Social Policy Essays Cyber Security Information

Social Policy Essays Cyber Security Information Cyber Security Information The Effectiveness of US Cyber Security The inevitable and continuous advancement in technology brings the terror of cyber dilemma. There are many risks that involved the cyber world. Among these are the viruses that are erasing the system, hackers breaking into your system and altering files, people using your computer to attack others, someone stealing you credit card information to make his own purchase. Hackers and terrorist attacks prompted the mandate on cyber security. When we say cyber security, we are dealing with the prevention, detection and response to attacks involving information in your computers. According to Mr. Richard Clarke, â€Å"Today’s IT security threats are increasingly focused on stealing valuable data. In this environment, relying on outdated measures like focusing exclusively on perimeter security is insufficient.† Get help with your essay from our expert essay writers Glimpse on Cyber Security Information technology is continuously changing. People are more adept to computers nowadays. Communications, transportation, entertainment, shopping medicine are greatly controlled by computers and the internet. A large percentage of the daily activities of an average person have been utilized in the presence of these breakthrough technologies. True enough, the idea of storing your personal information in your own computer or to other computer is very promising. Just four years ago, security experts have not been meeting their points on whether US government has protected the cyber world properly. But the only thing that they have agreed upon is the fact the increased threat produced in mainframe systems which are running in Windows and connecting to the Internet. It has been the dilemma on bureaucratic system and the lack of focus in the people involved in the task that makes us more susceptible to cyber problems. Another compelling reason is the fact that four years ago, threats on information structure, specifically on mainframe, is not considered as a threat at all. No solid attention has been given in the issue. On the other aspects, US allotted big budget in the protection of the cyberspace. But the lack of concern and wrong set of priorities seems to put the problem at bay. Although, it has been suggested throughout that people should be well-informed in the latest threats and vulnerabilities, the issue still exists as of today. Cyber Security Today Every bit of information throughout the Internet could be monitored by the government. This is going to be a very thorny development. This is how the US government would like to do in response to cyber space threats. All communications made in the Internet should be read by the federal government. In this scenario, the people will be forced to give up the right to privacy in order to protect security, public transportation and other critical procedures made in the Internet. The fact of the Internet being an open database makes it more susceptible to vulnerable attacks. The security of the information systems is largely a matter of consistent and applicable methods. Another step in cyber security is providing a Wikipedia style of database wherein the agencies can share different views and information regarding the matter. Despite the effort of the US government, some people say that the federal government has failed to reinforce the outbreak of cybercrimes. It already cost their economy billions of dollars yet they failed to respond with enough resources, determination. The U.S. government has not devoted the leadership and energy that this issue needs, said Paul Kurtz, a former administration homeland and cybersecurity adviser. Its been neglected. The White House has allotted $154 in protecting the cyber space yet they are more focused on online espionage than the international criminals lurking in the World Wide Web. In this aspect, the expected loss in the years to come is expected to reach a high percentage. Congress has either failed to pass bills or sent ineffective legislation to the president. Agencies have shied away from imposing regulations. Leaders have not bothered to make sure computer users understand the problem if the officials themselves even comprehend the threats. Overall, I was amazed at the lack of knowledge, not only among presidential staff, but at the Cabinet level, and the Senate and House, McAfee Chief Executive Dave DeWalt said after meeting in the summer with senators, Congress members and Cabinet secretaries about information security. The threats arent easily grasped: U.S. Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, whose district includes much of Silicon Valley, is one of Capitol Hills most Internet-savvy legislators. Yet even Lofgren, when asked in August if she knew what a botnet is, responded only with, Sort of. Her spokesman said most other members of Congress likely could not even make that claim. (Sean Garret (2007)). Last November 2007, a bill has been passed that will prosecute cybercrime cases and allow victims to have restitution. Weaknesses of Cyber Security Policies Accessing all the information of other people will give you safety is the same things that once in the brains of Hitler and Stalin, and also Mao. They each have their own spies to feed the necessary information in various matters that they assumed that can make them safe. In other words, the same things are the ones being conceptualized was once in the minds of these famous dictators. Although admittedly, going against the plans of the US