English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

How did the leaders justify the conflict to their people?

How essential is it that leaders justify war?

Did the justification change depending on audience?

(i.e. constituents,allies,neutral parties,opponents).If so how?

Did the justification change over time?If so how?

Did the intended audience accept the justification?This can
be judged by examining newspaper columns and editorials, statements by governments & polls.

What determines when the point of last retort is reached?

How does the conflict support the principles & categories of war?

Does the conflict lend itself to other principles or categories of war?

Do you agree w/ the principles & categories of war?

Please answer question w/ much details and evidence
Thank you

2007-03-25 12:27:00 · 2 answers · asked by mundoskisis4life 1 in Arts & Humanities History

2 answers

at the time to stem the growth of communism during the cold war.

2007-03-25 12:35:08 · answer #1 · answered by chuck h 5 · 0 0

this is worry-free to earnings historic previous on reflection. because of the fact the fall of the Berlin Wall and communism itself, one would desire to assert that many chilly conflict events have been pointless. on the time communism appeared very stable and it doubtlessly would desire to swallow lots of the international. based on the domino concept, if S Vietnam fell, different SE asiea international locations would desire to fall as nicely. And the certainty of those cases is that many international locations have been kissing as much as the Russians. Cuba, of direction, and Cuban armies have been in Angola, Africa. Allende grew to become right into a communist in Chili. Egypt and Syria have been allies of the Russians. for the period of that era there grew to become right into a conflict between the unfastened international and the Soviet international to win over different international locations. the genuine lesson of Vietnam is that the U. S. shouldn't make one million/2-hearted efforts to win any conflict. we would desire to continuously dedicate ourselves completely or not dedicate ourselves in any respect. The Vietnam conflict shows a failure of attitude, not a failure of purpose. perhaps the extra advantageous reason communism grew to become into defeated is that Reagan, with such courses as famous individual Wars, made the Soviets understand that they simply could not take care of to pay for to maintain up with the U. S. military. It grew to become into our military power that gained the chilly conflict, and you'd be able to desire to even say that our settle on in Vietnam grew to become right into a factor of our military prowess that the Soviets continuously had to nicely known. Vietnam would have performed a evaluate defeating communism in the long-term.

2016-11-23 15:23:18 · answer #2 · answered by pelak 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers