The Reign of Terror did not support the ideals of the revolution. Unfortunately for French citizens, they were not able to elect tribunal members. The tribunal members, who have absolute power were “appointed by the National Convention” (Document E). French people were rejected in their own country, which is proven by the statement that “conspirators are, in its eyes, only strangers”(Document G). The original ideals were made to protect the people of France but instead they were killing
Rhetorical Analysis of “Losing the War” by Lee Sandlin War is an incredibly ambiguous phenomenon. In today’s world it feels easy to forget anything but life in relative peace. World War II shook the globe. Now, it has has dwindled to mere ripples in between pages of history textbooks and behind the screens of blockbuster films. In Lee Sandlin’s spectacular essay, “Losing the War,” he explains that in the context of World War II, the “amnesia effect” of time has lead to a bizarre situation; “the next generation starts to wonder whether the whole thing [war] ever actually happened,” (361).
A big gain of ego. Which also meant the Allies were able to move on quickly through Europe and they won the whole war. The base the Allies had in Normandy allowed them to ship men and materials all over europe. This invasion shipped about 1.36 million men into Europe which very quickly beat Germany’s 420,000. On D Day the Germans were being attacked by both sides basically squishing them and cornered which meant they had to eventually surrender.
He wanted to believe that the colonist would eventually give in but that was never the case. King George III was a smart man but let his power hungry personality get in the way of his rational decision making. Killing England gives the readers insight on what was actually going on during the time of the American Revolution. Many people such as George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, and many others paved this road for us today to live in this great nation. Their hard work and sacrifice is something honorable to look at.
After a few more paragraphs the people warmed up to Kennedy and really supports what he does. Near the end of the speech he uses a hortative sentence that stuck with the American people ever since. He said “And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country,” This is a quote that gets Americans excited 50 years after he said it. Kennedy was very smart in the wording of this quote, he used pathos by getting them passionate about America, he used a hortative sentence which urged the America people to help their country become prosperous. He also used ethos by appealing to their emotion, after a well written speech about his goals he used this quote to get the American people working and helping America become a flourishing country.
The world is not prepared for the form of government. America is not united and will break away easily if the government decides to change, and other countries will take advantage of their weakness. Little issues like feminism, no wi-fi, colds, and other first world problems break up the nation. If something this dramatic was to happen, there is no way anybody could invasion the catastrophe it could create. The population would have no chance against a whole government and their enforcers.
I believe that you won 't allow that to happen to them. If you don 't help the refugees and pass by on this genocide, what will happen the next time one is being carried out? Will you let it pass? Will you deny us and the others down the line the right of life, that which we so desperately need? Other countries will think of you as weak and pathetic for not being able to take care of a small militia, you and your country will be a disgrace all because you didn 't want to take a chance when the odds were in
These are some concerns about Al Qaeda and what they will do next. "He noted that the United States did not have a broad, integrated plan to stop the next generation of terrorist and that the United States was putting relatively little effort in to a long range plan"(Meehan). The United States needs to get a plan together to stop the next generation of terrorist (which will be meaner than these). "Also at the same time, because of our choice of military confrontation, the nature of the threat that we have faced has changed"(Smith). Which means, The United States hasn 't chosen the best ways to go about thing at times.
However, the liberal and progressive organizations that usually would have protected the civil liberties of the victims of McCarthyism backed down from the task. Although numerous Americans were disturbed and troubled by McCarthy’s allegations, there was an absence of effective outlets for them to express their opposition. Therefore, liberals and progressives merely did not mount a campaign against McCarthyism nor did they defend the victims’ civil liberties, or when few tried, it was not effective. Schrecker argues, “The destruction of the front groups and the left-led unions may well have had a more deleterious impact on American politics than the decline of the (Communist) party itself.” (Schrecker 105). This is because, as seen in the example of McCarthyism, with the demise of the left-led unions and organizations, the nation lost the network that created a public space where legitimate alternatives to the status quo could be presented.