The Cold War Times A Theory Of Containment - 1073 Words

Question 1: During cold war times, the US’ had a theory of containment. Containment made to stop the spread of communism, because it was thought that if the US could not stop communist countries than it could work on stopping communism from spreading. In 1954, Vietnam was able to become independent from France. The country was divided along the 17th parallel, and North Vietnam and South Vietnam were created. Ho Chi Minh led North Vietnam and it had a communistic government, which was supported by China and the USSR. On the other hand, South Vietnam was a ‘democratic’ (anti-communism) government, which was led by Ngo Dinh Diem and supported by the US. During Diem’s regime, the government started to interrogate Buddhist priests. Diem was also known for treating the peasant class harshly, because he came from the property owning class. His government was also very corrupt, because he only appointed his family members to government roles00000. Diem’s tot alitarian government led to the rise of a communist group called the Vietcong. The Vietcong were a group that arose during Diem’s regime, they wanted to change South Vietnam into a communist country. Many non-communist citizens of the south also supported the Vietcong in hopes of ridding themselves of their corrupt government. The Vietcong was given supplies from North Vietnam along the Ho Chi Minh trail. They used guerrilla warfare to create fear in the hearts of their enemies. Using this strategy, they were able to kill theShow MoreRelatedThe Cold War Times : A Theory Of Containment904 Words   |  4 PagesQuestion 1: During cold war times, the US’ had a theory of containment. Containment made to stop the spread of communism, because it was thought that if the US could not stop communist countries than it could work on stopping communism from spreading. In 1954, Vietnam was able to become independent from France. The country was divided along the 17th parallel, and North Vietnam and South Vietnam were created. Ho Chi Minh led North Vietnam and it had a communistic government, which was supported byRead MoreThe Cold War And The Soviet Union980 Words   |  4 Pageswith Adolf Hitler’s declaring war on the United States, propelled America into World War II from 1939-1945. After War World II, the United States and the Soviet Union emerged as world powers, and the competition for the restructuring of Europe and the world was on. In the race for economic expansion, Americans loyalty and patriotism was tested influencing an urge to conform. However, the following events such as The Cold Wa r, Containment, Domino Theory, Containments failure, Cuban Missile CrisisRead MoreThe Soviet Union And The Cold War1038 Words   |  5 PagesAfter a series of events during the time of World War II, tensions between the United States and the Communists such as the Soviet Union and China, developed into a military and political conflict such as the Cold War. During the Cold War, which went on for 50 years, the Soviet Union and the United States competed to expand their economical and political influence. Although, the United States military has increased in size and it’s strategy. The United States power today is highly supreme when itRead MoreWorld Events And Trends Can Be Analyzed Through The Three Levels Of Analysis1511 Words   |  7 Pagespicture of how events unfold. The periods of the Cold War and the Post-Cold War period are not fully comparable by the standards of these three levels, but the conflicts that arise from this period are. On the individual level of analysis, Cold War conflicts started because of the fact that leaders became wary about the expansion of the opposite ideology, as well as encouraging the expansion of their own. This can be seen with the Vietnam War. This war started on the individual level because of PresidentRead MoreForeign Policy Decisions Of The United States888 Words   |  4 PagesUnited States of the Post-World War II era, one will find that the U.S. aimed to make pragmatic foreign policy decisions to strengthen its position in world politics. Some of these decisions may have given the U.S. economic advantages or helped spread democracy to the world. However, they were only the byproducts of a pragmatic strategy that aimed at giving the U.S. a larger sphere of influence in geopolitics over the Soviet Union. It is seen in the example of the Vietnam War that the U.S. favored a pragmaticRead MoreThe United States And Russia Essay1108 Words   |  5 Pagesemerged from WW2 as superpo wers. Both of these nations had vastly different ideologies regarding government and the economy. As these two nations struggled to gain increased power and influence globally it seemed almost inevitable that yet another war would ensew. Yet matters were complicated by what had originally been an American super weapon- the atomic bomb which first tests were conducted in 1945. This atomic bomb technology had been stolen by the soviets and each side now possessed enough ofRead MoreContainment Strategies During The Cold War1084 Words   |  5 PagesFebruary 2017 Containment Strategies in the Cold War During the Cold War, communism was spreading.   The three presidents Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy needed a way to stop it from spreading.   All Three turned to the idea of containment.   Ayers, et al. defines containment as a Policy by George F. Kennan, that started in the late 1940’s and was created to stop the spread of communism by providing economic aid, and military aid to countries opposing the Soviets.   