government is not a very bright idea considering the fact that the people are the key reasons of the cyberspace threats and vulnerabilities. If the people have already resigned in protecting the cyber world, the only thing left is the government to do the work. Strength of Cyber Security Policies It is a good thing that the federal government can provide ample budget in combating cyber space problems. The key to guarantee the best tools in doing so is having the proper financial allocation. Although, online espionage is the main priority of the US government, I must admit it is still a good tactics. Once the government gets hold of the people behind it, they will able to fully learn the principles in online threats. In this way, they can be able to apply whatever they have encountered in other aspects of cyber space dilemma such as online theft. The Wikipedia style of platform is so far a very good idea. An access to different strategies of key people and agencies is a way of learning to everyone. Application of these strategies will be helpful in minimizing the alarming losses contributed by the World Wide Web. Even though, combating the cyber space terrorists, passing a bill that reinforce the law to take actions in administering charges and victims being able to seek retribution are a good step. It at least will put a defensive strategy in protecting the user of the World Wide Web. News.com enumerates the provision of the bill.  · Existing law would be  changed so that federal prosecutors can go after supsected cybercriminals even if the crime occurs within a single state (currently, hackers must engage in criminal activity across state lines for federal prosecutors to get involved).  · The current law would also be made tougher by removing a requirement that computer crimes have to result in  a loss of at  least $5,000  before prosecutors can pursue the case.  · It would  become a felony, punishable by fines and up to five years in prison,  to damage 10 or more computers with spyware or keyloggers.  · It would become a crime, also punishable by fines and up to five years in prison, to use the threat of hacking into  someones computer to extort money or anything else of value.  · Cybercriminals would be  forced to give up any property used to commit their crimes or obtained in the process of those activities. Cyber Security: A Quest It will be a long-standing effort to fully eliminate the troubles brought about by the cyber criminals. At the same time, the issue of cyber security should always be our main concern. Technology is changing. We must keep our pace with the advancement of the modern world. These instances just further strengthen the fact on the everyday changes in the information technology. Digital world is at hand. The solution to our cyber space dilemma is also at hand. The decision lies on us. Bibliography: Lyman, Jay (2004). Is U.S. cyber-security policy leaving critical mainframe systems at risk? October 18, 2004, from http://www.linux.com/feature/39583 Jones, K.C. (2008). National Intelligence Director Wants To Monitor All Net Communications. January 18, 2008, from http://www.informationweek.com/management/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=205901409 Tech Policy Central (2008). Govt.s Fight Against Terrorism Hitting Net. January 21, 2008, from http://www.techpolicycentral.com/2008/01/govts-fight-against-terrorism.php Garett, Sean (2007). The Great Cybercrime Delusion. November 13, 2007, from http://463.blogs.com/the_463/2007/11/the-great-cyber.html Tech Policy Central (2007). Senate Committee Passes Cybercrime Bill. November 2, 2007, from http://www.techpolicycentral.com/2007/11/senate-committee-passes-cyberc.php

RCBC Savings Bank Essay

I. Synopsis RCBC Savings Bank is a wholly owned subsidiary of one of the country’s top universal banks, Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation (RCBC). RCBC Savings Bank was incorporated on the 15th day of January, 1996 to provide retail banking services to its target clientele and serve as the consumer and retail banking arm of RCBC. RCBC Savings Bank formally started its thrift banking operations on the 27th day of February, 1996. It grew extensively in just over a year, from a lean one-branch organization with a seven-man skeletal force to an institution with a network of six branches supported by 106 full-time personnel in 1997.In September 1998, RCBC Savings Bank acquired selected assets and assumed deposit liabilities of Capitol Development Bank. As a result of the strategic alliance, the Bank further widened the reach of its branch network and became the 2nd largest thrift bank in the country with 117 branches. One of its branches is the RCBC Savings Bank La Paz in Iloilo City. It serves many Ilonggos in banking and financing services. Despite of its fast growing business, the Management paid no attention to some internal control aspects of its branches. Like the La Paz Branch many complaints from customers regarding the efficiency and slow-moving service of the bank. The long queuing of the customers every time they do transactions to tellers is really a problem; it decreases the goodwill of the company and much more the customer satisfaction. As we all know, the competition in banking industry is high and many banks are already here in Iloilo. How would the Management address this problem? What course of actions or solutions should the Management put in place to achieve higher customer satisfaction? Is the company really into realizing its vision to be the most-sought-after by the consumer market when it comes to financial products and services?

