World History Homework Twelve Answers - Student Thirteen

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Michelle F

1. World War II: when, where, who and why? Explain.

As the name suggests, nations from every corner of the world were involved in World War II. It would be easier to list nations not involved than to list all that were involved. The key counties were Great Britain, France, Russia, and America. On the opposing side were Germany, Italy, and Japan. It began in Europe, in 1940, although Hitler and his allies had already seized countries. The war did not end in Japan until August 1945; V-E Day (Victory in Europe) was in May earlier that same year.

WW II was also a world war in regards to the area on which there was combat. It was fought throughout Continental Europe, Oceania, and there were even some bombings on Great Britain.

WWII is believed to be the result of the treaty that ended World War I. The treaty was far too harsh and left much animosity, even for those on the “winning” side, like Japan. Japan, Italy and Germany were very nationalistic, and felt slighted by the rest of the world. Their solution was to strike at those they felt were responsible for their situation, to seize land and antagonize the League of Nations. Those nations had little regard for human rights, and, Germany especially, believed that their nation and people were far superior to the rest of the world. Hitler’s “Final Solution” was to permanently exterminate anyone not part of what he considered to be the “Master Race”, especially Jews, who Hitler blamed for many of Germany’s problems.

Excellent! Note that there were many bombings by Germany of (on) Great Britain.

2. Compare and contrast communism and fascism, with at least two examples of how they are similar and two examples of how they differ.

Communism and Fascism both have dictators, little regard for the rights of the people, and did not have time or room in their state for God. However, there is not much else that they have in common. Communism strives for a worldwide revolution, in which all are considered to be equal, and kept that way, while fascism considers its own nation to be best, and would subjugate the rest of the world. Fascism puts the nation and race above individuals, while communism in theory puts the world before the individual. In actuality, the government comes first and foremost. Communism despised personal wealth; fascism recognized that it made the nation stronger.

Fantastic, may use as a model answer.

3. Why do you think Hitler and his supporters killed so many people? Explain.

Hitler is an example of a truly evil person. He killed millions of people because…? Why? Why did he feel that this was a good response to Germany’s troubles? Did he think that by exterminating all non-Aryans, Germany would then be pure, all problems over? Did he really think the rest of the world would sit by and watch? And, if that was truly his reason, and intent, why did he seize other countries? This was the action that brought the rest of the world’s attention to him. If he had not done this, he probably would have gotten away with the vile murder of millions. I think the best explanation for this is that he didn’t believe what he preached. He had his own agenda, and the only way he could get supporters was to have a somewhat plausible theory and a scapegoat. If what he wrote in his journal was true, that he did have a pact with the devil, he couldn’t have told his supporters his true reasons, because that would not inspire people as much as it would terrify them. Some of his supporters didn’t believe in God, or Satan, so that would have convinced them that their Fuhrer was crazy. Nationalism was a much better belief to feed to his followers, who were dying for something to believe in. I think his followers believed they were the “Master Race”, and everyone else was inferior. Hitler, however, quite probably had ties to powers outside this world that helped to fuel him in his destruction of Germany.

Not an easy question to answer. I appreciate your struggling with this question!
(after insertion of answer above) Fascinating insights about Hitler's "pact with the devil," and how he couldn't speak in those terms without losing credibility with atheists. Your conclusion about Hitler having "ties to powers outside this world" -- the devil and pure evil -- is thought-provoking.

4. Discuss the effect of communism spreading to China.

In the early 1900s, Russia was a weakened nation. Defeated by tiny Japan, subjected to 2 world wars and a brutal civil war that culminated in a revolution, Russia was not greatly admired, respected, or feared. China, however, was rising, quickly becoming a force to be reckoned with. When China adopted communism, it gave the idea credibility. Also, by adopting Russia’s government choices, which made it the USSR, it tacitly allied itself with USSR, formerly known as Russia. This led to animosity, and occasionally open hostility with capitalist countries, and other countries that did not condone the communist’s disregard for human rights. China adopting communism helped some nations to see what a threat communism really was, leading to the Cold War. It gave the USSR an ally, making it a slightly more formidable opponent for the next half of the century.

Insightful answer. Well done.

5. Describe any aspect of the Cold War or the Korean War or the Spanish Civil War (with reference to Orwell, if you like).

