How did the Carter and Reagan presidencies serve corporate interests? The Carter administration started off with strong corporate connections. He wanted and worked to protect corporate wealth and power.. It was became obvious that Caters actions and cabinet appointments only worked to serve corporate interests while harming the working class.
I think that Canada should try to retain its peacekeeping role. In the past years, Canada has been putting a lot more money and resources into fighting the war in Afghanistan, while they could have been investing in peacekeeping missions (Shephard). Canada should decrease its involvement in violent missions and increase their involvement in peacekeeping missions. They have participated in both in the past (Dyck 207). However, recently, under the leadership of the Harper government, they have primarily been engaging in violent missions (Harper).
WWII was the bloodiest conflict in human history, but some would say that the U.S invasion tactics were too far or just necessary. In my opinion I feel that you have to show dominance to others for them to see that you mean business, but I don’t agree with the pulverizing innocent civilians to their deaths. Although the necessity of a US invasion was debated within the US military (US Army was for, US Navy was against) the general consensus judging by the Battle of Iwo Jima and Battle of Okinawa is that an invasion of the Japanese home islands would be costly. With a deterrent to the USSR, the Soviets invaded Manchuria on August 9, 1945 only 3 days after the Hiroshima bombing and 9 hours before the Nagasaki bombing. The US were aware that the USSR would enter the Pacific War on 9 August because at the Yalta Conference
Many believe that the Syrian war has been prolonged by outside involvement contributing to the war in Syria. A big conflicting matter is the support of different oppositions when going from country to country. Recently a big issue is Russia’s support to the Assad Regime against the United States’s support for the Syrian Rebels. This truly is believed to be the single largest factor contributing to prolonged war and failure of reconciliation efforts (Document F). US led coalition airstrikes and Russian airstrikes have also played a big part in delaying the end to the war in Syria.
The United States fought unnecessary wars in Vietnam and Iraq. The war on communism, in Vietnam, severed the United States compared to the war on terrorism, in Iraq. During both wars the U.S. Military spent millions to billions of money, deaths were extremely high, and both failed to accomplish their purpose. Firstly the Iraq War dealt massive harm to the United States in multiple ways.
The United States has aided many different countries over the past few years. We have always been there when others need us. During George H. Bush’s presidency and Clinton’s presidency we helped a lot of countries when they were at war. They both devoted much of their time to peacekeeping and foreign affairs. One of Bush’s first approaches to foreign affairs was in the spring of 1989.
Was Operation Enduring Freedom Necessary? Tensions were building after the terrorist bombings of American embassies in Africa. The United States had responded to the terrorist attacks on the embassies by sending a cruise missile to training camps that belonged to Bin Laden’s al Qaeda organization in Afghanistan. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, American forces had initiated Operation Enduring Freedom on October 7, 2001.
That is for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Therefore, in cases where our combat forces are used, they must be committed with enough numbers, equipment, support and resolution to accomplish the object of winning the conflict. President Washington’s urgings had honest intentions, but he could never envision our modern world with its global trade network and convoluted politics. The historic use of American military force has been unevenly applied. Without doubt, a policy of American isolationism is not a possibility.
Brondon, I like the way you stated how you would determine who you would ally with. While reading this question I automatically assumed I would ally with the United States, but I didn't put as much thought to it as you did. My reason as to why I would ally with the United States is simply because during this time they were a powerful country. They came out of WWII better than when they entered the war. You stated that you would take a look at the pros and cons.
Should the United States have attacked Iraq? Introduction: On the 20th of March 2003, the United States commenced a war against Iraq and destroyed Saddam Hussein’s regime because they thought Iraq was a threat to the world. According to Presidents, Historians, journalists, and Politicians, it was not a necessary attack and it was a big mistake from The United States, that war was inequity and they declared war to take advantage of Iraq’s land.
The 2003 US invasion of Iraq was a disaster. What should have been a quick and dominant victory over terrorism turned into one of America’s biggest mistakes. A mistake that was fueled by lies cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, destroyed a country, and created more instability in the Middle East. After years of fighting, the negatives outweighed the positives, and therefore, the American invasion of Iraq was not justified due to the amount of deaths, lies, and instability caused before, during, and after the war.
As mentioned above, the main argument countries bump into is the question of sovereignty and the right to intervene in their governing procedures. We saw that with Barack Obama's delayed and deliberated response to make an action in Syrian civil war, which unfortunately came a year too late. All of the capable countries fear the international outrage their actions might spark, hence the slow and cautious process of assessing the current situation and comparing all the possible pros and cons. In addition, the local governments might fear an outrage of its own citizens, who might not want to send their military troops to a dangerous location.
The consequence of wars, the political turmoil in countries or simply a country in debt; these all warrant a need for foreign aid. Although it may seem like the obvious act to do, is it really the right thing to do? It is firstly important to note what is the fundamental characteristic of foreign aid and what it entails, both for a country providing and the country receiving it. The aspect of aid can take many forms, ranging from goods and services or capital from foreign country to country in need. As situations in different countries continue to take new forms, aid can also be provided concerning military, economic means, etc.
Hotel Rwanda is a historical film based on the Rwandan genocide, which stars Don Cheadle as hotel manager Paul Rusesabagina. The film documents Rusesabagina's acts to save the lives of his family and more than a thousand other refugees by providing them with shelter. The film explores the tensions between the Hutu and Tutsi peoples, that lead to a civil war in Rwanda, where corruption and bribes between politicians are routine. The political situation in the country worsens following when the Tutsi’s shot down the plane that was carry the President. Paul whom is a Hutu is marry to a Tutsi and as a result has to protect his family from the brutal Hutu militia.
What do you think when you hear the word Syria in today's world? To many people, war, terrorism, and weapons may come to mind and not without reason. For a little over seven years, Syria has been going through a multi-faceted crisis that has destroyed many cities and caused millions of Syrians to flee and be killed. As of now, Syria is trying to repair itself with the help of the United States. However, this calls to question what the United States’ stance should be in the finals steps of this war.