Negative Effect Of Nuclear Family Essay

The nuclear family is a term used to define a family group consisting of aheterosexual pair of adults; wife and husband, and their children. It can also be known as a ‘beanpole family’ and it can be, especially in middle-class families, child-centered; child-centered is defined as being actively involved by spending lots of time together as the child’s needs and wishes are the most important thing. Only 17% of families in the UK are nuclear families, and this statistic is on the decrease as it is more so a norm in the 21st century to cohabit (an unmarried couple living together and having a sexual relationship).In 2012 there were 18.2 million families in the UK. Of these, 12.2 million consisted of a married couple with or without children. It is in fact 50% of people in the UK who cohabit and the number of opposite sex cohabiting couple families has increased significantly, from 1.5 million in 1996 to 2.9 million in 2012. However, there are other types of families: extended family, unconventional families; single parent families, homosexual families and reconstituted families; step families. Single parent families and step families usually occur after ‘irretrievable breakdown’ of marriage, resulting in divorce. However, it could be that a martial partner or partner has died or left unexpectedly, and after this a new intimate relationship is formed and the couple is likely to procreate. Other characteristics of a nuclear family are: parents having high-paid or good occupations, living away from other family members; independent or privatised; they keep in contact with family via phone and mainly see family on special occasions, e.g. Christmas, Easter, marriages, funerals, and christenings. Despite this, the husband is actively involved in raising the children; ‘new dad’ and they are influenced by the media to be a ‘good father’ and perhaps their peers who are of t he same age as them. Also, they are likely to be called the ‘new man’, a term used to identify men who believe in equality, do house-work, spend time with family and children and do not use any offensive sexist language. There are five theories by sociologist that either support or resent nuclear families. The theories that resent nuclear families are: Marxist and feminist; the nuclear family is not a perfect family. The theories that support nuclear families are: functionalist, post-modern and new right; the nuclear family is the best type of family. Feminists believe: that the failures or ills of family life are due to men, in the family there is gender inequality as it has been proven that women do 3 times more house work than men, women are more likely to be victims of domestic abuse from males, children are more likely to be abused by men rather than women, 80% of divorce is women divorcing men, males are more likely to have addictions (drugs or alcohol or gambling) and men are more lik ely to have a career rather than have a strong focus on the children or housework. In contradiction to this, about two in five of all victims of domestic violence are men; and this is on the increase. However, men do not report domestic abuse from their partners because they are ashamed or embarrassed. Also in favor of men, it is apparent that all men are different, the research and statistics are a generalisation; perhaps not completely reliable. In addition to this, recently there has been an increase in female dominated families;matriarchy. Catherine Hakim (1996) suggests that feminists under-estimate women’s ability to make rational choices. It is not patriarchy (male domination) or men that are responsible for the position of women in families. She argues that women choose to give more commitment to family and children, and consequently they have less commitment to work than men have. Ann Oakleyargues that gender role socialisation is responsible for sexual division of labor. She also argues that there is still an expectation for women to take on the housewife and mother role. Because of this, it is more difficult for women to pursue careers as men do. Oakley also claims that employers expect women to play the role of housewife rather than pursue a career. This patriarchal ideology is justified by men through claims that women are more suited to caring roles because of their maternal instinct. However, Sue Sharpe said that not all women take on caring roles because of their socialisation. They may react against their socialisation, or pursue a career. Charlie Lewis (1980s) stated that fathers are playing a bigger role; they a more committed. Adrianna Burgess agrees with Charlie Lewis. He is a part of the ‘father institute’, a charity that supports fatherhood. A sociologist who wanted major changes was Charlotte Gilman. Gilman called herself a humanist and believed the domestic environment oppressed women through the patriarchal (male dominate d) beliefs upheld by society. She argued that male aggressiveness and maternal roles for women were artificial and no longer necessary for survival in post-prehistoric times. She wrote, â€Å"There is no female mind. The brain is not an organ of sex. Might as well speak of a female liver.