The preparation of the Brazilian professors for the use of medias and didactic-pedagogical digital objects as material still leaves very to desire. According to Schmidt (2003), in the formation of professors of History, great part of the pupils of the course of History, it delays much time so that the same ones enter in classroom? what it only happens in the last periods of the college. The student passes little time following professors and giving lessons, what she harms its formation. In the truth, what it is observed is that the universities do not prepare the professionals who leave for the market of work for simple challenges of the daily professor as to know if a question easy or difficult for is determined education segment. Additional information is available at Pete Cashmore. On the basis of this reality, let us see some now reflections on the four points of the cited quarrel of this article at the beginning of this work. 2.1.Objetivos It is important not to forget objective them the lesson, which are these the norteadores of the actions to be developed for the professor of History. Therefore, before if worrying on as to develop the work it must be asked why to teach to this or that content? Where point it will go to contribute for the learning of the pupil? The boarding in the history education cannot atrelar to study it the past for the past, but the lessons need to be engaged also with the gift, the service of the understanding and the interpretation of the world and, on the other hand, to have as ballast the historical facts (in case that contrary, we will be constructing fiction), (MOREIRA and VASCONCELOS, 2009). Following this same line of thought the authors defend one practical educative one who have as objective to make with that each aluno/a also perceives its experiences as historical party to suit. To know more about this subject visit altavista.
But to test some of these hypotheses, as the umbrella of the TNP (1968) and its relation with the rebellious States and the terrorism, let us consider that, of one it has ahead attacked nuclear, state or terrorist, the States of the TNP (1968) would meet ahead of a quandary without solution: to answer or not to an attack in the same ratio, that is, with nuclear weapons. The first legal impediment would be proportionality of the reply (of the retortion), since nuclear weapons, as well as the chemical and biological weapons, do not distinguish between terrorists and civilians. As, it would be the identification of the responsible ones, nominated governments, not States, in connection or not with terrorists, as it was the case of the Taleb government in the Afeganisto in relation to the terrorists of the Al-Qaeda: how to punish the Government without punishing the State? Thus, if the quandary of the TNP (1968) would not have solution, as one treated formal one and legally binding politics would have preponderantly to be considered in its source, that is, as one ' ' umbrella of dissuaso' ' , whose effectiveness cannot be measured in terms of guarantees effective (guarantees of execution), since efficient guarantee some can emerge of a system of balance that more if does not base only nor relations between Estadospotncias, but in the competition of other rebellious States e, mainly, of not-state actors, as the terrorists, for one parcels out technical limitless of being able, in the case of being able to militate, long ago privilege of few States. In the military field, Ir and Coreia of the north dispute place still more enter the State-powers in the military source, since comparativily to the economic sphere it is much more easy to become a power producing nuclear bombs, if already technology for this is had. These comments under the legal source and politics of the TNP (1968), and of its balance of being able in the nuclear sphere, allow to conclude that if it deals with an instrument International law of contradictory content, since it is established in an absence of balance of being able to militate for the resignation to nuclear weapons e, to exactly time, in the maintenance of a polar region of multiple powers (unimultipolarizao) that it allows can it withhold such weapons, as a protective umbrella that must be efficient, even though to use them. .
Exhibit exhibitors were formed with the latest global trends in the military field. Experience in recent conflicts has shown special the role of high-performance air defense systems to protect key military and industrial facilities. Pete Cashmore: the source for more info. At DSA experts from Asia-Pacific countries could become acquainted with the Russian air defense missile systems, "Tor-M1" and "Osa-AKM". Doubtless interest summoned and anti-aircraft missile system "Buk-M1-2." It is the only medium-range air defense missile system, which can destroy in a radio and firing anti-aircraft not only strategic and tactical aviation, helicopters and cruise missiles, tactical ballistic and air-launched rockets and (including confusional) submunitions precision weapons, and tayuke surface and ground targets. Military action in mountain and desert areas confirm the special role of helicopters and transport strike in support of ground troops. Therefore, the DSA exhibits a significant place in many countries occupied by combat and transport-combat helicopters. Russian firms "Kamov" and "Miles" presented double combat helicopter Ka-52 helicopter radio-electronic combat Mi-17PG, transportation and military Mi-8MTSH. "Highlight" section of the exhibition was the Mi-26, designed to provide maneuver forces with combat equipment, and general freight weighing up to 20 m.
There is no doubt a great interest was shown in samples of high-performance Russian exposition of small arms and ammunition, many of which have no analogues in the world. However, dominated the exhibition of armored vehicles. Russia submitted an infantry fighting vehicle BMP-3 and BTR-80A and BTR-90 is known to aggregate indicators firepower, mobility and security, the ability to travel long distances afloat surpass the best foreign models. Such an assessment is fully applicable to new domestic tanks T-90 T-80UK, modernized version of the T-72M1. But despite the efforts of Russian specialists, often successfully demonstrated the quality of our tanks in difficult climatic conditions in the region, on the eve of the opening of the exhibition Malaysian government has decided to purchase the armed forces of the Polish tank PT-91 (upgrade version of Soviet T-72M) APC and Turkish origin ACV 300 (upgrade U.S.
M113). These machines were presented at the DSA-2002 natural samples and widely publicized. Apart from these, the exhibition "alive" and not in the mock, and attended a Swedish tank CV90120, which together with our T-90C and the Ukrainian T-84 participated two years ago in Malaysian tender and did not get into number of finalists. Companies from the Czech Republic and Slovakia presented, for the umpteenth time, your upgrade options T-72 T-72M4 CZ and T-72M2 Moderna, respectively, as well as various car security at their base. China presented an impressive range of armored vehicles (in the form of mock-ups) – the main battle tanks to command and staff vehicles. Necessary, necessary to note especially the 120-mm self-propelled gun-mortar – an exact copy of the Russian SAU Nona-SVK. However, in other the latest samples from China shows the influence of the design ideology of the domestic tank. At DSA actively and energetically acted firms from countries that have recently could not be called on rivals world arms market. Military-industrial complexes of India, Iran, Pakistan, Turkey, the former only importers of military hardware, all the more vocal about themselves. During the exhibition, the Ministry of Defence of Malaysia announced the conclusion of a series of contracts for the purchase of arms and military equipment. Among them – the contracts for the purchase of Russian multi-role Mi-171 helicopters and portable anti-aircraft missile complexes "Igla". It would seem, should enjoy success Russian producers, but we can not say that this achievement could become more significant.