For this assignment, I found a story related to the two 9/11 works which were assigned in this week’s learning journal. This piece, entitled “Are we winning the battle against terrorism?” is a relatively recent debate between Thomas Mockaitis, professor of History at DePaul University, and Jon Alterman, Center for Stategic and International Studies. They are asked if we are making progress in the fight against terrorism. The first writer, Mockaitis, seems to have a positive view that the U.S. and its allies are making headway on defeating terrorists. He feels that the opinion of the general public is that we are losing the war.
As apparent in Document C, in which the quintessential “nuclear family” sits in a bunker, concerns about nuclear war stood at the front of the American ethos. This fear of nuclear war was also reflected in Document E, in which the question is posed of whether or not the “U.S. [should] take the first blow?” This question of “whether a policy of accepting the first blow may be the best one” became intertwined within the minds of the America people, heightening American fears. President Eisenhower, while addressing the issue of the Soviet Union and its subsequent tensions through nearly doubling “defense spending…of government spending” (Document H). However, the Eisenhower administration failed to successfully mollify these fears, apparent in the inauguration of President John F. Kennedy, who pledged not to “dare to tempt [challenging nations] with weakness” (Document I).
Between the two Walter Mitty stories one is obviously better. the text is the better one because it doesn’t try to be funny it takes humor from real life situations. In the movie they try too hard to make it funny and it makes the jokes half as funny as they could be. In the scenes where he is day dreaming about the girl it is not something that the real Walter Mitty would daydream about. In the text it describes him as being the hero in his day dreams There are multiple reasons that the text version of Walter Mitty is better than the movie.
The book states that the Nuremberg trials were indeed fair to the defence however, the allies used the trials as political vengeance. The second part of the book goes into analysing the achievements of Nuremberg and the misapprehensions. These misapprehensions are critiqued in terms of the behaviour governments have with the lack of law against nuclear weapons. If Nuremberg set out to achieve a new mindset with war and peace, why are there no sanctions against nuclear weaponry? This book was essential in understanding how the trials set an example for future international law against warfare.
The Cold War was so called because of its lack of direct fighting between the two major powers. Instead, it was a proxy war, in which smaller countries fought on behalf of the primary powers. It escalated as a result of the ideological opposition between American capitalism and Russian communism and became a prominent factor in American life during the second half of the 20th century. As the two dominant powers following the second World War, contention between the two became a global conflict. The element that made the Cold War different from other wars was its significant use of propaganda, but its impacts were hardly “cold”.
When I first read the story, it was very slow. The way it started in the first chapter did not really catch my attention, and it is also because I am not into war stories. Usually when I read books, it would immediately catch my attention, in which this book has not. Another key factor that I did not like about this book is that there should be more fighting scenes, or more experiences. A good fight scene between the soldiers and the Vietnam people would have catched all of our attention, because everyone likes a good fighting description.
I feel this fact is vastly overlooked because the ideological oppositions in the war was a major player in its existence in general. owing to that fact, the Gorbachev administration, who came into power in 1985 began to implement programs to rejuvenate the soviet economy, as it was severely lacking. The Glasnost and Perestroika initiatives opened up incentives for Soviet citizens as well as provided the once shackled eastern bloc and Soviet citizens new freedoms they never previously possessed (The End). Lowered barriers allowed for access to printed materials and the greater opportunity for travel, which in turn brought new understanding to Soviet officials, and helped to establish the “new methods of thinking” that characterized the Gorbachev administration (Détente). Very accurately put, Freedom is very addictive (The End), and not many that experience such a thing are quick to go back to previously restrictive regulations.
History is all about inspiring speeches, gruesome wars, and unexpected events that decide the course of the future. The Cold War is not an example of a war, but a highly important event, considering there was no actual fighting. The Cold War started because the Soviet 's wanted to spread communism, but America was getting in their way to stop it. Three major factors also contributed to the conflict of war, the most obvious one being the U.S. wanted to stop communism, another being both the Soviet Union and the United States were afraid of each other, and finally competition, because everyone needs some good competition. These factors are both reasons why the war started, and "weapons" that were used.
These relations did not last long as the Cold War commenced (White, 27). Although, the two powers were not each other’s major trading partners, the few economic relations they had were destroyed as the nations tried to promote their ideologies and opposing the other’s influence in additional countries. During the Cold War, U. S
Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a wonderful read, however there is one major flaw that is hard to look past. Science. Science is the Achilles heel of Stevenson’s writings, as it is probably something he himself does not fully understand. Though I am mostly sure Stevenson is logical enough to understand that it is entirely impossible to split a human into two separate beings, it is my thought that even his lack of science is a bit disappointing even for the average reader. The science of Jekyll and Hyde is minimally described, if at all.