† She also argued that women’s contributions to civilization, throughout history, have been stopped because of an androcentric (focus on male) culture. A Marxist view on the nuclear family looks at inequality. Similar to feminism, a Marxist approach to the nuclear family is cynical. A psychiatrist, David Cooper was critical of the nuclear family, and parents; they brought up children incorrectly, leading corruption! His views and research is clearly expressed in ‘The death of a family.’ He has certain beliefs about disciplining children; he believe that parents are obsessed with discipline; ‘control freaks’; children ‘cannot breathe’ and this it is not acceptable; parents should be liberal. He also thinks that this obsession is due to the past where parents were allowed to physically punish their children; violence and hitting. Rd Laing believes that the nuclear family is the cause of a person’s unhappiness; it should take full responsibility for depression or mental illness. It is in fact 50% of adults in Britain are depressedand about eight percent of children and adolescents suffer from depression.More specifically, he states that schizophrenia occurs due to the family. However, it may be un-noticed as mental illness is usually hidden. Edmund Leach; ‘A runaway world’ 1967. He believes that the nuclear family is isolated due to distant relationships with peers, and other family, which is caused by the location in which you live and the occupation you possess. The nuclear family should be outward looking, and it is not, it is inward looking. There should be support from other family members regardless of the situation as, apparently the nuclear family can’t cope with the stresses and strains of modern day society. In contradiction to the beliefs of the above Marxist sociologists: the family, or within primary socialisation play an imperative in teaching their children discipline and self-discipline, which is vital for future employment. It is therefore inevitable! With regards to the believes of Rd Laing, it has been known that when diagnosing mental disorders or illnesses, other factors are present. In addition to this, every individual deals with stress differently, so by assuming that the nuclear family can’t cope with stress isn’t compatible with every family. Divorce is also more likely to occur in the nuclear family, in comparison to the extended family. The functionalist view on the nuclear family is optimistic. They believe that the nuclear family is the norm in modern industrial societies, and it has major functions that contribute to the well-being of society: the family is the primary agent of socialisation; teaching norms and values; the family is central in creating consensus and order. Parsons (1955) argued that families are ‘personality factories’, producing children who have a strong sense of belonging to society. Talcott Parsons believes that the nuclear family provides key functions for society by learning morals, norms and values; primary socialisation, and it provides stability for children. It is described to be universal and functional. Parsons also argued that the family functions to relief the stress of modern day life. It can be known as the ‘warm-bath’ theory, in that the family provides a relaxing environment for the male worker to immerse himself after a hard day. Children or adolescences in nuclear families are unlikely to engage in crime, recr eational drugs, anti-social behavior, and violence. It is only a small minority who engage in this acts; majority have been successful indoctrinated to be a good citizen. Also, Children or adolescences do better in education, exam results, universities, health and career, in a nuclear family. Children in nuclear families are likely to achieve (academically, better health and career), whereas children in single-parent families have lower academic performance, are more susceptible to peer pressure to engage in deviant behavior, have higher dropout rates from high school, and have greater social and psychological problems.However, Kellaghan and this colleagues (1993) conclude that family social status or cultural background don’t determine a child’s achievement at school. They propose that for academic success, it is what parents do in the home, and not children’s family background, that is significant. Similarly, Sam Redding (1999) indicates that in relation to academic outcomes, the potential limitations associated with poor economic circumstances can be overcome by parents who provide stimulating, supportive, and language-rich experiences for their children. The criticisms of the functionalists perspective of the nuclear family is that: there thinking suggests that all members of the nuclear family are underpinned by biology, functionalist’s analysis on the nuclear family tend to be based on the middle-class; they don’t consider other influences