The War Of The Vietnam War - 1575 Words

The Vietnam War was the war known as the Second Indochina War,began in 1954 and ended in 1975. It is the longest misunderstood conflict in the United States.The Vietnam War remains to us to be one of the most memorable and enduring conflicts in history in which the U.S. involvement has played a huge role. This war was one of the important events for Americans. It got influences to the United States because many citizens drafted the army and they died. Vietnam war was between the North Vietnam and South Vietnam.The communist supported the Democratic Republic and the United States supported the Republic of Vietnam,which were due to be reunified after a national election was held. The Soviet Union neither the U.S could risk an in the war fight to each other. However, they had someone to protect them. In Vietnam, the Americans fought, as a result happened in the Cold War, the USSR could not make it. However, to support the Communist cause, the Soviet Union armed its follow Communist, wh o would surround the North Vietnamese. Looking back to the past, the Vietnam got freedom- the liberation of Saigon was a huge pain for the Americans. On 30, March 2015 was the day to celebrate 40 years of liberation of the South, uniting the country of Vietnam, but also the day when America celebrated 40 years of failure and it was the most painful in the U.S. history. In this situation, the conflict has taken in some places in the world, the Vietnam war still forever be a bloody experience.Show MoreRelatedThe War Of Vietnam And The Vietnam War1525 Words   |  7 PagesThe war in Vietnam is The United States and other capitalist bloc countries supported South Vietnam (Republic of Vietnam) against the support by the Soviet Union and other socialist bloc countries of North Vietnam (Democratic Republic of Vietnam) and the Vietcong of war. Which occurred during the Cold War of Vietnam (main battlefield), Laos, and Cambodia. This is the biggest and longtime war in American history during the 1960s (Best 2008). It is also the most significant war after World War IIRead MoreThe War Of The Vietnam War1475 Words   |  6 Pageson one such event, the Vietnam War, came from entertainment-based programs and the play Miss Saigon. Despite heavy coverage in such well-known comedic films as Forrest Gump and Good Morning Vietnam, the true events were anything but a laugh for those involved. In spite of the relative recentness of the events in Vietnam, many of today’s youths know little about the topic. The events in Vietnam raise the ever-present question on the ethics of third party involvement in a war otherwise unrelated toRead MoreThe War Of The Vietnam War1729 Words   |  7 Pagesspread of communism all around the world. This is what lead to the gruesome war that lasted over a decade in Vietnam. A great deal of social changed happened all over the world, but particularly in America as the Vietnam War dragged on. As people became more aware of the atrocities going on in Southeast Asia, the endless do mestic support turned into widespread explosive protest. During the first few years of the Vietnam conflict, Americans full heartedly supported the United States and its governmentRead MoreThe War Of The Vietnam War1379 Words   |  6 Pagestensions over the Vietnam war caused many americans to become divided on the actions taken by the government across seas. Americans questioned whether the government could be trusted. The feeling of betrayal and government secrecy created the â€Å"Credibility Gap,† in which many americans believed that the government no longer was for the people, but for anything else that would benefit the government. The Vietnam War exacerbated the gap between the pro-war traditionalists and anti-war liberals along withRead MoreThe War Of The Vietnam War1430 Words   |  6 Pagesended in 1989, the Vietnam war is still being fought, but on a different battlefield, one of public opinion. Some call this war an atrocity, a war the United States should never have joined. Others call it a crime, committed by the power hungry politicians of the U.S. Now that new information from both sides of the war has surfaced and the wounds of battle have had more time to heal there is yet another opinion emerging. The Vietnam War was in fact only one of many proxy wars fought under the umbrellaRead MoreThe War Of The Vietnam War1155 Words   |  5 PagesThe Vietnam War cost many Americans their lives in the 60s and 70s. Many were drafted into the war by choice and others selectively chosen to join to help America. The contributions made had a major impact on the American side of the Vietnam War. Though many contributions were made none stand out any more than others. It is sometimes said there is always a hero in the war who helped the victory. Wars, however, do not have war heroes because a hero is making an undeniable contribution to the war andRead MoreThe War Of The Vietnam War1592 Words   |  7 PagesThe Vietnam War was said to be one of the most significant wars in the twentieth century. This w ar took place from November 1, 1955 to April 30, 1975. It was at the time, the longest war in American history. Much of the conflict was centered in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. During that time, approximately 58,219 US troops were killed in action. The reason America got involved in the Vietnam War was to stop the spread of communism in South East Asia and beyond. â€Å"America’s involvement in Vietnam derivedRead MoreThe War Of The Vietnam War1204 Words   |  5 Pagesus†¦ When that is the way you are, how do you conduct your life?† The Vietnam War killed over fifty eight thousand Americans and over 61% of the men killed were 21 years or younger. Most Americans are conflicted with the fact whether the Anti War Movement played a factor in prolonging the Vietnamese War. â€Å"In every story there are two sides and in between lies the truth.