Who was to blame for the Cold War?
As Dwight D. Eisenhower said, "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signified, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold but not clothed." This statement could be directly applied to the Cold War. The term "Cold War" means "a state of political hostility and military tension between two countries or power blocs, involving propaganda, subversion, threats, etc" (Cold War Def.). The Cold War lasted from the end of WWII, in 1945, to the collapse of the Soviet Union, in 1989. It also included the Korean and Vietnam Wars and other conflicts in the Middle East and Africa. Both the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) were responsible for the political, economic, militaristic and ideological causes of the Cold War. Following the Second World War, Germany was separated into four independent quarters, Russian, American, British and French; from this division, the Cold War emerged (Collier 26). This proximity led to tensions and hostilities that surfaced in the years following WWII. There are three theses regarding the origins of the Cold War: the "Orthodox" belief that "the intransigence of Leninist ideology, the sinister dynamics of a totalitarian society, and the madness of Stalin" (McCauley 88) caused the Cold War; the "Revisionist" idea that "American policy offered the Russians
Who was to blame for the Cold War?
Who was to blame for the Cold War? There are two possible verdicts; the USA and USSR. Both these sides had different beliefs, USA was a capitalist country while the USSR was a communist country, and this was one of the main causes of the cold war. I believe that both sides were almost equally responsible for the start of the Cold War but USA may be blamed slightly more than the USSR because as you will see there are more arguments against the USA. The arguments against the USA (that indicate that the USA was the one to blame) are many. At the Yalta conference, February 1945, towards the end of the 2nd World War, Roosevelt didn't define what he meant by Eastern Europe being seen as "A Soviet sphere of influence". Stalin seems to define it as a total control of the USSR over the East but the USA interprets it by saying that Russia would only have a slight influence. Roosevelt also showed lack of trust in Stalin, as we can see at sources 6 and 8. An other mistake of Roosevelt was that he allowed Russia to move border into Poland as long as Russia didn't interfere with Greece. This clearly shows how the USA wanted to prevent the wide spreading of communism in Europe. The fact that America tested the atomic bomb in 1945 caused tension between the two countries and caused the USSR to fear even more the USA. After Roosevelt died, Truman became the president of the USA.
The collapse of the USSR was caused by internal problems and had nothing to do with the Cold War. Assess this view.
“The collapse of the USSR was caused by internal problems and had nothing to do with the Cold War”. Assess this view. In 1991, after over half a century of communist rule, the USSR ceased to exist as a political entity after many years of decline. This statement asserts that the cause for this cessation was only due to the effects caused by issues, policies and the framework within the USSR itself, and had absolutely no relation with regards to the external problem of the Cold War - defined by Ann Lane as a state of tension, conflict, hostility and competition which characterized US-USSR relations though not amounting to an actual war; this subscribes to the Soviet Initiative school of thought. However, this statement is unfair insofar that the collapse of the USSR was not only the result of trouble within its territorial boundaries, but rather a combination of factors both internal and external, including the foundational weakness of the Soviet economic system coupled with the long term pressure brought forth by the US policy of containment, the Reagan Doctrine as a catalyst, the turning point in USSR’s history with Gorbachev’s reforms and finally the immediate effect of the August 1991 coup d’etat that characterized the USSR’s decline. As such, this essay espouses that it was an amalgamation of both factors both within and outside the USSR that served as a
How far do you agree that the Cold War broke out in Europe because the USA and the USSR disagreed fundamentally about how they should treat the shattered European economy?
How far do you agree that the Cold War broke out in Europe because the USA and the USSR disagreed fundamentally about how they should treat the shattered European economy? Subsequent to the Second World War in 1945, the European economy was in tatters as much of the infrastructure had been laid to waste and industrial centres destroyed. As such, the two main victors of the war, the United States of America (USA) and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), declared their commitment to postwar unity and mutual cooperation in improving global conditions. 1 Yet, in less than two years, a fervent rivalry between the two nations led to a breaking up of accord, concerning mutual blaming, the division of Europe, as well as the difference in political ideologies. The Cold War broke out in Europe in 1947, signifying a sharp and unexpected deterioration in postwar relations between the USA and USSR. Yet all through this period, the rivalry between the two superpowers was played out in numerous areas: military coalitions; ideology, military, industrial, and technological developments. Europe was split in half, with Western Europe supporting the USA, and Eastern Europe being an ally of the USSR. So, was the disagreement on how to deal with the shattered European economy between the USA and USSR the sole reason for the Cold War? I would agree with this statement only to a small
Cold environments may be developed in a sustainable manner. To what extent do you agree with this statement?
Cold environments may be developed in a sustainable manner. To what extent do you agree with this statement? I disagree with this statement more than I agree with it. Cold environments in the world that were previously wilderness areas have undergone development, and nearly all of them have proved to be unsustainable. In the alpine areas, the mountains are a major magnet because of the scenery and the wide variety of winter sports that can take place there. The Alps have been developed as a tourist area. Although tourism benefits the area economically, it is socially and environmentally unsustainable. Tradition and culture has been eroded away because many young people now go down the mountains into urban areas in search of jobs. Even though the tourist industry has encouraged many young farmers to diversify out of rural and primary activities, many people still leave. Aside from that, the tourist industry brings with it unwanted pollution and litter and also causes footpath erosion. The tourist industry is also a potential hazard to the mountains and villages because the winter sports activities taking place there may cause avalanches. In the tundra or arctic regions, development has not been sustainable either, also both environmentally and socially. Gold, and particularly oil exploration and exploitation have scarred the fragile landscape. In 1968, the Trans-Alaskan
Creative writing involving war
Creative Writing The wailing sirens struck fear into the struggling crowd of panicking civilians. The adrenaline rush filled me as I barged passed all the strangers and knocked an old man off his feet, he tripped into the puddle beneath him launching muddy water into the others surrounding. Nobody cared, I could not help unless I wanted the same to happen to me, but as I turned around an aircraft shot past, a thundering rumble followed and shook the ground. As the old man searched for his walking stick in the marshy ground something caused an explosion; obliterating the helpless man and propelling rock and mud towards me at unbelievable speeds. Everything went black as a heavy rock belted into my face, I lay unconscious between two mangled bodies. I woke up to the same noise; aircraft shaking the earth, bombs breaking the earth and incessant screaming that sends a chilling sensation to your bones and then is silenced by an explosion. Only now the average volume was quieter, the loudest noise was two men shouting at each other. I kept my eyes closed to try and understand exactly what was going on and listened intently. "Open the door what are you doing!?" yells an Arabian man, The other person responded calmly, "We have enough people in here and we don't need anymore blood around the place." "What you're just going to let them die!?" "It looks like it doesn't it?"