such as wealth, social class or ethnicity and the harmonic view from functionalists on family tends to exclude social problems such as increases in divorce rate, child abuse and domestic violence. Ronald Fletcher, ‘shaking the foundation’ (1988) is also in favor of the nuclear family. He argues that people expect more out of marriage and family life than they used to. Couples are no longer prepared to be part of ‘empty-shell marriages’ (marriage without the partners being in love). Therefore divorce is becoming more popular; re-marriage is more successful and procreation is likely. Robert Chester; ‘the rise of the neo-conventional family’ (1985). He believes that the nuclear family has a positive impact on life; 80% of people will live in a nuclear family in sometime in their lives and 80% of people will get married- most people are also likely to become parents. He contends that the neo-conventional family that is characterized by joint conjugal roles and greater sexual equality has replaced it. Chester argues that the statistics only reflect one stage in a person’s life and the ultimately the majority of people will get married, have children and stay in this relationship. New right or traditionalists believe that the nuclear family is the best type of family to live in and that everyone should live in this type of family, on the assumption that, it is on a permanent basis. A relevant example of the New Right approach to the family can be seen in the view that there exists and under-class of criminals, unmarried mothers and idle young men who are responsible for rising crime. It is argued that this under-class is welfare-dependent, and that adolescence girls are deliberately getting pregnant in order to obtain council housing or state benefits. To hinder things further, this under-class is socializing its children into a culture revolving around crime, anti-authority, anti-world and anti-family values. The New right thinkers believe that there has been a significant amount of damage inflicted upon the nuclear family by, for instance, government policies. For example, they claim that government have encouraged mothers to get back to work, but this has resulted in maternal deprivation; lack of love resulting in psychological damage. There have been few taxes or benefits to encourage mothers to stay at home. The New Right argues that commitment to marriage has been weakened by divorce being made easier and single-parent families have been encouraged by welfare policies. It is apparently, more likely for those who are married and have children to stay together, which enables stability for children; children should only be brought up in the marriage by its heterosexual parents, both should be equal. The New right completely looks down upon divorce as in a unconventional family, children do not do as well, in terms of health, education, career etc. The New Right also perceives homosexuality as the symbol of moral decline, ‘unnatural’ and deviant. Many ‘New Right’ thinkers see the 1960s and early 1970s as the beginning of an attack upon the nuclear family; traditional family values. Specifically, the introduction of the contraceptive pill and the legislation of abortion in the 1960s have been associated with the family decline. The sexual freedom women experienced due to these changes apparently lessened their commitment to the family and equal pay and equal opportunities drifted women away from their roles as ‘natural’ mothers. Also, the 1969 Divorce Reform Act was seen as undermining commitment to marriage. Charles Murray (1989). Murray sees the traditional family to be under threat and Murray made this link to the idea of this ‘culture of dependency’. The ‘culture of dependency’ is the idea of people living off benefits rather than working for money. Patricia Morgan’s ‘Farewell to the family’ states that government policy has directly and indirectly contributed to the growth of the mother/child household. While looking to the needs of sole parent families, governments have overlooked or ignored the needs of intact families. Morgan states that the arrival of feminist advisers into governments has radically changed the way government benefits are d istributed. The burden of taxation has increasingly been shifted onto married parents to the benefit of the single and the childless. As a result, lone parents can end up with higher final incomes from any given wage than two-parent families. Also, more mothers are tempted into the workplace, and more children are pushed into day care, in order for traditional families to stay afloat economically. To contradict the beliefs of the New Right are: that the traditional nuclear family is still central to government plans; ‘key ministers have stated that children are best brought up by married natural parents’ andnew rights or legislation for children and women are aimed to strengthen the nuclear family as a whole, rather than weaken it! A post-modernist view on the family is more neutral; all families can face difficulties; any