Jump to content

Any history buffs?


Kesler

Recommended Posts

1) The role of the great leader was paramount in the establishment and consolidation of governments during the interwar period 1917 to 1950.

2) To what extent did non-democratic states have more influences than democratic states on the major events from 1917 to 1950?

3) The USA has sought to make the world safe for itself, not "to make the world safe for democracy". (1917 - 1950 examples)

 

I only need to prep for 2 of them but which 2 do you think have the most content/are easiest? And how would I answer it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For question 3, the us didnt really enter ww1 until their merchant ships were sunk by german subs, and in ww2 didnt enter until pearl harbor was attacked. Also already had a lot of hostility with japanese before the war as they were competing for the pacific. Point is while they kinda sorta were fighting for democracy it was more they were attacked and their interests

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

#3 he got perfectly.

 

#1 I think would be the easiest to do. Just look at the power individual leaders had at the time. Hitler helped Germany out of the recession, so people loved him and followed him everywhere. Vladimir Ulyanov(Lenin) led the October Revolution and really cemented the ideal of Marxism in Russia, and Stalin, I mean, look at how he controlled that country with an iron fist. Churchill was very influential and I don't think Britain would've gotten through the war without him, and you can counterpoint that with Neville Chamberlain, who's policy of appeasement basically allowed WWII to start. Eisenhower, obviously, so influential because of his work to help get us out of the Great Depression that he got 4 terms, helped get the US out of the isolationist mindset, and his negatives(like trying to replace Supreme Court justices with his own) get largely forgotten. You could counterpoint it with Mussolini, he had enough power to be in charge, but once the people started suffering and being attacked, Italy overthrew him. Also, I think this is after the interwar period, but Syngman Rhee, leader of South Korea, purposefully held up peace talks to try and prolong the Korean War and tried to be a dictator, which led to him being hated and eventually overthrown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3) The USA has sought to make the world safe for itself, not "to make the world safe for democracy". (1917 - 1950 examples)

 

what would be a thesis statement for this? like could I turn this into a to what extent question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, eaglesfan036 said:

please there is a reason murica spends so much on military it's to fend off all of the candians imo

Getting your White House burnt down once was enough eh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

I love number 3, I actually wrote a paper on that in my foreign policy class back in university. Except our timeframe was everything so I wrote about the war in Kuwait being one of the most self serving American fights in history.

 

Number 2 would be easy to research providing you have a good digital archive to draw upon, you could go back and look at the status of each of the states in the US and see what they voted in congress during the war was.

Edited by tfong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Victor said:
26 minutes ago, Victor said:

From what? The USA was under attack?

 

 

(Islands in the middle of nowhere do not count)

From what? The USA was under attack?

 

 

(Islands in the middle of nowhere do not count)

By storming Normandy and winning the war duh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, jaladolar said:

By storming Normandy and winning the war duh

Actually I think the Canadians most important contributions to Normandy was the "Dieppe Raid," which I had to do a brief presentation on in Grade 12. Basically the Dieppe Raid was a catastrophic fail version of Normundy by a Canadian legion. It's where the Allies learned that storming a beachfront on low ground is really shitty and dangerous thing to do. Without that battle, Normundy would have failed just as hard, and then maybe the war doesn't end for another X years or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
12 minutes ago, JardyB10 said:

Actually I think the Canadians most important contributions to Normandy was the "Dieppe Raid," which I had to do a brief presentation on in Grade 12. Basically the Dieppe Raid was a catastrophic fail version of Normundy by a Canadian legion. It's where the Allies learned that storming a beachfront on low ground is really shitty and dangerous thing to do. Without that battle, Normundy would have failed just as hard, and then maybe the war doesn't end for another X years or something.

 

Lets not also forget poor artillery and air support.

 

But the Battle of Caen is a much better symbol of victory for Canadians for Normandy.

Edited by tfong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...