'Repressive and emotionally cold'. Is this a true reflection of relations between parents and children in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century England?
344885 2486 'Repressive and emotionally cold'. Is this a true reflection of relations between parents and children in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century England? In sixteenth and seventeenth century England the parent-child relationship is often considered in emotional terms very different to the relationship we see today. Without doubt there are exceptions, but on the whole we tend to perceive these relationships in terms of altruistic love. Parents selflessly provide love and affection for their children, without exposing them to cruelty or any injustice. In regards to early modern Britain, some historians argue that this has not always been the case and that 'Repressive and emotionally cold' is a statement that can be applied to parenthood in sixteenth and seventeenth century. Scholars from this school of thought understand that parental altruism is somewhat a modern occurrence that began to occur with the rise of the sentimental family amid the industrial revolution. With industrialisation trade and industries began to develop and families tended to work separately. This led to the family no longer having to be relied upon for primarily economic reasoning leaving a whole new space open for love and affection. The supporters of this school of thought advocate the theme of change. 1 Lawrence Stone, for example suggests that children were simply viewed in this period as
Compare and contrast the ways in which war is presented in 'The Charge Of The Light Brigade', 'Vox Militantis' and 'Drummer Hodge'.
Compare and contrast the ways in which war is presented in 'The Charge Of The Light Brigade', 'Vox Militantis' and 'Drummer Hodge'. The three poems 'The Charge of the Light Brigade', 'Vox Militantis' and 'Drummer Hodge' are set in the Crimean War and the Boer War. The Crimean War started in 1854 and in September of that year allies besieged Sebastpool in Crimea. In October the Russians attacked the British base at Balaclava. During this battle the Charge of the Light Brigade took place. The Charge of the Light Brigade was written immediately by Alfred, Lord Tennyson, after the reports came back to England. The Charge of the Light Brigade is different from the other poems because it is about a specific event whereas Vox Militantis and Drummer Hodge are more general. Drummer Hodge was written by Thomas Hardy; Hardy wrote this poem because he had heard of the death of a young drummer boy. The word Hodge was a word used for a 'country bumpkin' which he thought suitable because the young boy had lived in the country all his short life. Drummer Hodge is a very reflective poem and the only activity in the poem, Drummer Hodge being buried, only takes up two lines, showing not only that the burial was short and unceremonious but also that all of the activity of war is finished. The rest of the poem is about how strange it is that the drummer is now going to rest in this foreign,
The causes of world war one
This is a map of Europe before 1914, as you can see the Austro-Hungarian Empire dominates what is now much of southern Germany and the Balkans. Germany is what we know presently as northern Germany and Poland. You may also have noticed that England, Scotland, Wales, and Eire made up the United Kingdom. Russia has a vast empire, a massive army (even though it is extremely poorly equipped, and trained). This was all changed by the First World War. The causes of world war one There are many reasons as to why the First World War actually took place, hardly any of them seem of great consequence when examined individually, however when examined together they do seem fairly major, but in my opinion don't merit a world war. Germany and France had a great rivalry after the wars of 1871 in which France lost the colonies of Alsange and Coraing to Prussia. France and it's people bitterly wand to have their revenge over Germany. Great Britain and Germany were also engaged in a hostile race to have the larger navy. This was heightened when Britain released a fleet of dreadnaughts which were the most lethal ships of warfare that the world had ever seen. The five major powers Great Britain At the start of the twentieth century Great Britain had the richest and largest empire in the world. Britain had the most trade and the largest navy on the planet. This had all happened under the
Explain how the effects of the First World War caused the collapse of the Tsarist regime
) Explain how the effects of the First World War caused the collapse of the Tsarist regime (8 marks) There were many causes of the collapse of the Tsarist regime. One of the biggest causes, however, was the First World War, as it had many effects on everyone in Russia, who all blamed the Tsar. The Tsar abdicated in 1917 because he had no control over anyone in Russia. He had no support. This was because everyone in Russia blamed the Tsar for something. They layed all the blame at his feet because he was in charge and was the only person who could change things. One of the main reasons why the 1905 revolution failed was because the Tsar had the support and control of the military. By the time the 1917 revolution had started, the Tsar had lost this support and control. He had no protection. This happened because of the war. Firstly, the army was very poorly equipped, as some men didn't have any boots and only a third of men had rifles. The army also had very incompetent leaders. There is evidence of this in the battles at Tannenberg and the Masurian Lakes. In both of these, the 'huge Russian armies' (Brooman 1994) were wiped out when they should have easily beaten a single German army. The poor leadership combined with the poorly equipped army made Russia suffer many defeats in the war. By 1917, 0.8 million Russian troops had been killed, 4.6 million wounded and 3.3 million
