Original Writings ~ The Literates Asylum
September 17, 2021, 09:03:26 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the new Original Writings, enjoy Smiley.
 
  Home Help Staff List Calendar Login Register  

History Essay (3/3 Completed)

Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: History Essay (3/3 Completed)  (Read 221 times)
Kitsune Tsuki
Co-Administrator
Novelist
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Favorite Genre: Fantasy, Steampunk
Posts: 105


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« on: May 19, 2007, 08:57:28 pm »

I got to do three essays for my final test grade in history.  They mainly focus around world war 1 &2 and it's aftermath.  Please critique.


   The first World War was one of the most bloodiest battles in all of history.  It was a war of firsts, in many aspects such as the first war to use many weapons now considered commonplace.  It is also considered a war that could have been avoided.  What prevented World War 1 from being avoided was militarinism and nationalism.  These three things were key aspects in what caused the war, and had if one of these key aspects was taken out, the conflict could have been downscaled, or even outright avoided.   If there was no militarianism or nationalism, the war could have been avoided.

   Nearly all nations at this time had been placing emphasis on improving and expanding their military.  They also used propaganda to make battle seem as if it was glorious, romantic thing, with power heroes leading men to a glorious, beautiful victory.  This glorification of war and battles lead not only nations, but the people of these nations to want to go to war.  Enrollment in the army was high, as many people were  eager and willing to fight for their nation.  Most governments at this time were spending large amounts of money to supply their military with top of the line weapons and vehicles.  This emphasis on the military is also affected the foreign policies of a nation, leading countries to be particularly aggressive with their neighbors.

   Something, which had emerged only within the last century prior to the war, was nationalism.  The core idea behind nationalism is you should have pride in your nationality and ethnicity.  Nationality is very much a double-edged sword, it can bring about revolutions against oppressive, and often foreign, governments or it can lead to revolts by lesser ethnic groups within a large empire.  Much of what lead up and caused World War 1 was due to nationalism.  Also, nationalism, compounded with militarianism, caused people eager to join their nations army, ready to serve their nation.  Had the idea of nationalism not been so popular at this time, many of the key factors that began the war would not of happened, such as the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

   Militarianism and nationalism are the two key components to why the war started.  Individual they don’t amount to much, but together they create a unified chain of effect, which turned into the first World War.  Had there not been a sense of nationalism in the Serbian organization that assassinated Archduke Ferdinand, they might of not have any reason to kill him.  Alternatively, had he been killed, but nations were not already prepared or eager for war, the conflict might not of happened on such a large scale.

   Like many wars and conflicts, World War 1 was caused due to a variety of reasons.  Furthermore, it was not just one reason that caused the war, but rather a variety of reasons that combined lead to one of the bloodiest wars in history.  If one of the factors of the war was missing, and the war still occurred, then it would have been an unnecessary war, because there was no reason to why it had to happen.  However, because there was a reason to why the war happened, it was not unnecessary, though that is not to say that it was necessary and it could have been avoided.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2007, 01:08:02 am by Akriel » Report Spam   Logged

In a poll of Columbia\'s grad school of journalism, 57% believe in ESP, 57% in dowsing, 47% in the ability to read a person aura, and 25 believe in the lost continent of Atlantis

To the River Red, across the ochre steppe
A thousand fathers killed,
A thousand virgin daughters spread with swords still wet,
With swords still wet with the blood of their dead

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

jazen
Novelist
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 163


A smile costs little but gives much treat sum1 2 1


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2007, 10:33:19 pm »

First Paragraph
First sentence, one of the bloodiest or the most bloody, most bloodiest doesn’t quite sound right.
Sentences 3 to end. Try ‘It is also considered a war which could have been avoided, some things which prevented this where militarianism and nationalism, if either one of these where removed from the equation then the war could have been downscaled, or even outright avoided.

Third Paragraph
Sentence 5, try caused people to be eager to serve their nation by joining it’s army.

Forth Paragraph
First sentence, try are the two key components to causing the war.

Fith Paragraph
First sentence, try caused by a variety of reasons.
Second sentence; try but rather a number of reasons that combined, leading to one of the bloodiest wars in history.
Third sentence, try, If even one of the factors involved in causing the war was removed then there would have been no reason for the war to occur, so if it did it would have been an unnecessary war.
Forth sentence, try, However as there were reasons for the war to take place it was not an unnecessary war, though that does not mean that is was necessary, it could have been avoided.

