The Vietnam War proved to be the longest war in both Australian and American history in the 20th century but presented a lot of debate as well as mixed opinions about Australia’s actions and involvement. The USA, who lead the operation and campaign, purely took part in the War to prevent the spread of communism globally, and also to prevent the domino effect from occurring in neighbouring countries in Asia. Furthermore, the Viet Cong were fighting the North Vietnamese government to improve Vietnam, which was under communist rule. However the alliance with America that Australia had, through SEATO and also ANZUS treaties, played a major factor and also a trigger for our involvement. Australia feared communism, and was definitely a key threat which ultimately forced us to contribute to the Vietnam War.
All in all, Source 1 and 2 both have a different stance on how the Draft should or shouldn’t be available. While both do give their beneficial ideals, Source 2 was more logical with its stand than Source 1s idea of unity and income. However, both sources use the reason that Draft shouldn’t be passed from World war and Vietnam. For example, “ Vietnam was a war of attrition without a clear victory condition or civilian peace-building component, and thus unlike our more recent conflicts” (Source 1). Also , “First of all, World War II and the Vietnam conflict, both of which were very costly in terms of human life for numerous reasons, were also both wars of conscription, as was the Civil War, the bloodiest conflict in American history in terms of American lives lost” (Source 2).
Civil forfeiture was originally created with noble and worthwhile intentions. The goal was to battle against crime and budgetary restrictions at the same time, which is very logical. However, over the years civil forfeiture has been warped, and in many cases causes more harm than good. It is important to understand both the positive and negative aspects of civil forfeiture in order to see the big picture of the situation and be able to stand against the issue as a member of society. At its base, civil forfeiture is a law enforcement tool with many different functions.
Although it was preceded by the Pumunkeys experience with aggressive Spanish conquistadors and traders, the actions of the English were a decisive factor in the escalation of the conflict. Had the English colonists not attempted to assert dominance and expected war, the Pumunkeys may not have retaliated with such brutal force. Had the Pumunkeys not sought to expand their influence over other indigenous peoples, they might have recognized the threat the English posed over them and not aided them to the extent that they did. Ultimately, though, the burden of the conflict falls on the more aggressive which was certainly the leaders of the English colonist such as Captain Smith and those who succeeded him. If the English had not assumed that they would be able to easily dominate all of the natives, and instead tried to maintain meaningful and lasting good ties with the Pumunkeys and their allies, both societies could have avoided a devastating war and forged an alliance that would have strengthened them
Many educated individuals know about the past history the United States have been in. Most of the time it was started for political reasons rather than freedom abilities. Other times it was set out to seek independence from other nations or certain individuals. Above it all, what the main concern was when it was settled out for combat. Back then the settlers would be the unfortunate victims who had to fight for the origin.
For over an extended period, the U.S. military has concentrated on expeditionary fighting abroad. Its support in household operations has been sporadic and for the most part in reaction to natural calamities. With the increased worry about wide-scale terrorism, have come endeavors to include DOD all the more intimately with the government, state and neighborhood offices in their country security exercises. DOD assets are interesting in the legislature, both in their size and capacities and can be connected to both stops and react to terrorist acts. While the DOD administration is prepared and willing to play a supporting part in these endeavors, it wishes to keep up abroad military operations as the Department 's primary center and evade a channel
As part of its intervention, the United States have been sending troops to fight in other countries. Most times the U.S. send troops to overthrow autocratic rulers and build democracy. There is also another kind of intervention, it takes place during crisis to provide humanitarian aid. However, in both cases, the U.S. government should make a clear and thoughtful strategic decision before getting involved and send troops under any condition. Later on it becomes difficult to withdraw the troops and bring them back home due to the unclear reasons from the beginning.
It would be, then and now, misinterpreted and cause some troubles that some would say cost more than its worth. This part and the parts to come are, I would assume, going to include a lot of history; history of the amendment, why it was made, what it meant then, and how it was used in the past (or how it affected everyday life). Due to the fact I’m not well educated in this I am excited to see what else I end up
It is perhaps opportunely that our government is able to push through boundaries and traditions to come up with resolutions and better policies/laws. All this time, the Philippine Economy has been deemed to have strong growth hindered by political uncertainties. This is so true. We have a potential to be great and yet we still move slow towards our development and sustainability. Our country has its own strengths and weaknesses that affect positively and/or negatively our over-all status.
So, America decided to fight the Spanish to protect its imports, but also to receive the opportunity to expand. Theodore Roosevelt and his Rough Riders ousted the Spanish, and Spain was forced to concede Puerto Rico, which America claimed as its own, Guam, and the Philippine Islands. In doing so, the Americans were fulfilling the Monroe Doctrine, although imperialism was thought to be a more favorable foreign policy. Puerto Rico was then shaped into this massive sugar plantation at America 's disposal. In conclusion, America 's expansion outcomes were normally because of the economy.
The Articles were a stepping stone which led to the Constitution however the Articles contained more weaknesses than strengths which forced the colonists to get rid of them and create a new document. Prior to the Revolutionary War, many of the original
If the war had not been won, independence would not have been given, and America most likely would not be what it is today. Another reason that the war is impactful is that it led to the ability to have government. The government was also finally able to publish laws. Without success in the war, having a good government would be difficult. This is because in
The casualty rate has increased form the stricter ROEs get. The reason being that if I see a threat and cant engage it when I know I can stop the threat from causing harm/damage. In the Vietnam War the casualty rate was far higher. The reason there being that the ROEs where so closed in the beginning that even if you did see the threat that you could not and where not allowed to engage the theat. I am not saying that this is the only reason that the Vietnam casualty rate was so high but is one of the leading factors.
The Declaration of Independence v. The US Constitution The Declaration of Independence is more important than the US Constitution because of how the contents changed America, socially and politically. For instance, without the Declaration of Independence, technically, the United States would not officially be separated from Great Britain. The Declaration of Independence addressed how King George III violated the rights of the men in the colonists. Yet the US Constitution laid the laws of the land, some of these amendments are still argued with, and not all people believe that they are executed how they should be or some just disagree with them completely. Furthermore, the Declaration of Independence is frequently mentioned in today’s political