family can be unsuccessful or successful. Post modernists suggest that in the post modern era there is a wide variety of family arrangements people can choose from – nuclear, extended, reconstituted, cohabitation etc. They claim that not one type dominates and that family arrangements are diverse and fluid. Post modernists see such flexibility as a positive thing. Judith Stacey for instance, suggests that a single individual will experience a variety of family structures throughout their life span. Post-modernists argue that the post-modern family life is characterised by diversity, variation and instability. For example, women no longer aspire to romantic love, marriage and children. Cohabitation, single-sex relationships, economic dependence, pre-marital sex and childlessness are now accepted alternative lifestyles. Men’s role(s) are no longer clear, which has, apparently led them to redefining both their sexuality and family commitments. Others disagree with this view; they believe that the basic features of the family have remained identical to the 1950s. Also, the increase in single-parent families and reconstituted families indicate that there is a slow drift away from the nuclear family. Pakulskic and Waters (1996) believe that class can be seen as just one, not very important, division in society along with ethnicity, gender, age, disability, etc. They offer a number of explanations for ‘the death of class’. The development of welfare states and the institutionalization of class conflict have reduced the direct impact of class relationships. Property has increasingly moved from private hands to being owned by organisations and the division of labour has become more complex. Moreover, increasing affluence for the majority has meant that most people are able to choose what they consume and therefore they are able to create their identities. Class background no longer restricts people’s opportunities, confining them to a particular pattern of life and range of experiences. Judith Stacey argues that the greater choice for women gives them the ability to break out of there patriarchal oppression and shape their families to their needs. Therefore, women are the main agents of family change, by changing their role. For example, many reject the traditional house-wife mother role for a career or higher qualifications. Jeffery Weeks; growing acceptance of diversity. Weeks identified that there are shifts in attitudes since the 1950s. The shifts in attitudes are: sexual morality is mostly a matter of personal choice, Church and state have lost the potency to influence morality and there are favourable attitudes to homosexuality and cohabitation. However, despite these changes in attitudes Weeks states that family patterns are not changing; most people want marriage, children are mostly still brought up by couples and many people who divorce get re-married. To contradict this, the New Right and functionalists would disagree and say that the patriarchal nuclear family is the best family as it meets the needs of society. To conclude, I believe that the nuclear family can have a negative impact on its members, which feminist would agree. However, all types of families, e.g. reconstituted family can have a negative impact on its members also. But, the nuclear family is seen to be the traditional family which people have been living in for centuries, so it can therefore be suggested that the changes in society have negatively affected the nuclear family, e.g. equality legislation, and therefore promoted, discreetly, alternative families.

Battle of Long Island in the American Revolution

The Battle of Long Island was fought August 27-30, 1776 during the American Revolution (1775-1783). Following his successful capture of Boston in March 1776, General George Washington began shifting his troops south to New York City. Correctly believing the city to be the next British target, he set about preparing for its defense. This work had commenced in February under the guidance of  Major General Charles Lee and continued under the supervision of Brigadier General William Alexander, Lord Stirling in March. Despite the efforts, a lack of manpower meant that the planned fortifications were not complete by late spring. These included a variety of redoubts, bastions, and Fort Stirling overlooking the East River. Reaching the city, Washington established his headquarters in the former home of Archibald Kennedy on Broadway near Bowling Green and began devising a plan to hold the city. As he lacked naval forces, this task proved difficult as New Yorks rivers and waters would permit the British to outflank any American positions. Realizing this, Lee lobbied Washington to abandon the city. Though he listened to Lees arguments, Washington decided to remain at New York as he felt the city possessed significant political importance. Armies Commanders Americans General George Washingtonapprox. 10,000 men British General William Howeapprox. 