Elie Wiesel's The Perils Of Indifference

455 Words1 Page

Who was Elie Wiesel? Elie was a Holocaust survivor; he received most of his fame from a widely known speech; The Perils of Indifference. He presented this speech in April of 1999, during the Millennium Lecture series. What is indifference, indifference means lack of interest. What I want to know is how much WWII could have been effected if the American soldiers were granted permission to attack earlier, or how many wars could have been different; for example, the Civil War. The point that I am trying to make is how I agree with Elie. WWII could have been completely different if American soldiers could have gotten permission to attack the Nazis earlier. If the war could have been stopped a month earlier or even a year earlier; there could have been …show more content…

This war was about slavery. Slavery was a very big part of crop production in the south. The north didn't believe in slavery, while on the other hand the south couldn't function without it. The world, today could be very different if the north hadn't ending the war. We could be two different countries instead of one big country. The north could have said that they didn't care if the south had slaves or not, but that wasn't what they believed in. The north could have said that they didn't care, or they didn't have any sympathy towards the slaves. To me, that was what made the war such a powerful, meaningful war; not just some average war. Personally, I think that what Franklin Roosevelt did during the war was to protect the US soldiers as much as possible. Save as many lives as possible, and try not to destroy families by their son getting killed when it wasn't necessary to send soldiers to Germany when that wasn't our war to fight. After the war was over I believe that I didn't change my mind of who I agree with, that would be, Elie Wiesel. During his speech, he made very valid points and that persuaded me to believe that the war could have been ended many months or even years

Open Document