Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Social effects of World War II
Social effects of World War II
Cold War and it's consequences
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Social effects of World War II
Following World War II, Europe was in ruins. Between bomb damage, economic downturn, and natural disasters such as droughts and blizzards it seemed nearly impossible to restore Europe to its prior greatness. America facilitated the recovery of Europe with military and financial aid and helped prevent the spread of communism. This aid crushed the Soviet dream of a communist Europe and started the Cold War. Over the next 45 years, the United States and the Soviet Union would resemble two angry women, avoiding each other at all costs and exploding into a furious rage at the first sight of the other. Many events contributed to and were derived from the Cold War such as the Truman Doctrine and Marshall Plan, the Civil Rights movement, the Space Race, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Kennedy Assassination, and the hippie movement. Some of the most important questions that could be asked of these events are these: of what significance were they to the Cold War and where would the world be today if they had never happened? Lessons learned from the past affect everything about the future, and without these events, America, and even the world, would not be where it is today.
The Cold War was largely characterized by how the United States treated the struggling European nations. Addressing a joint session of Congress, Harry S Truman requested $400 million in military and economic aid for Greece and Turkey in the name of democracy. Truman believed the countries were facing the threat of communism if no aid was given. He proclaimed, “It must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures” (Merrill). In the article “The Truman Doctrine: containing com...
... middle of paper ...
... Heritage Oct. 1997: 84+. US History Collection. Web. 5 Dec. 2011.
Davis, Sid. “We heard the shots…” American Heritage Dec. 2003: 68+. US History Collection. Web. 5 Dec. 2011.
Kershaw, Terry. “African American national leadership: a model for complementarity.” The Western Journal of Black Studies 25.4 (2001):211+. US History Collection. Web. 5 Dec. 2011
Merrill, Dennis. “The Truman Doctrine: containing communism and modernity.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 36.1 (2006): 27+. US History Collection. Web. 5 Dec. 2011.
Maddox, Robert James. “Lifeline to a sinking continent.” American Heritage July-Aug. 1997: 90+. US History Collection. Web. 5 Dec. 2011
Phillips, Charles. “May 4, 1970.” American History 39.2 (2004): 16+. US History Collection. Web. 5 Dec. 2011.
Spagnolo, Ed. “Cat and Mouse.” American Heritage Nov. 2000: 31. US History Collection. Web. 5 Dec. 2011.
...et al. Vol. 4: Primary Sources. Detroit: UXL, 2006. 146-161. U.S. History in Context. Print. 17 Nov. 2013.
To start off the Cold war, Russia had lost twenty-seven million soldiers in World War II. Stalin was not going to allow the Germany to attack Russia again . To make sure of this , Stalin made East Europe his buffer zone.The United states could not allow the this to contunie to happen. The first example was the Truman Doctrine, that declared the the Untited States would support “free people”. The Doctrine was followed by the Marshall Plan which gave 12 billion dollars in aid European democracies so that communist ideas would not be so attractive. These were some of the long term , patient policies the United States did to
Eibling, Harold H., et al., eds. History of Our United States. 2nd edition. River Forest, Ill: Laidlaw Brothers, 1968.
...he Oxford Journals, The Journal of American History, Volume 93, Issue 1.2013. Accessed November 20, 2013. http://jah.oxfordjournals.org/content/93/1/290.extract.
“Was Truman Responsible for the Cold War”, well, according to author Arnold A. Offner, his simplistic answer is an obvious “yes.” “Taking Sides” is a controversial aspect of the author’s interpretation for justifying his position and perception of “Truman’s” actions. This political approach is situated around the “Cold War” era in which the author scrutinizes, delineates, and ridicules his opponents by claiming “I have an ace in the hole and one showing” (SoRelle 313). Both authors provide the readers with intuitive perceptions for their argumentative approaches in justifying whether or not “Truman” contributed to the onset of the “Cold War.” Thus far, it would be hard-pressed to blame one single individual, President or not, for the “Cold War” initiation/s. Information presented show the implications centered on the issues leading up to the Cold War”, presents different ideologies of two Presidents involving policy making, and a national relationship strained by uncooperative governments. However, evidence that is presented may indicate otherwise as Joseph Stalin provides adequate counter claims for discrediting the “simplicity” of “yes”.
Walens, Susann. A. United States History Since 1877. Western Connecticut State University, Danbury, CT. September 2007.
The Soviet Union began to view the United States as a threat to communism, and the United States began to view the Soviet Union as a threat to democracy. On March 12, 1947, Truman gave a speech in which he argued that the United States should support nations trying to resist Soviet imperialism. Truman and his advisors created a foreign policy that consisted of giving reconstruction aid to Europe, and preventing Russian expansionism. These foreign policy decisions, as well as his involvement in the usage of the atomic bomb, raise the question of whether or not the Cold War can be blamed on Truman. Supporting the view that Truman was responsible for the Cold War, Arnold Offner argues that Truman’s parochialism and nationalism caused him to make contrary foreign policy decisions without regard to other nations, which caused the intense standoff between the Soviet Union and America that became the Cold War (Offner 291)....
Following World War II, the United States and the USSR were the only two world super powers left. Because of different economic systems, strategic interests, and atomic weapons the US and USSR entered a Cold War. This war was not a typical war. It was strictly economical and political fighting, there was no physical fighting. The USSR believed that peace would only come from worldwide communism, but the US wanted to stop the spread of communism immediately. President Truman tried to offer financial aid to countries nearing turmoil and facing communism, in order to stop the spread of communism entirely. The United States was successful in that it did not actually fall to communism itself, and that the US was able to partially contain communism
Divine, Robert A. America past and Present. 10th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education/Longman, 2013. 245. Print.
1900-1930," Journal of American History; June 1996, Vol. 83 Issue 1 Web. 26 May 2015.
Prentice Hall - America – Pathways to the Present-Pages 132, 133, 139, 140, 141, 142, 186, 187
... An American History of the World. 4th ed. of the book. W.W. Norton, 2012, 671. 2.)
George Browm Tindall, David Emory Shi. American History: 5th Brief edition, W. W. Norton & Company; November 1999
... Conference.” Reader’s Companion to American History. Houghton Mifflin Company, 1991. Online. Internet. Available at HTTP: http://www.historychannel.com/. 23 Sept 2001.
The process whereby the Truman Doctrine came to fruitions was a long and arduous one. After WWII, the Soviet Union and the United States stood at the pinnacle of world power. By the late '40's, the U.S.S.R. had caught up to the United States' nuclear weapons programs. In addition, they were very land-hungry. Throughout Russia's history, they have been in search of a port. The Soviets in that respect were direct threats to their non-Communist neighbors; Greece, Turkey, and Iran.