Overall
It is a good draft, put it into a word processor and check the spelling and grammar - a few words aren't recognised by my computer.
It reads relatively well, as I have not done history in a while I am afraid I cannot comment on the accuracy - I usually tried to tune out anything involving too much blood and gore, which caused a number of problems when at GCSE we did Ireland, World War 2 and the History of Medicine.
Keep trying, I'll check over the rest of it when it is done if you want, you should do well, providing you check the spellings - if the computer doesn't recognise it then check a dictionary or something - if you have a text book then they may be in the glossary (normally found at the back).
Good Luck
Report Spam   Logged

AMERICA here I come,
I will be out of the country - and away from internet - for the next 2-3 weeks.

A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step,
A story of a thousand words starts with a single thought.
Kitsune Tsuki
Co-Administrator
Novelist
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Favorite Genre: Fantasy, Steampunk
Posts: 105


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2007, 08:05:53 pm »

Took some of your suggestions.  Revised it a little.  Was mispelling militarism, was adding like 5 extra letters.  Haven't started on the second one yet.

   The First World War was one of the bloodiest battles in all of history.  It was a war of firsts, in many aspects such as the first war to use many weapons now considered commonplace.  It is also considered a war that could have been avoided.  Though there was a multitude of factors, the two key ones that prevented World War 1 from being avoided were militarism and nationalism.  These two things were key aspects in what caused the war, and had if one of these key aspects was taken out, the conflict could have been downscaled, or even outright avoided.   If there was no militarism or nationalism, the war could have been avoided.

   Nearly all nations at this time had been placing emphasis on improving and expanding their military.  They also used propaganda to make battle seem as if it was glorious, romantic thing, with power heroes leading men to a glorious, beautiful victory.  This glorification of war and battles lead not only nations, but also the people of these nations to want to go to war.  Enrollment in the army was high, as many people were eager and willing to fight for their nation.  Most governments at this time were spending large amounts of money to supply their military with top of the line weapons and vehicles.  This emphasis on the military is also affected the foreign policies of a nation, leading countries to be particularly aggressive with their neighbors.

   Something, which had emerged only within the last century prior to the war, was nationalism.  The core idea behind nationalism is you should have pride in your nationality and ethnicity.  Nationality is very much a double-edged sword, it can bring about revolutions against oppressive, and often foreign, governments or it can lead to revolts by lesser ethnic groups within a large empire.  Much of what lead up and caused World War 1 was due to nationalism.  Also, nationalism, compounded with militarism, caused people eager to join their nations army, ready to serve their nation.  Had the idea of nationalism not been so popular at this time, many of the key factors that began the war would not of happened, such as the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

   Militarism and nationalism are the two key components to why this war started.  Individual they don’t amount to much, but together they create a unified chain of effect, which turned into the First World War.  Had there not been a sense of nationalism in the Serbian organization that assassinated Archduke Ferdinand, they might of not have any reason to kill him.  Alternatively, had he been killed, but nations were not already prepared or eager for war, the conflict might not of happened on such a large scale.

   Like many wars and conflicts, World War 1 was caused by a variety of reasons.  Furthermore, it was not just one reason that caused the war, but rather a number of reasons that combined lead to one of the bloodiest wars in history.  If just one of the factors of the war was missing, and the war still occurred, then it would have been an unnecessary war, because there was no reason to why it had to happen.  However, as there were reasons to why the war happened it was not unnecessary, though that is not to say that it was necessary and it could have been avoided.

Worlock ~ Separated the paragraphs for ease of read and nicer layout.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2007, 09:26:55 am by Tau Worlock » Report Spam   Logged

In a poll of Columbia\'s grad school of journalism, 57% believe in ESP, 57% in dowsing, 47% in the ability to read a person aura, and 25 believe in the lost continent of Atlantis

To the River Red, across the ochre steppe
A thousand fathers killed,
A thousand virgin daughters spread with swords still wet,
With swords still wet with the blood of their dead
jazen
Novelist
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 163


A smile costs little but gives much treat sum1 2 1


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2007, 08:19:07 pm »

First paragraph sentence 5, change ‘in what’ to ‘that’, and remove the word ‘had’. The last sentence is unnecessary.
   
Second paragraph, second sentence, ‘it was glorious’ add the letter ‘a’ so it reads ‘it was a glorious’. Last sentence could ‘a nation’ change to ‘nations’. Check the spelling of ‘enrollment’ my computer says it only has one ‘l’ although the American spellings may be different.