† Anonymous The United States become involved in Vietnam after the French withdrew when the Republican President Dwight EisenhowerRead MoreThe War Of The Vietnam War877 Words   |  4 PagesAnother big difference in this war was that the Vietnam War was had more disapproval and was more expressive within the American public, unlike the Korean War. The ANITWAR MOVEMENT started in the 1960s this group was never enacted until this era. There was not a group like this in Vietnam, but there were many groups that opposed the war. The main object of these revolts was the American military presence in Indochina. The ANITWAR MOVEMENT caused an influence not only socially, but also in the realmRead MoreThe War Of The Vietnam War1421 Words   |  6 PagesIn July and August of 1972, Jane Fonda made radio broadcasts from Hanoi that changed the way Americans thought of the Vietnam war and of her. To this day, many people view her as a traitor and criticise her actions in Vietnam; however, some people we re truly inspired by her words and what she had to say. Despite people s personal opinions, Fonda was a powerful speaker and knew how to convey her message to her audience. She tried to convince people that the American government and military were the

Explain the Role of Proximity and Globality in Effectiveness

Question: Explain the role of Proximity and Globality in effectiveness 1. Executive summary The aim of this assignment was to explain the effect that proximity and globality has on an organizations ability to be effective and competitive in its operating environment. Effectiveness is defined a to have an effect on (Concise Oxford dictionary) According to the Oxford dictionary Proximity is defined as the closeness, near neighborhood or approach to a subject. In business proximity is defined as the environment in which the organization is operating in. The environment consists of the macro environment and the Competitive environment. The macro-environment consists of the following factors: legal, political, economical, technical,†¦show more content†¦The mission should answer this question. The mission of an organization guides it towards the identification of its focus areas. It is with respect to these focus areas that an organization should perform if it wishes to carry out its mission. The mission should also indicate the functions to be carried out by the organization. In the mission of the organization the endeavors of those involved and the task of the organization are embodied. The direction in which the organization wishes to go also needs to be clear from the mission. 3.1.2 Strategic focus areas or performance areas Two important questions that should always be asked are: Are the right things being done? and Are the right things being done right? A third question which can be added, is Are the right things being doneShow MoreRelatedReed Supermarket Case32354 Words   |  130 PagesWebsite at www.pearsoned.co.uk/hollensen to find valuable student learning material including: Full versions of the video case studies Multiple choice questions to test your learning Annotated links to relevant sites on the web An online glossary to explain key terms Flashcards to test your knowledge of key terms and definitions Classic extra case studies that help take your learning further We work with leading authors to develop the strongest educational materials in marketing, bringing cutting-edgeRead MoreOne Significant Change That Has Occurred in the World Between 1900 and 2005. Explain the Impact This Change Has Made on Our Lives and Why It Is an Important Change.163893 Words   |  656 Pagestheir situation within the domestic sphere and the conditions under which they labored to expand the career opportunities available to them at different times and in diverse settings. She places special emphasis on the important but often overlooked roles they played in politics, particularly those associated with resistance movements, and their contributions to arts and letters worldwide. Drawing on the essay collections and series on women in world history that she has edited over the past decade

France Essay Example For Students

France Essay There are many Countries in the world, but non-like France. France is one of the most interesting countries in the world because of their history, creative arts, and even their transportation. One of the reasons why I think France is an exciting country is because France is an independent nation in Western Europe. It is also the center of a large but diminishing overseas administration. France is considered the largest Western European country. It is shaped roughly like a hexagon, and three of its six sides are bounded by water and the English Channel on the northwest, the Atlantic Ocean and Bay of Biscay on the west, and the Mediterranean Sea on the southeast (Turnpike, Pg.515). The remaining sides are mainly mountainous and are shared by seven European neighbors and Belgium and Luxembourg on the northeast: Germany, Switzerland, Italy on the east, Spain, and tiny Andorra on the south. A Frances ally is Monaco, located on the Mediterranean coast near Nice and entirely surrounded by F rench territory. In ancient times France was part of the Celtic territory known as Gaul or Gallia. Its present name is derived from the Latin Francia, meaning country of the Franks, a Germanic people who conquered the area during the 5th century, at the time of the fall of the Western Roman Empire. It became a separate country in the 9th century. Since the 17th century France has played a major role in European and world events. In the 20th century it has experienced numerous crises, including the devastation of two