One of President Reagan’s biggest achievements was the end of the Cold War. The United States and the Soviet Union signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in 1987. The Treaty agreed to eliminate all intermediate and short-range ground-based missiles and launchers from Europe. This Treaty came after a summit meeting that Pres. Reagan and Gorbachev had in the fall of 1986, in which each country was considering what type of missiles they would maintain in Europe.
This is why I think we shouldn’t have nukes in some countries of the world. There could be a potential world war III all from one nuke. For example the launching of a big out right war using nuclear war heads against Iran has activated drawing boards of the pentagon since 2005. Since 2005 we have been at war with Iran. This has turned into a pre world war three shaking countries all over the world.
1953 marked the US’s decision to become an ally with the Shah, the leader of Iran. The United State’s tie with the Shah involved using Iran’s oil wealth for economic development, furthermore he purchased billions of dollars worth of weapons of security from the US. In 1979 the monarchy was overthrown by radical Islams that were supporters of Ayatollah Khomeini, a Shia Muslim religious scholar. The motive of the Iranian students was to demonstrate their rebellion against the Shah, in which their demand was the return of the Shah for trial then execution, additionally they asked that the US stay out of their country’s internal affairs. Carter’s approach imposed the protection of the American hostages but also ensuring the alliance with Iran, this had a negative response that affected him being reelected.
President Reagan contended that we were trying to get an opening to “moderate” or anti-Khomeini forces in Iran rather than trafficking with hard-line terrorists and extremists. This explanation, too, has been dismissed as a subterfuge on the grounds that “all the moderates in Iran are dead.” Again, the evidence strongly supports the President’s view. As our chronology makes clear, the idea of seeking an opening to Iran, of trying to identify and deal with moderate elements there, predated the events that brought the hostage issue to the forefront. This theme emerged time and again in early statements from the NSC and CIA and were prominent in administration thinking throughout the Iranian initiative. And the President himself consistently stressed that he sought an opening to moderate elements in Tehran.
JFK did what he could to ease the tension between the two nations. America removed missiles from Turkey, therefore the soviets removed their missiles from Cuba. What are the implications to the more recent interpretation of international politics? What makes a leader a strong leader? A leader that’s strong doesn’t necessary have to and or want to go to war all the time.
Why Did the U.S Go to War with Iraq in 2003? Iraq war is one of the most debatable U.S military conflicts of the past decades. Different opinions exist about the propriety of this war. Nevertheless, it is likely that that the U.S intervention into Iraq was a justified measure, as it helped to prevent more serious and dangerous conflicts on the Middle East. The official reasons to enter the Iraq conflict were freeing Iraq people, planting democracy, and destroying the Iraq nuclear potential.
Though this treat he was able to have his way at the Yalta conference. Truman thought of America as the World’s atomic power and was assured by Cabinet advisers; America would reign supreme in the arms race. However Joseph Stalin was also attempting to build Russia’s power in this arms race too. Truman began to get tough on Russia in 1946 when there were strong protests in the Iran against Russian Troops. The Soviets had denied sharing control of the Turkish Straits as they had claimed they would not have.
If the United States cannot respond to a threat near our own borders, why should Europeans or Asians believe that we're seriously concerned about threats to them? If the Soviets can assume that nothing short of an actual attack on the United States will provoke an American response, which ally, which friend will trust us then? (Reagan, 2012). This statement had to do with his concern over the events that were happening in Central America, which during this time had the Pro Soviet Sandinista government running Nicaragua which in had just ridded itself a previous dictatorship in 1979. This was also problematic because in 1981, Sandinista-supported Marxist guerrillas launched an offensive against the government of El Salvador, which was pro-American (Russell, 2010).
Rational Choice Theory in “Fail Safe” In the movie “Fail Safe” the President of United States of America meets issues that create security dilemma between two nations where he has to make certain hypothesis, assumptions, and correct decisions that will be consequential to the United States as country as well as a nation. Being at the state of Cold War, United States and Soviet Union were trying to avoid and prevent limited war that would lead to Mutual Assured Destruction of two nations. However, due to technological failure one of the USA bombers gets false signal to bomb Moscow with two by twenty megaton bombs and US cannot reach the bombers because Soviet Union was jamming US radio system. As the Commander Chief of United States of America, the President has to deal with Rational Choice Theory to stop the bombing of Moscow. He has to make assumptions why all this happened, what should be done to stop Group Six from accomplishing their mission, and if the bombers will not be stopped and the bombs will be dropped what should be done to even the situation.
Iran claims the recent uranium stockpile is specifically for the use of their peaceful energy program; however, the United States and other P5 countries share the concern that the stockpile and dramatic production increase needs to be stopped immediately, preventing Iran from creating nuclear weapons. Iran’s nuclear program is assumed to be capable of creating a nuclear weapon within the next year. In a speech addressed to the UN General Assembly Netanyahu physically drew a red line on a diagram of a cartoon bomb under a divided section marked, “final stage” (Nichols 1). Netanyahu and other experts suggest that if uranium enrichment stockpiles remain at these levels or increase, Iran will be capable of nuclear weapons and sooner than expected. Netanyahu’s illustration for his speech approximates Iran is 90 percent along the way to the creation of nuclear weapons.