Paragraph 3, sentence 5 doesn’t quite read right, it sounds like something is missing.

Paragraph 4
, sentence 2. Change individual to individually.
My thoughts  I think that is is good so far, although by the end it is getting slightly repetitive in regards to the causes.
Report Spam   Logged

AMERICA here I come,
I will be out of the country - and away from internet - for the next 2-3 weeks.

A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step,
A story of a thousand words starts with a single thought.
Kitsune Tsuki
Co-Administrator
Novelist
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Favorite Genre: Fantasy, Steampunk
Posts: 105


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #4 on: May 22, 2007, 12:52:52 am »

Used your fixes.  Glad to have you helping me, you got a good eye for grammatical errors and sentence structure.

As far as it being repetative(sp?), any suggestions on fixing the issue.

I also started working on the second essay.  Got 3 paragraphs done.  Need to have a third body paragraph and a closing.  I got no idea on what to do the former on though.

   The First World War was one of the bloodiest battles in all of history.  It was a war of firsts, in many aspects such as the first war to use many weapons now considered commonplace.  It is also considered a war that could have been avoided.  Though there was a multitude of factors, the two key ones that prevented World War 1 from being avoided were militarism and nationalism.  These two things were key aspects that caused the war, and had if one of these key aspects was taken out, the conflict could have been downscaled, or even outright avoided.   If there was no militarism or nationalism, the war could have been avoided.
   
Nearly all nations at this time had been placing emphasis on improving and expanding their military.  They also used propaganda to make battle seem as if it was a glorious, romantic thing, with power heroes leading men to a glorious, beautiful victory.  This glorification of war and battles lead not only nations, but also the people of these nations to want to go to war.  Enrollment in the army was high, as many people were eager and willing to fight for their nation.  Most governments at this time were spending large amounts of money to supply their military with top of the line weapons and vehicles.  This emphasis on the military is also affected the foreign policies of nations, leading countries to be particularly aggressive with their neighbors.
   
Something, which had emerged only within the last century prior to the war, was nationalism.  The core idea behind nationalism is you should have pride in your nationality and ethnicity.  Nationality is very much a double-edged sword, it can bring about revolutions against oppressive, and often foreign, governments or it can lead to revolts by lesser ethnic groups within a large empire.  Much of what lead up and caused World War 1 was due to nationalism.  Nationalism, compounded with militarism, made people eager to join their nation’s army and serve their country.  Had the idea of nationalism not been so popular at this time, many of the key factors that began the war would not of happened, such as the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand.
   
Militarism and nationalism are the two key components to why this war started.  Individually they don’t amount to much, but together they create a unified chain of effect, which turned into the First World War.  Had there not been a sense of nationalism in the Serbian organization that assassinated Archduke Ferdinand, they might of not have any reason to kill him.  Alternatively, had he been killed, but nations were not already prepared or eager for war, the conflict might not of happened on such a large scale.
   
Like many wars and conflicts, World War 1 was caused by a variety of reasons.  Furthermore, it was not just one reason that caused the war, but rather a number of reasons that combined lead to one of the bloodiest wars in history.  If just one of the factors of the war was missing, and the war still occurred, then it would have been an unnecessary war, because there was no reason to why it had to happen.  However, as there were reasons to why the war happened it was not unnecessary, though that is not to say that it was necessary and it could have been avoided.



   After Germany to the ally powers in World War 2, there was still a second front to win, versus Japan on the Pacific.  Japan, the last member of the Axis to fall, had been attacking and conquering local nations since before the war in Europe began.  After the war in Europe finished, the Allies began to pour all their resources into defeating Japan.  In an attempt to end the war as quickly as possible, the United States decided to unleash the most powerful bomb at that time.  When Japan still didn’t cease their war efforts, a second atomic bomb was dropped, that time convincing to Japan to accept peace.  Though the potency and effectiveness of the bomb was undeniable, it is often debated whether the use of the bomb was the best course of action.  Some claim that is saved more lives, in comparison to an invasion of Japan, while others argue that Japan was almost defeated and was ready to surrender, making the use of the bomb unnecessary.

   The exact number of casualties caused by the two atomic bombs dropped over Japan is hard to discern.  No exact number can be produced due to the lack of accurate records at the time, as well as the number of indirect deaths caused by nuclear fallout.  The most commonly accepted number of death is approximately 214,00 people, including deaths due to radioactive exposure.  This number is considered minor compared to the potential casualties is the United States invaded Japan.  The Secretary of State, James Bryrnes, declared a year after the closure of the war that approximately 500,000 United States soldiers might have died if the United States had invaded, rather then dropping the bombs.