All three cold war presidents hadRead MoreEssay The Power of Ideology1484 Words   |  6 Pagesideologies, there would be no call to use such a disparaging weapon. The ideas of influential leaders, both right and wrong, are more potent in war than what is universally understood. The world in actuality is ruled by them, and contrasting ideologies cause massive collateral damage. Conflicting ideologies of Communism and Capitalism were set aside in World War II when the Russians and the Americans united as allies to face Nazi Germany as the common enemy. With t he defeat of Germany, Russia and theRead MoreEssay on Examining the Possible Causes of the Cold War1309 Words   |  6 Pagesof the Cold War and how it developed into one of the largest unarmed struggles in history have been subject to much debate and consequently a number of schools of thought have developed as to the origins of the Cold War. These proposed explanations to the causes of the Cold War have consisted of the orthodox, revisionist and post-revisionist theories. Each theory demonstrates a different viewpoint as to how a variety of political, economic and militaristic factors instigated the Cold War TheRead MoreUnited States Containment Policy During the Cold War1003 Words   |  5 PagesDuring the Cold War, Americas basic policy was that of containment of the Soviet Union. The policy of containment was based upon several principles. First, the Soviet Union wanted to spread socialism to all areas of the world. However, it was felt that the leadership of the Soviet Union felt no particular rush to accomplish their goal. The Kremlin is under no ideological compulsion to accomplish its purposes in a hurry. Like the Church, it is dealing in ideological concepts which are of

Mahatma Gandhi and his non-violent struggle Free Essays

Mahatma Gandhi and his non-violent struggle against the British Empire was a result of the political situation in India. Prior to World War II, the world has witnessed the rise of the Soviet Union in terms of political and military power. We also saw the rise of popular national liberation movements across the colonized world. We will write a custom essay sample on Mahatma Gandhi and his non-violent struggle or any similar topic only for you Order Now In most colonies, the way of gaining independence from Western colonialism has been through the waging of armed revolutions, such as the struggle of the Chinese and the Malaysians, led by Mao Tsetung and Sukarno, respectively. However, such a type of struggle for Indian independence was essentially difficult in Indian society where a strict and clearly defined caste system was in place. The caste system hindered the creation of unity of Indians as a united people while transcending class divisions. More so, divisions between the ranks of the Indian people became more pronounced as fighting between rightist Hindu fundamentalists and left-wing communists never stopped, with both espousing violent means of securing Indian independence. All of these confused the majority of a people who continued to wallow in poverty and desolation. In all of these, Mahatma Gandhi emerged to present an alternative viewpoint, a seeming middle-ground between the pro-people radicalism of the left and the religious conservatism of the right. Related article: Favoring Pragmatism Over Principle It was founded on the principle of non-violent struggle. It dismantled all previous ideas that political power comes from the barrel of a gun. Gandhi turned the idea of revolution on its head and succeeded in doing so. While a major factor for their triumph was the waning power of the British empire after World War II, their struggle through non-violent means inspired other civil libertarians the world over to give peace and non-violent struggle a chance prior to the taking of arms. As can be seen from above, Mahatma Gandhi was clearly faced with almost immense tasks, particularly leading the Indian people in the path to independence, despite the power of the British Empire and the ethnic tensions evident in Indian society. At a time when almost the entire colonial peoples of the world were engaged in armed struggle, Gandhi decisively implemented his idea of non-violent struggle to force the British Empire to recognize their demands for sovereignty and independence. He utilized creative forms of protest, such as the non-payment of taxes, peaceful marches to the sea, even if these actions were met with brutal force by British security forces. One of the great things about Gandhi was his ability to present his vision of a free and independent India to the masses in very simple terms which could be clearly understood and grasped. More so, he fully understood that Indian culture was still basically rooted in Hinduism. He believed that the application of foreign theories such as Marxism and nationalism might isolate the independence movement from the vast majority of the people. He was also a very simple man, who embraced the entire cross-section of Indian society, even the so-called untouchables, to the extent of earning the ire of the elite Brahmin caste. As such, his own person was a concrete mobilizing force to move the Indian people into action and determine their destiny. On the other hand, a minor weakness of his leadership was the seeming personality cult that ensued even years after his death. This is shown by the absence of second-liners to continue his work in building a just and peaceful Indian society. While all the mass actions were joined by Indians from different castes, the focus was always primarily on Gandhi’s thoughts and decisions. Such a personality-based leadership, while effective in inspiring people into action, cannot work in the long-term insofar as empowering the people and sustaining the gains of Indian independence. This is due to the lack