The type of peace, temporary or more permanent, depends on how long it will last as conflict is a part of human nature, leading to the conclusion peace can lead to war. A temporary peace can be compared to putting a band-aid over a bullet hole; it might hold and stop the blood on the surface but there’s much more damage in the inside. The Treaty of Versailles was a band-aid to the other world problems after WW1. First when the treaty was being written the US, Britain and France could not agree to which degree the terms against Germany should be. The US wanted “peace without victory”, France wanted to cripple Germany and gain security from the treaty and Britain wanted middle ground of wat the US and Germany wanted (Treaty of Versailles: How America, France & Britain Benefited.).
Political rivals could stop plans from moving forward because they disliked the writer of those plans. Alexander Hamilton wrote, “The only enemy that the republic had to fear is the effects of political parties. It will prevent the government from achieving its goals and create disorder…”(Document 2). Alexander Hamilton wrote this document to criticize his opponents, however in this he also criticizes political parties. Also in the same letter he states, “...harmful to the principles of good government and dangerous to the union, peace and happiness of this country…” In that document he was talking about the head of the rival party.
They both fought for what they thought is right, and wanted the people involved with the country. Back in the later days France was fond of the United States because of their support in the war. Making no reason for France to dislike America. Thomas Jefferson has great respect for France and made a clear choice that he would rather have France as an ally than
President Roosevelt started to bring America out of the Great Depression that it once was in, but he had to handle the challenge the Supreme Court put on him by not passing a few acts from his New Deal. President Roosevelt believed that the states were not in the right mind to think for themselves to get out of the Great Depression, the Depression would just continue and only deteriorate. President Roosevelt put his head together with brainstormers he hired to come up with the Court Packing Plan that he sent to the Supreme Court; hence, this causing an uproar among the nation. Furthermore, the plan ended pershing having President Roosevelt being humiliated and shamed for trying to control the Supreme Court and destroying checks and balances even though he tried to help America when he thought it would die and perish. However, America was soon brought all the way out of the Great Depression by entering into World War
This idea of leadership style, combined with looking at what Theodore Roosevelt did during his presidency, is very similar to Trump’s way of leading our nation, although they came into office with different political experience. The speech is very much focused on nationalism and on foreign diplomacy, which foreshadows such focus throughout Theodore Roosevelt’s presidency. His clear nationalist emphasis is seen when he mentions that all citizens have a duty and all must work hard, which works to his advantage in getting the attention of the middle, working class and placing himself as a populist, since he says “our first duty is to our own people” (Roosevelt, 1905). By doing so, he quickly gained the attention of the media and the love of the public, which is what allowed him to win another term
He soon developed the reputation of an oppressor and a man not worthy of being head of America. In conclusion, there is much evidence to support the idea that Andrew Jackson was a tyrant and vastly abused his power in presidency. Jackson was a cruel ruler for his actions, some including the Indian Removal Act, his overuse of vetoing, and his temper and personality. Overall he was just not right for the position of a political
In the second paragraph it states, irrational and reckless choices and actions, this is true owing to Tino’s actions made Paul feel sad and fearful. Throughout the book the consequences of Tino’s actions and choices, positive or negative, haunted Paul and affected Paul’s future decisions. I predict that if Tino had not made those decisions Paul would not be in the place that he is in now. In the third paragraph it says, Dire time made Tino make rash and unfair choices and actions that had positive and negative consequences on Paul. This is also true by cause of the choices Tino made were rash and unfair in the way that he hurt Paul very deeply.
Andrew Jackson: A Monster Some may think that Andrew Jackson was a hero, but his horrific actions during his time as president, prove otherwise. While he was president, he did many things that made a negative impact to our country. Nobody should forget these things, for they are what make him a monster. Those things include, The Trail of Tears, the fact that he enjoyed violence, and that he was a murderer. To begin, Andrew Jackson was the reason that so many Indians had to leave their homes.
"The United States government did something that was wrong — deeply, profoundly, morally wrong. It was an outrage to our commitment to integrity and equality for all our citizens... clearly racist." Even before the speech was given, there was fierce public disapproval at the study. The trial was widely regarded as unethical and racist by both experts and the general public (Brookes and Paul e12). There was widespread cry that the Tuskegee study was outrageously immoral and cruel, even deceiving towards the victims.
In fact, Joseph McCarthy himself suffered this consequence: “It was his clash with the Army that would lead to his downfall” (Robert 3). By accusing the Army of treason, he lost respect in the population and bad opinions spread around, ruining his power streak.This risk prevented these kinds of people from succumbing to actions that would sabotage their reputation. In addition, McCarthyism allowed these kinds of nasty people, such as McCarthy, to act upon unsightly desires. Therefore, the McCarthy trials encouraged the conflict between
This violence could continue and cause France to become weak. These are just a few of the main reasons why the Federalists wanted to ally Great Britain. However, they had strong competition on this issue. The Democratic-Republican party thought that allying with the French government would insure prosperity. “The
Alliances helped cause the war because nations would be against each other and they would also want to be dominant. Although there were many reasons that caused World War I, Militarism, Imperialism, and Allies were the main factors. Militarism made nations want to prove their power. Imperialism caused distrust and propaganda. Allies caused nations to fight for dominance.
Washington also warned that this rebellion was an embarrassment to the new nation and seemed to support the nation’s enemies across the sea’s theory that the people are unfit to govern themselves. Washington’s alarm and disapproval was so great that the events of Shay’s Rebellion convinced him to come out of retirement. Other elite figures saw Shay’s Rebellion in a similar light to Washington’s opinion. They saw it as a call for a stronger central government. Thomas Jefferson was one of the few elite figures who did not object to Shay’s Rebellion saying “I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing.” Overall, Washington and other elite figures did not support Shay’s Rebellion.
Aside from social welfare was his belief to keep French and English speaking Canadians united.The unity of the country was very important to King, he was a nation-builder and avoided making controversial decisions and tried to stay natural. For example, at the beginning of the second world war King promised that there would be no conscription, but as the war continued he understood that he could not keep
Hamilton, in the way he shaped the government, is considered rather shady, for lack of a better word; he took any methods to get what needed to be done, done. This was what typically led to the Jeffersonians’ attacks on him: not only were his actions, at times, difficult to justify, but they made him an easy target for the preying Jeffersonians. If we are to judge the parties solely by their figureheads, then we must take into account Jefferson himself, rather than basing our opinions of the Federalists on Hamilton’s ruthlessness and then taking an angle that makes the Jeffersonians Hamilton’s complete opposites. For all of Hamilton’s low points, it must be remembered that Jefferson was not so noble himself: the ideological differences between Federalists and Jeffersonians brought out the worst in the Founders. The fear of the “Hamiltonian juggernaut,” running a successful development of the nation’s government, was what triggered Jefferson’s increasingly vengeful moves against him and the Federalists.