   Others argue that Japan was essentially defeated when the bomb was dropped, and that they would have called for peace in just a few months time, regardless off whether the bomb would have been dropped or not.  Many of the people who supported this were then-General Dwight D. Eisenhower and General Douglas MacArthur, who was the highest ranking officer in the Pacific Theater.)  The idea was that continual bombing of Japanese cities, using conventional bombs, would weaken them without inflicting vast amounts of casualties upon United States soldiers.  Another group of detractors from the atomic bomb claim that it was unethical and borderline genocide to use it.
Report Spam   Logged

In a poll of Columbia\'s grad school of journalism, 57% believe in ESP, 57% in dowsing, 47% in the ability to read a person aura, and 25 believe in the lost continent of Atlantis

To the River Red, across the ochre steppe
A thousand fathers killed,
A thousand virgin daughters spread with swords still wet,
With swords still wet with the blood of their dead
jazen
Novelist
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 163


A smile costs little but gives much treat sum1 2 1


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #5 on: May 22, 2007, 08:36:25 am »

Section 1
Paragraph 1

First 2 sentences are fine. I’m going to have to look closely at the 3rd sentence later. Change ‘was’ to 'were’ in the 4th sentence. Remove the word 'had' from 5th sentence. How does it look if you change the last sentence to ‘Without militarism or nationalism the war might never have taken place’?

Paragraph 2
This is fine - I think.

Paragraph 3
This is fine  - I think.

Paragraph 4
First sentence add an 'as' so that it reads 'as to why this war started'.

Paragraph 5
Try merging the first 2 sentences to get
'World War 1 had a number of causes which all combined to lead to one of the bloodiest wars in history.'
Sentence 3, we know you are talking about the war, change 'the factors of the war' to 'these factors'


Section 2
Paragraph 1

First sentence makes no sense, is a word missing in the first section of it?  Seventh sentence ‘that is saved’ change 'is' to an ‘it.’

Paragraph 2
Sentence 4, the ‘is’ should be an if. Last sentence should be ‘rather than’ not ‘rather then’.

Paragraph 3
First sentence ‘whether the bomb had been dropped’ not ‘would have been dropped’
Second sentence, try, ‘were the then General…’ rather than ‘were then – General…’ You also put a closing bracket but no opening one.


Overall
I will look over the repetitiveness issue later, and double check all the grammar. So far so good though.
Helps when I use a US spell checker rather than a UK one.

New thoughts
Section 1:Paragraph 1 you mention that it is a war of firsts weapon wise, it was also however a war of lasts as well, look at civilian casualties compared to WWII, trenches are also, from my understanding, not used in battle, and battle fields are more the cities than open fields. War involves civillians a lot more than it used to.
What happens if you completely remove the third sentence? I'm not quite sure that would work, just have a look at the way it reads without it.
Section 2:Paragraph 1 the missing word should, I think, be inbetween 'Germany' and 'to the ally...'
« Last Edit: May 22, 2007, 04:30:21 pm by jazen » Report Spam   Logged

AMERICA here I come,
I will be out of the country - and away from internet - for the next 2-3 weeks.

A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step,
A story of a thousand words starts with a single thought.
Kitsune Tsuki
Co-Administrator
Novelist
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Favorite Genre: Fantasy, Steampunk
Posts: 105


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #6 on: May 22, 2007, 11:51:05 pm »

What happens if you completely remove the third sentence? I'm not quite sure that would work, just have a look at the way it reads without it.
Section 2:Paragraph 1 the missing word should, I think, be inbetween 'Germany' and 'to the ally...'
'Lost' was suppose to go there.

Used more of your advice, as well as some from my father.  You're a damn good spell checker, you know that?  Thanks alot for all your help!

Section two is essentially complete, for now.  I may add another paragraph, depends on whether my teacher has a 5 paragraph min.

Section 1

   The First World War was one of the bloodiest battles in all of history.  It is considered a war that could have been avoided.  Though there were a multitude of factors, the two key ones that prevented World War 1 from being avoided were militarism and nationalism.  Without militarism and nationalism, the war might have never taken place.