of a concrete organizational structure to effectively implement the ideas of Gandhi. Lastly, Mahatma seemed to favor speaking in very mystical and vague language, which tends to confuse his followers as to the exact meaning of what he wants to articulate. Nonetheless, his leadership style was still very effective in mobilizing almost a billion people to demand their independence from the British Empire. Being a charismatic leader, he used his gift of astute yet mystical articulation to convince all sectors of Indian society about the necessity of seeking independence. The clearness of vision and objectives, and the creativity of his means of action of pursuit of these goals, were also indispensable factors of his success in leadership. More so, his propensity for personal sacrifice, at the cost of his life and liberty, in pursuit of his goals are very high on the list of his outstanding leadership qualities. Years of imprisonment and the beatings he received from the British security forces did not deter him from continuing his leadership. This is a crucial part of his leadership style, especially when not many leaders in the world are prepared to do sacrifices like such. Usually, leaders are hidden above their ivory towers and palaces, to the extent of alienating themselves from the people they serve. Gandhi, however, was different, as he was like the common everyman, save that it was his leadership of commitment and sacrifice that helped his people achieve independence. In terms of my own personal leadership style, I accede to the leadership traits of Gandhi, in terms of his clarity of vision and propensity for sacrifice. In any organization, these are very fundamental because these will determine how the followers will appreciate their role in the organization. If the vision and goals are clear, the followers can quantitatively measure, in a given amount of time, the progress of the organization and their individual development as well, relative to the vision and objectives. It ensures that the organization does not operate in limbo, without any purpose or necessity of existence. Gandhi’s propensity for sacrifice can also be incorporated in my leadership style. It is important for followers to see and realize that the leader himself is willing to lay himself on the line in pursuit of the vision and goals of the organization. Such a leadership trait reassures the followers that the leader is serious about the success and development of the organization and dismantles notions that the leader’s only interest is to make his people follow orders and deliver results. However, my leadership style differs with Gandhi insofar as adopting a pragmatic and realistic view on plans and actions. I would accede more, in this regard, to the Leninist maxim of â€Å"concrete analysis of concrete conditions†, instead of the Gandhian mode of relying heavily on a notion of non-violence in the face of difficult odds, as I still contend that the success of Gandhi and his movement was also based on external factors (e.g. British losses after World War II) than his non-violence alone. I even surmise that without the world wars and the decline of the British Empire, his non-violent movement would never have been successful. Nonetheless, the above mentioned leadership traits of Gandhi are included in my notion of the ideal leader – clarity of vision and goals, and propensity for sacrifice. In analyzing situations and challenges, and making decisions, it must include the Leninist maxim of â€Å"concrete analysis of concrete conditions†, without, of course, prejudicing the principles and objectives inherent in the organization. A leader must always seek to create candor and camaraderie among his followers, to drive home the point that no unseen barrier exists between them. More importantly, the leader must always seek ways of empowering his people and training new second liners, based on the idea that leaders, no matter how great they are, will always have to step down and be replaced by new blood. If possible, the leader must shun micro-managing the affairs of the organization, especially when competent persons have been assigned to ensure the success of projects and goals. However, while being democratic and consultative as possible, the leader must exercise full control of the more important decisions of the organization, based on the notion that his experience and vision will always be beneficial for the future of the organization. Works Cited: 1. Gandhi, M. (1962). Essential Gandhi. Edited by Louis Fischer. New York: Vintage   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Books. How to cite Mahatma Gandhi and his non-violent struggle, Essay examples

Journeys End, what do you think makes a good officer Essay Example For Students

Journeys End, what do you think makes a good officer Essay Journeys End is a play set in the trenches of World War One. It portrays the hardship and the suffering that the several officers in it had to endure, during the 3-4 days that are depicted in it. We get to know in quite a lot of depth the personalities and relationships that the men have with one another. Each officer is very different and individual in their up bringing and values concerning war and in life. The first officer we are acquainted with is Hardy, a company commander. Hardy is a very easy going officer who looks on the bright side of life, One and two its with Maud and Lou; he passes his time in the trenches singing nonsense rhymes and being a rather, cheerful red- faced looking chap. He does this to make the most of the situation that he is in, and from my impression he tries not to bother about the trivial facts that would just, in his mind, be an