The emotion a soldier experiences cannot be understood by anyone except those in war. This emotion is unique to each individual, as we all have different outlooks on life, death and war. Lieutenant Jimmy Cross’s experience of the death of Lavender undoubtedly illustrates the effect war eventually makes on a soldier. Due to his mistake, Cross “felt shame. He hated himself.
The essays “Why Soldier Won’t Talk,” by John Steinbeck, and “Ambush” by Tim O’Brien, are both about their own personal experiences in war. The authors explain the awful life or death choices the soldiers must decide and consequently deal with for the real of their lives. Although both of the authors have experienced war, their viewpoints and descriptions of war are incredibly different from each other. In the essay, “Why Soldier Won’t Talk,” Steinbeck directly avoids using the word “I,” and instead speaks in second person references. Steinbeck wants the reader to understand the harsh and difficult living conditions the soldiers are living in.
Pinkie’s Roman Catholic and Ida’s paganistic beliefs represent two extremes in ‘Brighton Rock’; how does Graham Greene explore the relationship between these character’s actions and how they are formed and affected by their personal religious code. In Brighton Rock, Pinkie is portrayed as the villain despite his Roman Catholic beliefs. Pinkie neither smokes nor drinks and believes in hell however he has no morals when it comes to the subject of murder and other crimes, which should be strongly against his religion. The description of the two also differs greatly, with Ida’s curves and Pinkie’s sharp edges Greene created much dissimilarity in their appearances and their personalities. Throughout the novel Ida and Pinkie’s beliefs influence their actions and create a contrast between the characters even though they do not directly speak.
Catch-22 is a novel that at first appears to simply be the monotonous story of an Air-Force captain during World War 2. The apparent uniformity of the story is present because the exposition of the story takes place on the lonely island of Pianosa, in the Mediteranean. Upon further inspection of the story, it becomes a darkly comedic satire portraying the madness and absurdity of warfare. The Air Force captain by the name of Yossarian is infuriated by the fact that he has no idea why he is fighting the enemy. His wholehearted belief in the idea that he’s “the last sane man on earth” remains a motif throughout the novel.
This very blatant observation demonstrates Remarque’s point that war is simply gruesome. However, even though Remarque often points out the brutal blood bath that a battle can bring he also describes how cruel the army can be when they aren’t fighting anyone. When Paul and his friends are discussing how vicious superior officers such as Himmelstoss can be Kat explains how that came to be, “man is essentially a beast…the army is based on that; one man must always have power over the other. A non-com, can torment a private, a lieutenant a non-com, a captain a lieutenant, until he goes mad,” (Remarque 44). Kat describes the never ending cycle of abusive punishment that comes from a commanding officer making a man vengeful and in turn brutal to those he is superior to.
Tuchman believes this shows Vietnam to be a police war against communism and of nation building. Tuchman feels we do not learn from history because of the power makers or human beings; and Tuchman points out that each human is different. Policymakers do not listen according to Tuchman. Tuchman feels foreign policy officers are ignored and there is a gap between observers in the field and policy makers in the capital. Tuchman believes that there is a pre-conceived bias in the policy makers heads and they make policy less to fit the facts and more to fit the notions and mental baggage they have carried since
The article with the weakest argument is article G. The cause stated in this article is that events in society that occurred before the trials were the reason for the accusation of witches in 1692. This is a weak article because it makes absolutely no connection with the main topic of the article. The author drifts off topic speaking about Bacon’s Rebellion and Leisler’s rebellion, yes the author is trying to explain that those are possible factors that may have contributed to the events of the trials, but why? How? The explanation isn’t clear and understandable.
Slaughterhouse Five Essay Question 3 War has the ability to affect and inspire people to many degrees. It was the horrors of World War II that inspired Kurt Vonnegut to write Slaughterhouse Five, a unique anti-war novel in which the main character, Billy Pilgrim, has become “unstuck in time” and travels simultaneously through phases of his life, concentrating on his shattering experience as an American prisoner of war who witnesses the firebombing of Dresden. Throughout this novel, Vonnegut uses scientific motif and narrative structure to cope with the emotional impact of war, enhancing the overall meaning that our existence is finite; death is the only constant. Kurt Vonnegut injects elements of science fiction with Billy’s belief in Tralfamadorians, aliens who have a four dimensional view that time does not flow, that all moments exist concurrently and it is only an illusion if they appear to have any linearity. After the unexpected death of his wife Valencia, Billy begins to seriously advocate this view for it helped him mitigate the pain of what seemed like wrongful death.
Cara War is something that you never want to experience, especially the war in Vietnam. Vietnam was an absolute mess because at no point was the United States as a whole on the same page about the war in general. Some believed that it was an important war that we needed to win and others believed that we had absolutely no business in Vietnam. As General Sherman said, “War is Hell,” but most vets would say that Vietnam was far worse than hell. They were placed into a war that from the start was impossible to win due to many circumstances and situations starting with the rules of war.
Often times more than not someone walks into court attempting to plead by way of insanity. This is where the question is always asked “who do you get to define insanity.” It is defined in the court of law as a person who is insane cannot have the intent required to perform a criminal act because they either do not know that act is wrong or cannot control their actions even when they understand the act is wrong. However, the definition of insanity is still being debated outside the courts as well as inside the