Strategic Defense Initiative, popularly known as "Stars Wars", was quite possibly the deciding force in the war, as well as Reagan's hard stance against the communists. Prior to the Strategic Defense Initiative, the war was at a stalemate. The Soviets had greatly exaggerated the reports of their power, so although the United States was far superior, they thought that they were barely equal. With Mutually Assured Destruction the policy of the day, this tied the governments' hands. If they sent missiles, the Soviets would shoot them as well. But with SDI, the US had the upper hand. SDI worried the USSR, even though they weren't sure it would even work, they didn't want to take the risk. The stalemate of MAD was broken.

Good explanation of the Cold War and SDI. (Note: I cleaned up your answer, and you might want to click "Page History" below and then click to compare the latest two versions, in order to see in highlights what I changed.

6. How did technological advances or insights help the Allied forces? Be specific.

The Allied scientists, especially cryptologists, were key in winning the war. Without them, it might not have even been possible, and there would have undoubtedly been many more casualties. Enigma was one the major codes cracked, this one cracked by a Polish scientist. The math and reasoning used was ingenious, and helped tremendously in planning strategy. With the code cracked, the Allies could understand the messages they intercepted, and even send fake ones back, which they did on occasion.

Did we really send a few fakes one back??? I need to investigate that claim .... Your answer is great.

7. Should the United States have entered World War II in Europe? Discuss.

Absolutely. Europe was still recovering from the previous war, and was entirely unprepared. Their opponents were not only prepared, but absolutely determined to annihalate their victims. The European Allies were tired, demoralized, and all but defeated. Great Britain was holding up best against the Axis attacks, and that was mostly due to the fact that the Axis had only bombed Great Britain, they hadn't launched a full attack. Without fresh American troops, morale, and Yankee ingenuity, how long would it have taken? The Germans had made themselves into a fighting machine that could withstand attacks from the outside and inside. And, like it or not, America's fate was tied to Europe. If Europe fell, the Axis would turn their eyes to the Americas next. If we had not entered the war when we did, we might be speaking German.

Extremely well-reasoned argument. Excellent point about the need for "Yankee ingenuity." (One minor quibble: "annihilate", not "annihalate").

H1. Why did genocide tragically kill so many more people in the 20th century than in the rest of world history combined?

Partially because of the rise of nationalism, and the belief that their country and race were better than everyone else. It was also partially due to the acceptance of the "theory" of evolution, and the rejection of Christian values and belief in God. There was less concern for others, more about themselves, and what was best for them. The thought was that if getting rid of everyone from another race, so be it. It probably would have been better if the world had not rejected chivalry as well.

Terrific answer! Best in the class. Will use as a model.

H3. Was it right for Churchill not to warn a town about a German bombing if he knew the town would be bombed?

Churchill sacrificed the lives of civilians to preserve the possibility of saving soldiers, in case of the chance that the Axis would figure out that their code had been cracked. De was waiting for the right time time to use the information learned from the intercepted messages. If you go through life waiting for the right,or perfect time to do things, those things might just not get done. Often, there are no right or perfect times, just some that happen to be better than others. One of the duties of the government is to keep the people safe. I don't agree with the choice he made, as the were other options available.

Superb argument, might also use this as a model.

H6. Was General MacArthur right or wrong in the Korean War?

Wrong. Regardless of how inexperienced, stupid or incompetent your president is, he is still your commander-in-chief. MacArthur swore an oath to obey him, and chose not to do so. However brilliant MacArthur's plan was, he still disobeyed his commander, and broke his oath.

Good answer, but are you sure that MacArthur took an oath to obey the president? Usually the oath taken is to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Perhaps by implication that requires people in the military forces to obey a constitutional order. But I'm confident the oath does not require, for example, a commander to obey an unlawful order.
In this case Truman's order was probably constitutional, so your point is valid.
Terrific insights, among the very best in the class all year. 90/100, with an opportunity to earn the final ten points by answering number 3. I've clicked "Watch this page" so that I'll easily see your page edit when you answer
Great finish to your terrific work all course!--Andy Schlafly 18:09, 6 May 2009 (EDT)
Regraded after you completed question 3: 100/100. Congratulations.--Andy Schlafly 11:04, 8 May 2009 (EDT)