unwanted nuisance. I think this is intentional to help him keep his spirits high and his mind off the worst sides of the war. This is a good quality in an officer as it not only keeps him light hearted it keeps the morale in the rest of the company high. He has good humour which explains his view on the war, which is very unlike the other officers who treat it much more seriously than he does who sees it all as one big joke. When he speaks he does not use the correct terminology in a lot of cases even though he knows exactly what they are called, those horrid little things like pineapples. Hardy has another very vital and excellent quality, which adds to his definition of being a good officer. He is extremely observant of the surroundings and knows there is a great attack expected but he knows it is going to be due very soon as he has watched and detected funny things happening over in the Boche country. There is more transport than usual, bringing up loads and loads of men A reputable officer should always be alert and aware of any changes. He fulfils this requirement completely, as he is on the job when required and he keeps an eye open for any suspicious activity from the opponent. Hardy is not a perfect officer and does have a few flaws like when Osborne asks about the sleeping arrangements and Hardy dismisses him. I dont know The Sergeant- Major sees to that. His attitude is that others can worry about trivial things like ammunition, logs and all the time-wasting necessities that really are essential but not in his view. He is not bothered about tying up loose ends but is aware that he should be. His disorganisation is one factor which slightly eats away at his image as a good officer. He has not checked the trench stores or has not made any effort to make sure everything is present and correct, 25 right leg and 9 left leg gumboots. Hardy is very eager to leave before the next officer Stanhope arrives, Well, no, I dont specially want to see him. I think he does this as he knows that he is not completely fulfilling his role as an officer. This is the complete opposite to Osbornes conscientiousness and efficiency. Osborne is the second officer we come across in the play. When we first meet Osborne it is evident that Osborne is a more serious, methodical man. He asks lots of questions; about the beds, where the stores are and he asks for the logbook. These qualities are useful in an officer as it shows that they like a good clear view of things in their head, which would be a paramount factor in an attack. Osborne is very defensive of Stanhope in a conversation when Hardy accuses Stanhope of Drinking like a fish as usual? He adamantly sticks up for him Hes a long way the best company commander weve got. From this we establish that Osborne and Stanhopes friendship is a good one and that Osborne is very loyal to him. . Dickens creates EssayTrotter is a rather plump addition to the team but he works hard and is a worth while man to have in the company. Unlike other officers he will not delegate all the bad jobs to other men and he pulls his weight well around the trench. This will make other officers very fond of him which is very important in the trench environment as things will get tough and they need all the support from each other that they can get. Trotter is not the main man in the company but he still is a first-rate officer. Although he keeps himself to himself, he copes with the strain well by eating and counting down the days on a tick list. He is a serious old chap but he will always do the job set to the best of his ability I wont let you down. This is a very good quality to have because its always the effort and the thought that counts in life. As long as you try hard and do the best you can people will respect you for it and commend you in many ways. Hibbert, compared to the other men, is a prime example of a bad officer. He complains of a pain in his eye, but the other men say he is just trying to wriggle home. He shows no commitment to his duties at all and does not put in any effort. I personally think that Hibbert is just a burden and the company could do well without him. Another man on the company who needs a bit of motivation to do the best for his soldiers is the Colonel, he is extremely good at the planning and attacking side of things but does not like to mix with the soldiers a lot. He needed Stanhope to push him to go up top and wish the men luck before the attack I think they would appreciate a word or two. He could be seen as a bad officer for this but I have come to the conclusion that he has done this on purpose to keep a clear mind and focused for the job. With all the deaths of his men he has to see, if he made friendships hed brake down within a week. So he is a good officer even if he is a little cold, the men might not see this but he is doing it for their best interests. Most of the officers in this dug out have some excellent qualities that make them good officers but none of them is a perfect or ideal officer. They all are individual in their ways but have something about them, which really has an impact on the other men at this hard time. Without one another they would find it hard to cope as each of them have an asset that improves the situation they are in. They work as a team with each other. As a group they hold most of the qualities an ideal and good officer needs in my opinion, experience, motivation, good at keeping moral up, hard work, lots of effort and importantly they all do their best for their country and fight for the right reasons. None of them are prejudice to one another despite their social status or background and they respect and value everyones company and friendships.

