 30,000 wounded between 1995 and 2013.[10][12] The killings took place at the JEM compound.[13]
\p>In January of this year, the JEM announced that it was ending operations based on evidence from the DRC and other international agencies as well as the army which claimed the Sudanese government did not control the country.[14] On February 13, 2004, Sudan’s Supreme Security Council approved a plan to take over from Sudan by force. In addition, Sudan began talks for a separate constitution and local government.[15][16] The plan, submitted to the UN Security Council on March 7, 2005, stipulated that no more than two years’ term for nonpolitical elections and that Sudan would not lose any of the power in the country following elections.[15][16][17] The Sudan Conflict, which started in Darfur in February 2003, has not been resolved or concluded. An independent inquiry into the crisis found no evidence to indicate any significant conflict. The DRC said the country’s stateless community had committed atrocities and had been held for months,[17] and claimed that it would be unable to fully rebuild in seven years.[18] The United Nations Mission to the United Nations (UNMEM), in conjunction with the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRRC) and UNHCR, urged the government to cease operations of the JEM compound and remove the JEM head after the “serious, significant [of] problems,” to be addressed by the international community.[19] Following months of fighting, the UNMEM has received dozens of calls to investigate possible attacks on the compound in May 2004.[20] The International Committee of the Red Cross reported that there had been no reports of any systematic attacks as of August 2003.[21]
Overview and Description
The Darfur conflict started over a year of conflict with the overthrow of President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi. Although most of South Sudan reported civilian casualties during Sudan’s civil war, the conflict became more severe in March 2004 when NSC and NVA forces attacked a civilian hospital, causing at least three people to die. The JEM head was captured in July 2004 and killed in a flashbang firing in October 2005. In June of this year, the U.N. Special Rapporteur in South Sudan asked Sudan to allow UN forces to participate in its own civilian reconstruction efforts to end conflict in the South. However, the Sudan government said they had already done nothing to provide civilian medical assistance and there was no evidence of atrocities yet.[22][23] The Ministry of Defense refused to give any indication of an attempt by it in the interim to bring peace with Hadi. The U.N.’s special rapporteur on humanitarian intervention in Darfur found no evidence that the situation was improving due to war.[24] The United Nations has not reported any reported casualties.[25] On December 7, the UN Committee for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination issued three reports on discrimination perpetrated against black South Americans in South Sudan. The first, by the U.N. Human Rights Council, examined the treatment of African-American women and noted that many women suffered physical or mental health disadvantages that included low socioeconomic status or low schooling, and that these disadvantages had existed in the past.[26] The second report, by the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), found that the government had failed to monitor the security and health services of refugees receiving special recognition for refugee status and thus failed
\p>Some of the killings were part of a policy to destabilize the country’s stability. Darfur militants were believed to be responsible for over a half-million deaths and over 30,000 wounded between 1995 and 2013.[10][12] The killings took place at the JEM compound.[13]
\p>In January of this year, the JEM announced that it was ending operations based on evidence from the DRC and other international agencies as well as the army which claimed the Sudanese government did not control the country.[14] On February 13, 2004, Sudan’s Supreme Security Council approved a plan to take over from Sudan by force. In addition, Sudan began talks for a separate constitution and local government.[15][16] The plan, submitted to the UN Security Council on March 7, 2005, stipulated that no more than two years’ term for nonpolitical elections and that Sudan would not lose any of the power in the country following elections.[15][16][17] The Sudan Conflict, which started in Darfur in February 2003, has not been resolved or concluded. An independent inquiry into the crisis found no evidence to indicate any significant conflict. The DRC said the country’s stateless community had committed atrocities and had been held for months,[17] and claimed that it would be unable to fully rebuild in seven years.[18] The United Nations Mission to the United Nations (UNMEM), in conjunction with the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRRC) and UNHCR, urged the government to cease operations of the JEM compound and remove the JEM head after the “serious, significant [of] problems,” to be addressed by the international community.[19] Following months of fighting, the UNMEM has received dozens of calls to investigate possible attacks on the compound in May 2004.[20] The International Committee of the Red Cross reported that there had been no reports of any systematic attacks as of August 2003.[21]
Overview and Description
The Darfur conflict started over a year of conflict with the overthrow of President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi. Although most of South Sudan reported civilian casualties during Sudan’s civil war, the conflict became more severe in March 2004 when NSC and NVA forces attacked a civilian hospital, causing at least three people to die. The JEM head was captured in July 2004 and killed in a flashbang firing in October 2005. In June of this year, the U.N. Special Rapporteur in South Sudan asked Sudan to allow UN forces to participate in its own civilian reconstruction efforts to end conflict in the South. However, the Sudan government said they had already done nothing to provide civilian medical assistance and there was no evidence of atrocities yet.[22][23] The Ministry of Defense refused to give any indication of an attempt by it in the interim to bring peace with Hadi. The U.N.’s special rapporteur on humanitarian intervention in Darfur found no evidence that the situation was improving due to war.[24] The United Nations has not reported any reported casualties.[25] On December 7, the UN Committee for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination issued three reports on discrimination perpetrated against black South Americans in South Sudan. The first, by the U.N. Human Rights Council, examined the treatment of African-American women and noted that many women suffered physical or mental health disadvantages that included low socioeconomic status or low schooling, and that these disadvantages had existed in the past.[26] The second report, by the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), found that the government had failed to monitor the security and health services of refugees receiving special recognition for refugee status and thus failed
The Sudanese government has been accused of tampering with evidence, such as attempting to cover up mass graves.[12][13][14] They also arrested and harassed journalists, thus limiting the extent of press coverage of the situation in Darfur.[15][16][17][18]
While the United States government has described the conflict as genocide,[19] the UN has not recognized the conflict as such.[20] On 31 January 2005, the UN released a 176-page report saying that while there were mass murders and rapes of Darfurian civilians, they could not label the atrocities as “genocide” because “genocidal intent appears to be missing”.[21][22] Many activists, however, refer to the crisis in Darfur as genocide, including the Save Darfur Coalition, the Aegis Trust and the Genocide Intervention Network. These organizations point to statements by former United States Secretary