world wars, political and social upheavals, and the loss of a large empire in Indochina, Algeria, and West and Equatorial Africa. It has, however, survived and emerged from the ruins of World War II to become an important world supplier of agricultural and industrial products and a major partner in the European Union (EU) (Turnpike, Pg.528). Today, the term metropolitan France refers to the mainland departments and Corsica, a large island located in the Mediterranean Sea off the coast of Italy that has been a part of France since 1768. France has six overseas departments and French Guiana in South America; Guadeloupe and Martinique in the West Indies; Mayotte, an island formerly part of the Comoros, located in the Indian Ocean; Reunion, an island in the Indian Ocean; and Saint Pierre and Miquelon, islands off the east coast of Canada. France has numerous small possessions called overseas territories (Bobley, Pg.2120). These include the widely scattered islands in the South Pacific that are administered from Tahiti and are known collectively as French Polynesia. French Southern and Antarctic Territories. New Caledonia and Wallis and Futuna Islands; and many small islands in the southern oceans, including the Kerguelen and Crozet archipelagoes, and the islands of St. Paul and Amsterdam (Indian Ocean). The overseas departments and territories are represented in the French National Assembly (Bobley, Pg.2125). Another reasons why I think France is an exciting country is because France is well known for their arts consisting of their world-famous novelists, poets, playwrights, and philosophers. Many of the new movements of the 19th and 20th centuries, including impressionism and cubism, began in France. A ministry of culture was established in 1959 to preserve this rich cultural heritage and to make it more widely available outside of Paris. Cultural institutions have now been established throughout the country, and numerous expositions and festivals are held during the summer. (Fetzer, Pg.394-395)Major efforts have been made since World War II to improve and modernize the extensive French transportation system and to lessen its historical focus on the Paris metropolitan area. Train service, provided by the state, is fast and efficient. (Brian Sookram, Pg.115) The French National Railways Trains Grande Vitesse (TGV, high speed trains) are world famous. The English Channel Tunnel completed i n 1994, established the first direct rail link between France and Britain. Airlines are also state run; Air France is one of the worlds largest airline companies. Frances road system provides access to all parts of the nation. The network of is in the process of being expanded. In 1990 there were 23 million passenger cars and more than 5 million trucks and buses. Waterways carry much of the nations bulk freight; the three principal waterways deep enough to accommodate the 1,500-ton barges common in Europe are the Rhine River, the Seine between Le Havre and Paris, and the canalized section of the Moselle below Metz. (Balerdi, Pg.118)Further more, thats why France is one of the most interesting countries in the world. Bibliography:This is one of my analitical research papers. it is a hit.

To what extent was the United States responsible for the collapse of the Grand Alliance at the end of the Second World War Essay Example

To what extent was the United States responsible for the collapse of the Grand Alliance at the end of the Second World War Paper The Grand Alliance was the term given to the co-operative mutual assistance relationship between the western powers, especially the United States and Britain, and the Soviet Union, which was formed to engineer the defeat of Nazi Germany in the Second World War. For the duration of the conflict, relations between these nations were fairly good: the Americans supplied billions of dollars worth of war material to the USSR under the Lend-Lease arrangement (though with little enthusiasm: the first shipments did not arrive until late 19421), the Allies made attempts to co-ordinate their military activity, and all were agreed on the common understanding that defeating Hitlers Germany was essential for world peace and international security. Propaganda photographs of American and Soviet troops exchanging handshakes over the ruins of a defeated Third Reich gave every impression that the era of antipathy and hatred between nations was over, and that a new order of peace and prosperity would be built on the back of a crushed swastika. 2 In reality however, by the end of the war the alliance was falling apart. Even before Germany had been defeated, major chasms were opening between the allied powers, and after the war concluded these divisions only widened. The exact date by which the alliance had totally collapsed can be disputed, but it would be uncontroversial to assert that this date can fall no later than the end of the Berlin blockade in May 1949. All semblances of co-operation disappeared, and the world was plunged into a four decade-long confrontation of nuclear proportions, the Cold War. We will write a custom essay sample on To what extent was the United States responsible for the collapse of the Grand Alliance at the end of the Second World War specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on To what extent was the United States responsible for the collapse of the Grand Alliance at the end of the Second World War specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on To what extent was the United States responsible for the collapse of the Grand Alliance at the end of the Second World War specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer It has been argued that the actions of the United States were primarily responsible for the alliances collapse, that the foreign economic policy of America after 1945 represented an attempt to expand its influence into the already-agreed-upon Soviet bloc in Eastern Europe, or certainly nothing less ambitious than a drive to revitalise west European economies, the better to use them as allies and buffers in a showdown with communism. The Marshall Plan refers to the economic initiative launched by the United States on June 5th, 1947, to assist European economies in recovering from the devastation of World War Two. Though the sums of money involved fell short of the $17bn4 which the Truman administration had initially requested, the amount of aid given between 1948-52 eventually amounted to over $13bn, around 1. 