The Long Telegram and NSC- 68 George Kennan’s long telegram was a response letter to the Soviet’s position. He was basically saying that we could not make ends meet with the Soviet Union because of their philosophy and suspicious leadership. He also, felt capitalism and communism would never mesh under communism. He felt the Soviet Union would try and spread communism globally to attack capitalism and stop western ideas from spreading in communist countries. Kennan predicted the types of laws the Soviet would try to make to defeat the U.S. and explained why we should accept them.
Even scientists who worked on building the bomb were opposed to its use. Crimes of humanity are usually murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian. The dropping of the Atomic bomb killed thousands of people and scarred all the people who survived permanently. Seven scientist, who had helped build the bomb, submitted a report to the Interim Committee, which advised the President, saying “If the United Sates were to be the first to release this new means of indiscriminate destruction upon mankind, she would sacrifice public support throughout the world, precipitate the race for armaments, and prejudice the possibility of reaching and international agreement on the future control of such weapons” (John Toland, ibid, p. 762). The scientists are the ones that know best about the bomb, they were the ones that built and designed it.
Here, it is crucial to understand that the bargaining range is determined by the expected outcome of the war minus the cost for each state. Bargaining failure results as the failure to find a common ground, that both states would prefer, rather than going to war. As highlighted by Fearon (Art & Jervis, 2012) , the first causal mechanism that serves to explain why bargaining can still yield war is
They argue that that in no way that the United States was in the right to drop the atomic bombs onto Japan for any reason at all. There were even a few American top military leaders wasn’t cool with using the bombs because they knew that it was of little effect on the war seeing as Japan was trying to surrender. The reason that American political leaders give for the use of the bombs that they had to demonstrate the power that they held by destroying a city. See the whole reason behind dropping the bombs in the first place was to scare Russia from getting involved in the war with Japan and that by showing them the kind of power that they had that they believed that they could get Russians to agree upon their terms in both Europe and Asia. They said that it was to be their master card.
Due to the events of the 11th September 2001 the USA began its war on terror, and specifically targeted was George Bush’s ‘axis of evil’ which included; Iran, Iraq and North Korea. The USA used their war on terror so to legitimise their actions worldwide thus destroying any hopes for a post cold war collective international security, therefore basing their response to international aggression on protecting their own national interests. This is seen with the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001. Together with Britain they acted unilaterally in order to remove the al-Qaeda and capture bin Laden, who was the prime suspect for the 9/11 attacks. The USA believed its actions were justified by labelling them as self defence under Article 51 of the UN charter.
If the Nazi army knew the exact time and location of Normandy battle and stop the allied forces, we would spend much more time and resources to fight and win the war. Even in the peace time without any battle to fight, military information should also be considered as top secret of the country, because the advantage of the military power is the major factor in the negotiations among countries and the major mean to keep nation secure. Military censorship should involve the materials about the weapon, the proposals of the imminent military actions and the records of the ended military actions. Education censorship, the censoring of the class materials and the general guideline of teaching, is a little more complicated. Although it is tempting to think that education in a democratic society should be free, autonomous and unrestricted, a censorship on education of children and teenagers is not only appropriate but also necessary, especially when porn and violence are concerned.
They are a signal or warning to any other group that may consider hostile action. During the Cold War, the term ‘mutually assured destruction’ referred to the fact that both the US and the USSR had enough weaponry to destroy each other if they ever went to war. The theory was that if both nations knew this, both would avoid conflict at all costs. The haka is a traditional Maori display of aggression seen on the rugby field prior to a game. It serves the same purpose of trying to convince your opponent not to bother competing too hard because you are stronger than them.
Michael Walzer argues that there is an important moral difference between guerilla warfare and terrorism in his just war theory. The war convention prohibits combatants from intentionally killing civilians and imposing foreseeable harm on noncombatants that are disproportionate to a military end, thus the jus in bello criteria of proportionality and discrimination are crucial for assessing whether or not a military action is just and morally acceptable. Walzer argues that it is most preferable that civilians have a right that “due care” is taken by combatants to avoid imposing unnecessary and inappropriate risks of harm and death upon them.  This claim about civilian rights and noncombatant immunity works to impose restrictions and prohibitions on certain military tactics and strategies in an effort to prevent military and political leaders from weighing victory over concern for human rights to life and liberty. Walzer distinguishes between guerilla warfare and terrorism, arguing that the latter’s conduct is not justified according to the established rules of war.
The recent invasion of Iraq was caused because several governments, primarily the American, believed that Iraq was creating Weapons of Mass Destruction. However, three years after the invasion, no weapons have been found. The invasion has however brought Saddam Hussein; a cruel dictator who has killed many people for little reason, down from the Iraqi government. Having American forces in Iraq is also helping to lower the danger of civil war within the country. World War Two is a different situation as the original problem was solved.
“War should be avoided” I strongly agree with this statement as war never ends well, even if some people are victorious, they’ve still most likely lost thousands of lives of their own country, and others. War should definitely be avoided at all costs, and only even be thought about as a very last resort. Also only in extreme occasions such as being threatened with a bomb attack that could kill thousands of innocent people or being absolutely certain that someone may have weapons of mass destruction, as then, you may be saving more lives of innocent people than you would lose going to war, and also men or women in the army are putting their own lives at risk, whereas people that could be victims could be the ones who haven’t made the big decision to do that.