The plan free essay sample

The Somebody-Wanted-But-So chart is an excellent way to summarize important information from history. In it, you identify a person or group of people; their goal, need, or want; what conflict of interest stood in the way; and the outcome. This strategy works great because history depends on the needs, wants, and actions of humans. Use the chart to show your understanding of people, countries, and organizations in the Korean War. Part 1 – Complete the following chart using information from the lesson. The Korean War Chart Somebody Wanted But So North Korea To unite both halves of Korea under Communist rule. The United Nations interfered with their invasion. The Korean war began. General MacArthur To defeat the North Korean army. We will write a custom essay sample on The plan or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page The North Koreans were to strong to take head on. He got permission to lead a mission to ambush them from behind while other UN troops continued to fight them head on, thus trapping the North Korean army. President Truman To keep the UN troops away from the Chinese border, so that there was less of a chance that China would enter the war. General MacArthur didn’t listen and the Chinese entered the war, causing the war to last much longer than it might have if the Chinese hadn’t entered the war. President Truman fired General MacArthur for going against his orders. China The UN troops to stay away from the border between China and North Korea. MacArthur and his UN troops were extremely close to the Chinese border. More than 300,000 Chinese troops moved to assist North Korea. United Nations To restore peace in both North and South Korea as soon as possible. Chinese troops were preparing to join the war in favor of North Korea. The UN had to come up with a plan. Part 2 – You will create four paragraphs, one for each question below. Each response must be in your own words and in complete sentences as well as include evidence from the lesson. 1) How did General Douglas MacArthur react to the events in Korea? What was his stance on the Korean War? General Douglas MacArthur was the leader of the UN troops. He took some of the UN troops and ambushed the North Korean forces from behind, thus trapping the North Koreans between them and the UN forces on the front-lines. He also wanted to invade China in order to reestablish a democratic political system in China. 2) How did President Truman respond to the events in Korea? What was his stance on the Korean War? President Truman assigned General Douglas MacArthur as the leader of the UN troops. Truman wanted to restore peace in North and South Korea as soon as possible. Under no circumstances did Truman want to give the Chinese a reason to enter the war. He wanted MacArthur to stay away from the Chinese border. 3)Which leaders actions were the most justifiable—General McArthurs or President Trumans? Support your claim with evidence from the lesson. I believe that President Truman’s actions were the most justifiable because General MacArthur disobeyed Truman’s orders by approaching the Chinese border when he was specifically warned to stay away from that border. Because General MacArthur disobeyed Truman’s orders, the Chinese entered the war and the war lasted a lot longer than it would have needed to. 4) Would the outcome of the Korean War have been different had General MacArthur not been fired? Why or why not? Support your claim with evidence from the lesson. No, I do not believe that the outcome of the Korean War would have been different because the Chinese had already entered the war long before MacArthur was fired and it was MacArthur’s fault that the Chinese had even entered the war. MacArthur probably would have just made even more of a mess if he hadn’t been fired.