20,000 men Washingtons Plan To defend the city, Washington divided his army into five divisions, with three at the south end of Manhattan, one at Fort Washington (northern Manhattan), and one on Long Island. The troops on Long Island were led by Major General Nathanael Greene. A capable commander, Greene was struck down by with fever in the days before the battle and command devolved to Major General Israel Putnam. As these troops moved into position, they continued work on the citys fortifications. On Brooklyn Heights, a large complex of redoubts and entrenchments took shape that included the original Fort Stirling and ultimately mounted 36 guns. Elsewhere, hulks were sunk to deter the British from entering the East River. In June the decision was made to construct Fort Washington at the northern end of Manhattan and Fort Lee across in New Jersey to prevent passage up the Hudson River. Howes Plan On July 2, the British, led by General William Howe and his brother Vice Admiral Richard Howe, began arriving and made camp on Staten Island. Additional ships arrived throughout the month adding to the size of the British force. During this time, the Howes attempted to negotiate with Washington but their offers were consistently rebuffed. Leading a total of 32,000 men, Howe prepared his plans for taking New York while his brothers ships secured control of the waterways around the city. On August 22, he moved around 15,000 men across the Narrows and landed them at Gravesend Bay. Meeting no resistance, British forces, led by Lieutenant General Lord Charles Cornwallis, advanced to Flatbush and made camp. Moving to block the British advance, Putnams men deployed onto a ridge known as the Heights of Guan. This ridge was cut by four passes at Gowanus Road, Flatbush Road, Bedford Pass, and Jamaica Pass. Advancing, Howe feinted towards Flatbush and Bedford Passes causing Putnam to reinforce these positions. Washington and Putnam hoped to entice the British into mounting costly direct assaults on the heights before pulling their men back into the fortifications on Brooklyn Heights. As the British scouted the American position, they learned from local Loyalists that Jamaica Pass was only defended by five militiamen. This information was passed to Lieutenant General Henry Clinton who devised an attack plan using this route. The British Attack As Howe discussed their next steps, Clinton had his plan for moving through Jamaica Pass at night and flanking the Americans put forward. Seeing an opportunity to crush the enemy, Howe approved the operation. To hold the Americans in place while this flank attack was developing, a secondary attack would be launched near Gowanus by Major General James Grant. Approving this plan, Howe set it in motion for the night of August 26/27. Moving through Jamaica Pass undetected, Howes men fell upon Putnams left wing the following morning. Breaking under British fire, American forces began retreating toward the fortifications on Brooklyn Heights (Map). On the far right of the American line, Stirlings brigade defended against Grants frontal assault. Advancing slowly to pin Stirling in place, Grants troops took heavy fire from the Americans. Still not fully grasping the situation, Putnam ordered Stirling to remain in position despite the approach of Howes columns. Seeing disaster looming, Washington crossed to Brooklyn with reinforcements and took direct control of the situation. His arrival was too late to save Stirlings brigade. Caught in a vise and fighting desperately against overwhelming odds, Stirling was slowly forced back.   As the bulk of his men withdrew, Stirling led a force Maryland troops in rearguard action that saw them delay the British before being captured. Their sacrifice allowed the remainder of Putnams men to escape back to Brooklyn Heights. Within the American position at Brooklyn, Washington possessed around 9,500 men. While he knew that the city could not be held without the heights, he was also aware that Admiral Howes warships could cut his lines of retreat to Manhattan. Approaching the American position, Major General Howe elected to begin building siege lines rather than directly assaulting the fortifications. On August 29, Washington realized the true danger of the situation and ordered a withdrawal to Manhattan. This was conducted during the night with Colonel John Glovers regiment of Marblehead sailors and fisherman manning the boats. Aftermath The defeat at Long Island cost Washington 312 killed, 1,407 wounded, and 1,186 captured. Among those captured were Lord Stirling and Brigadier General John Sullivan. British losses were a relatively light 392 killed and wounded. A disaster for American fortunes in New York, the defeat at Long Island was the first in a string of reverses which culminated in the British capture of the city and surrounding area. Badly defeated, Washington was forced retreat across New Jersey that fall, finally escaping into Pennsylvania. American fortunes finally changed for the better that Christmas when Washington won a needed victory at the Battle of Trenton.