When war broke out in Europe in August 1914 he was able to call a press conference in which he lectured the White House reporters on the need for them to strive for complete neutrality and urging them not to fan the flames of public opinion.1 “Of course, the European world is in a highly excited state of mind, but the excitement ought not to spread to the United States. So far as we are concerned, there is no cause for excitement.”2 Woodrow Wilson's initial firm stance on neutrality was
McNamara’s advice to withdraw military personnel prior the coup was no longer an option as instability in Vietnam posed a threat to national security. Although McNamara concedes the conflict was a civil war, he presses the importance of understanding the conflict as an element of the Cold War. Out of fear for further spread of communist interest, the US began to unilaterally support South Vietnam militarily. McNamara however argues that had the US been more able to empathize with and to better understand the Vietnamese, large-scale military intervention could have been avoided. America’s duty to act where others can not or will not stems from McNamara’s belief that there’s something beyond oneself.
Moreover, as Britain was one of the major power of the WWI, the effects on both of their men and arms were not recovered from the WWI. This also led Chamberlain hesitant to take part for a large war at this time. Thus, making an appeasement with the Germans was the best solution for them to be recovered and prepared later in the future because rather than fighting a big war against advanced army with unprepared-no men army, they would fight a war with recovered army even if the opponents might grow more. ! Back again to 1919, the Treaty of Versailles made conclusions to the German’s territorial, armed forces, colonies, preparations and indemnity, and the war guilt issues.
The newly formed German democratic government saw the Versailles Treaty as a dictated peace (Diktat). Not all Germans wanted to sign the surrender the war and accept terms of the treaty. France, which had suffered more damage wise than the other countries in the big four, had insisted upon harsh terms, the peace treaty did not ultimately help to settle the international disputes which had formed to start World War 1. On the contrary, the treaty created inter-European cooperation and started the recovery of problems that caused the war in the first place. Germany felt that the treaty should not be harsh and that it should be created with intentions of future cooperation and efficient, fair recuperation.
“Ending the War Against Japan: Science, Morality and the Atomic Bomb” Summary The author of this essay gives three different options to end World War II. Option one states that the United States should make peace with japan. The United States knows that japan is very close to surrendering but has not surrendered because they are afraid that we will put their emperor on trail as a war criminal. The Japanese feel that the emperor is a descendent from the gods and they will do everything to protect him. If the United States is clear that they do not want to make him a criminal but instead a national symbol then maybe the Japanese might agree and surrender.
Woodrow Wilson was president for the United States at the time did not want to get involved with a war that took place in Europe. But he had to be opened minded because if Germany took over Europe they would become a threat for the United States. Woodrow Wilson declared war against Germany
Therefore, the Vietnam War can be said to be part of the Cold War due to the Americans acting upon their policy of containment and fear of the Domino Theory. However, the Vietnam War can be said to not be part of the Cold War due to its origins not being from communist and capitalist disputes, this is simply why the US became involved. Unlike other events in the Cold War, for example the Berlin Airlift (where Stalin blockaded East Berlin from the West due to the prosperity stemming from capitalism in West Berlin and Germany) and the Korean war (where the communist north attacked the South that was occupied by a US military administration, therefore making it anti-communist). The origins the Vietnam War were due to unresolved Vietnamese problems, for example the creation of a power vacuum due to the withdrawal of France in March 1954. This led to the Geneva Agreements, where Vietnam was divided along the 17th Parallel.
The British Prime Minister, Lloyd George, realised the severe implications that this could have and so wanted a more lenient peace treaty. The American public had little interest in Post War Europe but their President, Woodrow Wilson, wanted a Germany that would make a good neighbour in Europe, hence his fourteen points. To reach a compromise a meeting was needed at the small palace of Versailles, not far from the French capital, Paris. Here the leaders of ‘The Big Three’ (Clemenceau, Wilson and George), tried to find a lasting peace of Europe. This meeting was intended to bring stability and peace into a crippled Europe.
Although he did approve of the bomb, Roosevelt was unconcerned about actually dropping the bomb on Japan. Instead he supported the idea that since Germany was possibly looking into the same type of destructive weapon, the U.S. needed to advance in the field in order to prevent detrimental attacks against them. He had the Great Depression on his hands as well and was less motivated during his time to destroy Japan to end the war more efficiently. On the other hand, Truman saw his opportunity of bringing the United States to the end of the war in a quick manner by releasing the bombs since Japan had no intentions of taking an easy surrender. To prevent going through an invasion, Truman made a hasty decision to drop the bombs.
I could blame the defeat which would have been the result of my action on him and come out as Peacemaker…But I had a greater obligation than to think only of the years of my administration and of the next election. I had to think of the effect of my decision on the next generation and on the future of peace and freedom in America and in the world.” However, this idealistic standpoint was mere propaganda. In private, President Nixon would favour a more militant and aggressive approach. This contradictory position not only exposed Nixon’s vulnerability to public opinion, but also his disillusion and misunderstanding of the complexities of such a war. It is imperative to understand the factors which influenced President Nixon’s strategies and decision making during the Vietnam War.