Governments of countries for example often had to keep their peoples under control participating in the war and having mixed feelings/ opinions of the war. As front lines are filled with trenches interactions in this case refer to several things such as gunfire, bombing, and shouting of orders. These examples fall under the first category of Battles and are either physical or verbal. Throughout the war, diplomacy was an advantage to the allies. For example when faced with heavy casualties and problems at home, Russia withdrew from the war and instead the United States entered brining much needed support and troops to help win the war.
“Early in the war the need for better communication between, pilots and tank commanders, infantry captains and forward observers, and between the infantry men and the tankers after the closing of the hatch needed to be drastically improved” (Ambrose, 45-46). The opposing forces had already been in war for quite some time so one could argue that we had an advantage due to our freshness, and resources that had not been touched yet. Despite this we would be at disadvantage when it came to experience in the war and the terrain that would be encountered. The American tactics consisted of being mobile “and racing across the battlefield” all of these tactics went up in smoke when they landed in Europe and they were faced with heavy defenses and worst of all hedgerows (Ambrose, 56). War is always evolving and the Germans had many weapons and tactics our American troops did not foresee.
* Ideology Ideology is a system of concepts regarding how things ought to be organised. Teams of individuals could have competitive thoughts and ideations, this will cause conflict. An example of this can be the cold war, in which the USA and also the Soviet Union had competitive political and economic ideologies after the world war ll. * Politics This issue is split into two areas, International Politics and Internal Politics. International politics is engulfed with potential sources of war and conflict, like border disputes and disputes over territory, as shown within the current conflicts in India, Pakistan
New inventions that were discovered in the era of World War I made fighting techniques more efficient. This war was the turning points for new and useful weapons. Before this point the methods to warfare were very simple and straight forward, now with planes in the air creating a whole other dimensions to tactics and strategy, tanks that covered the ground, and torpedoes in the water. Times were changing and if you were lagging behind you may have been defeated by other nations. Some of the biggest changes to the scenes was the invention of machine guns, poisonous gases/ chemical warfare, and trench warfare.
This freedom also opened doors for abuse. Armies, necessary to protect freedom, were able to bully other nations. There were two safeguards against the menacing instability. The first safeguard was a doctrine and it stated: wars were made by hungry, arrogant, ignorant, oppressed men. It was thought that the new world would get rid of the need for war.
The implications of this on the services are far reaching due to the fact there is the ever current risk to the lives of serving soldiers who are in combat or an area of global instability. They may be seriously killed or injured by the enemy, by civilians who resent the military presence or even by friendly fire. There is also a huge impact on the family of military personnel who may experience extreme stress or anxiety about the welfare of their loved one. War is also a extremely expensive prospect and a war can quickly use up many types of resources including fighting vehicles, ammunition and protective equipment. Reserve
Thomas Poozhikala D period 3/26/12 Vietnam and Johnson 1. Why did President Johnson increase America’s military presence in Vietnam? What was the Gulf of Tonkin resolution? Johnson increased America’s military presence in Vietnam because he and his advisers believed that an excalation of American force would drive the enemy to defeat with a minum loss on both sides. Therfreo he ordered immediatiely to have bombing raids agisnt military installations in North Vietnam and ordered his troops to land.
The opposition against the Tsar grew due to the loss of war and other factors such as; the Tsar controlling the army, the refusal to co-operate with the Dumas and Rasputin being an advisor. To an extent many of these factors are significant to the Tsar’s opposition growing. However,
These include the tensions between the isolationists and those who wanted to become involved in the war, for example, and the chapter concerning the battle for the hearts and minds of the American people illustrate how deeply the war divided American society. The war itself raised other issues, such as how the war was to be fought; how the domestic battle against suppression and dissent would be fought; and perhaps most importantly; what the eventual move away from isolationism would entail, and the role America would have in the post-war world. In doing so, he also addresses, more broadly, the changes such involvement brought to American society, in particular, the expansion of government apparatus during the war, and the attempts of the government to persuade the American people of the righteousness of American involvement in the affairs of the ‘Old World’. Over Here also offers an excellent study of the progressive strand in American politics, the debates between progressives regarding American involvement in the war, and how it gave way after 1918 to the Red Scare and also the nativist drive for ‘One Hundred Per Cent
The U.S. had learned its lesson from Vietnam, showing American young men fighting and dying too explicitly was no way to keep public support for a war. It is obvious because of the many attempts at peaceful diplomacy prior to the fighting that America needed to win a quick and decisive victory. Some military experts have even referred to the coalition's invasion of Iraq as a “Blitzkrieg.” As a result, the military payed special attention to limit what the media could see in an attempt to portray the war as “bloodless.” Images of Iraqi vehicles being blown to bits by the coalition air forces were broadasted into the homes of ordinary Americans. These images did just that, the unprecedented nature of the intense, precise, air raids portrayed the war as a one sided