3% of total US economic output during the same period. After some flirtations with accepting Marshall dollars from the Americans, Soviet authorities rejected the assistance both for themselves and their satellite regimes in what Arthur Schlesinger calls the point of no return for US-Soviet relations during the postwar period, in July 1947. Undoubtedly the plan had a political motivation as well as an economic and compassionate one: concerns were rife that if west European countries, especially France and Italy, were allowed to collapse in the aftermath of the war, then communist parties within those countries would win support and possibly even general elections (see below); the Marshall plan was in part intended to end the social discontent on which communist theory thrives, and also to demonstrate to Europeans the ability of capitalism to satisfy their basic needs. The United States was fairly open about this aim: General Marshall himself stated that one of the goals of the initiative was, the revival of a working economy in the world so as to permit the emergence of political and social conditions in which free institutions can exist. 7 The Soviets believed that the Americans intended to undermine the USSRs attempts to construct centrally planned economies in eastern Europe, or, in the event that they were refused access to these countries, to build up western Europe as a strong opponent of communism. Soviet spokesperson at the UN Andrei Vyshinsky spoke for the Stalin regime when he told the assembled diplomats: [T]his plan is an attempt to split Europe into two camps , to complete the formation of a bloc of several European countries hostile to the interests of the democratic countries of Eastern Europe and most particularly to the interests of the Soviet Union. 8 (italics original). Some historians since have been sympathetic to this view; W. A. Williams argues that the postwar atmosphere degenerated into hostility in large part because of American insistence on an open-door policy of total free trade between nations, rather than, offer[ing] the Soviet Union a settlement based on other, less grandiose, terms. 9 However, this argument is predicated on the assumption that eastern Europe was already in economic isolation from the west, whereas in fact this was a state of affairs forcibly created by the USSR. Therefore, if the Marshall Plan did increase postwar tensions this was only because of the actions already taken by the Soviet Union; without communist domination of east Europe, a plan to revive shattered economies in former warzones would not have had the degenerative effect on international relations which it evidently did have. In this sense, the Marshall Plan was a response to the Soviet aggression which had caused Cold War tensions to increase, rather than an ipso facto cause of antipathy itself. There are other examples given of where the west was responsible for an increase in superpower hostility following 1945 however. One episode deserves special mention: US interference in the Italian general election of 1948. American and British officials were concerned that in the war-ravaged countries of France and Italy, economic hardship might result in communist parties coming to power through free elections; by 1946 such organisations already seemed poised to become the largest single political forces within those countries. 0 These worries quickly disappeared in the case of France, but when an election was scheduled for April 18th 1948 in Italy, the Italian communist party, at two million members the largest outside of the Soviet bloc, was poised certainly to win a large enough share of the vote to make it impossible to keep them out of a governing coalition, and possibly an outright majority. The United States decided to intervene. A massive letter-writing campaign was organised, resulting in some ten million letters being sent by Italian-Americans to relatives in Italy arguing against a vote for the communists, and the CIA in conjunction with the Catholic Church ran a huge anti-Marxist propaganda campaign. In addition, some $2-3 million was distributed by the CIA to various anti-communist political parties in Italy. When election day came the communists were humiliated, their share of the vote halved from what they had achieved in the 1946 local elections. 1 This is not the place to discuss whether American actions were justified, but undoubtedly the precedent set by the Italian effort, and its resounding success, resulted afterwards in the United States being far more willing to engage in anti-Soviet activities elsewhere, and this case is therefore cited as an instance where the actions of America contributed to the breakup of the Grand Alliance. Another reason sometimes given is the American monopoly on nucl ear weapons in the aftermath of World War Two. On July 16th 1945, the largest man-made explosion in history took place at the Alamogordo test site in New Mexico,12 and the United States was immediately catapulted into a position of total military superiority. Though the Soviet Union had ended the war with colossal conventional armed forces, the atomic bombings of Japan in August of that year left the Russians in no doubt that their on-paper ally had become indisputably the most powerful military force in the history of the world. It has therefore been argued that this obvious fact caused Stalin and his government to feel threatened and bullied by the United States, and that this was the reason for the antagonistic nature of postwar negotiations. Williams again writes: Particularly after the atom bomb was created and used, the attitude of the United States left the Soviets with but one real option: either acquiesce in American proposals or be confronted with American power and hostility. 