I would have changed WWI. Somehow I would have arranged for the surrender terms to be more generous to the Germans - but I would have preferred a revolt in Germany to remove the Kaiser before 1918, create a new government and had a better outcome for Germany.
This would have eliminated one of the key justifications for Germany's post war militarization and possibly Hitler's rise.
Another War I would have changed would be the American Civil War. In my version, Lincoln would have NOT been assassinated, the Radical Republicans would not have disenfranchised the South and brought on radical Republican reconstruction with all its blow back for generations to come.
Another war would have been Vientam. We would have recognized the election of Ho Chi Minh and never created a puppet government or weighed in on their civil war.
I would look at the Russian Civil War of the 1920s including the rebellion or mutiney of the naval forces at the Kronstadt.
Had the Soviet power been checked maybe things might have turned out differently for millions of Russians... but would they have prevailed against Hitler ?
2007-01-10 00:51:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
You could have some real fun with this. Argue in a paper that in the Civil War the South had every right to cede from the union. Also a case can be made that by leaving Vietnam, we made things markedly worse for the average citizen there. Or that the war was "just" as being part of an overall strategy of the domino effect... Do something current by examining the Two pillars theory of containment with Iraq/Iran...Study the possible effects of new powerful nuclear Iran....
2007-01-10 01:47:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by fire16 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Quicker reaction concerning the Second World War, perhaps. The United States was a heavy determining factor in the war, despite the fact that we entered at the last minute, practically. With that said, the war may have been over in a matter of few years. That would mean vastly fewer casualties for the United States and for Europe.
2007-01-10 00:47:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by Huey Freeman 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It would definitely be the war in Vietnam. It was an ignorant and naive American public who acted like lemmings in not learning more about our involvement in Vietnam, and more importantly. what the Vietnamese was trying to achieve.
They simply wanted their independence from the French, and we wouldn't help them achieve that because Ho Chi Mien was a communist. It was OK for the US to support France and it's old school Colonialism, but couldn't see history repeating itself when we did the same thing during the Revolution, against the English. Our vision was clouded with the thought that we could support a communist country against a wrong headed ally.
2007-01-10 01:45:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by briang731/ bvincent 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
WWII. it was a terrible time is history for people all over the world with the highest death toll of any war. in all 62 million people died. The civilian toll was around 37 million, the military toll about 25 million not to mention the Holocaust wich killed 8 million Jews.
2007-01-10 00:38:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by sarah 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The 100 years war...I think it went on for far to long...cut it back to the 50 years war.
2007-01-10 01:07:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by Frann 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
This one! I would write how bush was pretty dumb for making up the whole 'weapons of mass destruction' to take over Iraq.
I would point out that we could have made up a B.S. story to invade ANY country, and invaded a much richer and more resourcefull land.
2007-01-10 02:29:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by smart@$$ 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
The war against the sexes.
2007-01-10 00:37:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by Terence C 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The "War on Drugs"
They use it to take away our civil liberties and our rights. It's nothing more than a tool to invade our privacy. Do you really think that the government cares if the citizens fry their brains?NO....it's all about power and them getting more.
2007-01-10 00:46:54
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