In the opening statement of the speech Eisenhower asserts that it would not be "a measure of this great opportunity merely to recite, however hopefully, pious platitudes. ' ' He realizes, he says, "that if a danger exists in the world, it is a danger shared by all—and equally, that if hope exists in the mind of one nation, that hope should be shared by all. "(Eisenhower Atoms for Peace). As explained in the paragraph before instead of talking about the past use of atomic energy Eisenhower jumps right into the present. Eisenhower describes to the audience the new way of war, which is atomic warfare.
It also promised to build free institutions in South-East Asia. Two years later, in the year 1967, the same affair was considered not only as unsuccessful, but also as a gruesome action of the politicians. In one moment, the intellectuals glorified the arrival of a young and freethinking new president, but almost immediately, they blamed his successor of cruelty, continuous lies and desire of war, although the new president’s strategy was basically the same as of his mourned-for predecessor. Richard Nixon’s governing season did not bring much serenity either. Heated resistance against war became even stronger.
“We observe today not a victory of party, but a celebration of freedom, symbolizing an end, as well as a beginning, signifying renewal, as well as change”. President Kennedy ran on the platform of change in America. He was the first president in history to speak of the future and what could happen. Rather than past presidents who addressed issues that needed to be fixed in America. Faced with the opposition of a rising soviet power Kennedy was faced with the task of protecting the county and keeping its people safe.
The policy paper, titled "The National Security Strategy of the United States of America" -- call it the Bush doctrine -- is a romantic justification for easy recourse to war whenever and wherever an American president chooses. This document truly deserves the overused term "revolutionary," but its release was eclipsed by the Iraq debate. Recall the moment. Bush, having just backed away from unilateralism long enough to deliver a speech to the United Nations, was now telling Congress to give him the power to go to war with Iraq whenever and however he liked. Congress, with selective reluctance, was skating sideways toward a qualified endorsement.
“Franklin Roosevelt is lionized for winning World War II, but he’s also criticized for putting 110,000 Japanese-Americans in what were in effect concentration camps. Roosevelt has also been criticized for not doing more to stop the systematic murder of the Jews during the Holocaust.” In other words, Roosevelt did the right thing but people just didn’t exactly agree with him. Although he faced political hardships, Franklin D. Roosevelt also went through personal difficulties as well. It states “FDR had the shift focus away from the economic hards times to begin the task of being a war. President Franklin D. Roosevelt led America to prepare for war.
Although war comes with risk, leaders often find it inevitable when it comes to assuring the safety of their citizens. The Vietnam War was a significant movement in history that extended from 1965 – 1973 through the political years of Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon. The antiwar movement caused division within the administration as to the deciding factors of the United States involvement in Vietnam. Their decisions caused the most traumatizing event of the 20th Century. More than two decades ago the longest war ended, yet questions remain unanswered: what was the motivation of President Kennedy and his administration (Nolting, Lodge, Rusk and McNamara) to get involved in the Vietnam War, the role of Diem and the escalation of devastation on the US.
Throughout The War there were many decisions that the American citizens, and eventually the South Vietnamese, began to resent. Much of the Vietnam controversy could have been avoided if America had acted in a quick manner. America’s involvement in the Vietnam War lasted a total of eleven years from beginning to end making it, “the longest war in which the United States took part in” (Vietnam War). America went into the war to protect South Vietnam from the North Vietnamese Communists. The U.S. entered the war because of the Truman Doctrine, “Truman had declared that the United States must help any nation challenged by Communism” (Vietnam War).
While war was inevitable, the U.S. hoped that the threat of nuclear destruction would force other countries into negotiating peace instead of fighting. Evidently, by using nuclear threats as a form of intimidation, the U... ... middle of paper ... ...s source in my paper to show how the use of the bomb helped the US grow into a global superpower through military conquest. Truman, Harry S. "Statement by the President of the United States." SIRS Decades. ProQuest, 25 Apr.
Woodrow Wilson’s Hope for International Peace “There must be, not a balance of power, but a community of power; not organized rivalries, but an organized peace.” (Cooper 366). These words of wisdom from the twenty-eighth president of the United States, Woodrow Wilson, truly expressed his ultimate goal of world peace and international collaboration. This honorable American leader used his powerful influence as president to encourage cooperative world associations and negotiations in order to maintain peaceful relationships globally. Specifically, during Wilson’s time in office, he was forced to make crucial decisions on America’s position following the outbreak of World War I in Europe. World War I involving the Allies and the Central Powers forced Wilson to either remain neutral or take a side in the European violence.
This, to the American government, as well as the modern state’s view, is how to define peace: through militarism. The threat of weapons of mass destruction leading to the war in Iraq caused a different use of the word peace in the political justification for war. President George Bush expressed his concern fo... ... middle of paper ... ...one another if they say it is for the goal of reaching global peace. Wars will continue to be fought in order to obtain this arbitrary goal and the modern state will continue to support them, as they can justify their violence. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have been fought for years and made little progress.