13 Undoubtedly the US was sometimes guilty of flaunting its nuclear dominance: American officials evidently thought that the Paris Peace Conference of July 1946 would be far more productive were it to be immediately preceded by two nuclear weapons tests. 14 On the other hand, it is quite possible that considerations of American nuclear power did not factor significantly into Soviet thinking. At the Potsdam conference (July-August 1945), more than one western official observed Stalins surprising calmness, even nonchalance, when told by President Truman that the US was in possession of a new weapon of unusual destructive force. Only later did it transpire that not only did the USSR have an atomic weapons programme dating back to 1942 but that, due to the laxness of the Manhattan Projects managers respecting its wartime ally,15 the Soviets had spies passing nuclear secrets to Moscows scientists. 6 Stalin was therefore fully aware that the United States monopoly on atomic weapons would be only temporary, and therefore that this need not be factored into long-term Soviet strategic thinking. Furthermore, the aggressive actions taken by the USSR in the postwar period (see below) show no signs of restraint by Russian leaders on account of the destructive capability of the Americans nuclear arsenal. The Berlin Blockade (June 1948-May 1949) took place and concluded before the Soviets successfully tested a nuclear bomb of their own on August 29th 1949. 7 The USSRs leaders seem to have calculated, probably correctly, that the United States wanted to avoid war with the Soviet Union at almost any cost; after August 1949 this only became more true as MAD thinking began to gain widespread acceptance. The more orthodox interpretation of the postwar period is that the alliance collapsed primarily because of the actions taken by the Soviet Union after the defeat of Germany, especially concerning the areas of Europe occupied by soldiers of the Red Army. At the Yalta conference in February 1945, only months away from the defeat of Germany, major disputes arose over the fate of European nations such as Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia which had been liberated from German control by the troops of the Soviet Union. The western leaders, President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Prime Minister Winston Churchill, wanted Stalin to conduct free and fair elections with the aim of establishing self-governing sovereign entities, but were under no illusions that the Soviet leader intended to turn them into friendly buffer states, and probably totalitarian one-party regimes at that. With respect to Poland especially, Stalin had already shown his contempt for national democracy movements by allowing the Wehrmacht to crush the Warsaw uprising in August-October 1944, and had a pro-Soviet puppet government ready and waiting to take over from the German authorities. 18 Previous Soviet treatment of Finland and the Baltic states gave every indication needed of how Stalin would react to attempts made at installing democracy in other countries. Section V pledged all of the allied powers, including the Soviet Union, to the earliest possible establishment through free elections of Governments responsive to the will of the people, and asserted the right of all people to choose the form of government under which they will live. 19 It does not need to be repeated that Stalin never had any intentions of carrying out the requirements of this passage. Immediately after the war the leaders of national communist parties, many of whom had spent the pre-war and wartime years in exile in Moscow and had long been subdued under Stalins whip, began their gradual accumulation of power. Invariably, the communists would contest a free-ish election under the auspices of the Red Army, win a minority of the vote (as little as 17% in Hungary and never more than 38%, in Czechoslovakia), and then agree to take part in a coalition government. Under pressure from Stalin, their rivals would agree to give communists control of ministries of justice and of the interior, which would then be used to disappear political opponents. In Poland the Soviet puppets methods were less subtle: a massive campaign of violence and intimidation preceded the first postwar elections in 1947, and the communists claimed 80% of the vote. 20 Despite assertions by some historians that western leaders handed over Eastern Europe to the Soviets at Yalta, short of a full-scale war with the USSR there was little if anything Roosevelt and Churchill could have done to prevent Stalin from turning eastern European countries into satellite states. Nevertheless, the dictators flagrant violations of the USSRs promises at Yalta created a chasm between the former Allies even before V-E Day, and is therefore frequently cited as the primary reason for the collapse of the Grand Alliance. As Roosevelts biographer Conrad Black has written, The issue of whether the British and Americans (and Frances) foremost ally would be Germany or Russia would be determined by whether Stalin could resist the temptation of enslaving Eastern Europe. 21