   Nearly all major nations at the time had been placing emphasis on improving and expanding their military.  They also used propaganda to make battle seem as if it was a glorious, romantic thing, with power heroes leading men to a glorious, beautiful victory.  This glorification of war and battles lead not only nations, but also the people of these nations to want to go to war.  Enrollment in the army was high, as many people were eager and willing to fight for their nation.  Most governments at this time were spending large amounts of money to supply their military with top of the line weapons and vehicles.  This emphasis on the military also affected the foreign policies of nations, leading countries to be particularly aggressive with their neighbors.

   Something, which emerged only within the last century prior to the war, was nationalism.  The core idea behind nationalism is you should have pride in your nationality and ethnicity.  Nationality is very much a double-edged sword, it can bring about revolutions against oppressive, and often foreign, governments or it can lead to revolts by lesser ethnic groups within a large empire.  Much of what led up and caused World War 1 was due to nationalism.  Nationalism, compounded with militarism, made people eager to join their nation’s army and serve their country.  Had the idea of nationalism not been so popular at this time, many of the key factors that began the war would not of happened, such as the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

   Militarism and nationalism are the two key components as to why this war started.  Individually they don’t amount to much, but together they create a unified chain of effect, which turned into the First World War.  Had there not been a sense of nationalism in the Serbian organization that assassinated Archduke Ferdinand, they might of not have any reason to kill him.  Alternatively, had he been killed, but nations were not already prepared or eager for war, the conflict might not of happened on such a large scale.

   Like many wars and conflicts, World War 1 was caused by a variety of reasons that combined lead to one of the bloodiest wars in history.  If just one of the factors of the war was missing, and the war still occurred, then it would have been an unnecessary war, because there was no reason to why it had to happen.  However, as there were reasons to why the war happened it was not unnecessary, though that is not to say that it was necessary and it could have been avoided.

Section 2

   After Germany lost to the ally powers in World War 2, there was still a second front to win, Japan in the Pacific Ocean.  Japan, the last member of the Axis to fall, had been attacking and conquering local nations before the war in Europe began.  After the war in Europe finished, the Allies began to pour all their resources into defeating Japan.  In an attempt to end the war as quickly as possible, the United States decided to unleash the most powerful bomb at that time.  When Japan still didn’t cease their war efforts, a second atomic bomb was dropped, that time convincing to Japan to accept peace.  Though the potency and effectiveness of the bomb was undeniable, it is often debated whether the use of the bomb was the best course of action.  Some claim that it saved more lives, in comparison to an invasion of Japan, while others argue that Japan was almost defeated and was ready to surrender, making the use of the bomb unnecessary.

   The exact number of casualties caused by the two atomic bombs dropped over Japan is hard to discern.  No exact number can be produced due to the lack of accurate records at the time, as well as the number of indirect deaths caused by nuclear fallout.  The most commonly accepted number of death is approximately 214,00 people, including deaths due to radioactive exposure.  This number is considered minor compared to the potential casualties if the United States invaded Japan.  The Secretary of State, James Bryrnes, declared a year after the closure of the war that approximately 500,000 United States soldiers might have died if the United States had invaded, rather then dropping the bombs.  The vast number of potential casualties justified the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
   
   Others argue that Japan was essentially defeated before the bomb was dropped, and that they would have called for peace in just a few months time, regardless of whether the bomb had been dropped or not.  Two people who supported this were then-General Dwight D. Eisenhower and General Douglas MacArthur, who was the highest ranking officer in the Pacific Theater.  The idea was that continual bombing of Japanese cities, using conventional bombs, would weaken them without inflicting vast amounts of casualties upon United States soldiers.  A second group of detractors from the atomic bomb claim that it was unethical and borderline genocide to use it.  They have criticized the atomic bomb for being indiscriminately destructive.
   
   Though it is easy to say whether it was or wasn’t justified to use the atomic bomb, it’s extremely hard to deny the potency and power of the atomic bomb.  Hiroshima and Nagasaki were almost completely flattened by the explosions.  Much of the rubble was warped and twisted, leaving a grim reminder of the power of these weapons.  Regardless of whether using the bomb was appropriate or not, what’s done is done, and history cannot be changed.
Report Spam   Logged

In a poll of Columbia\'s grad school of journalism, 57% believe in ESP, 57% in dowsing, 47% in the ability to read a person aura, and 25 believe in the lost continent of Atlantis

To the River Red, across the ochre steppe
A thousand fathers killed,
A thousand virgin daughters spread with swords still wet,
With swords still wet with the blood of their dead
Tau Worlock
Fool! Reviewers Have No Need For Sleep!
Novelist
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #7 on: May 23, 2007, 09:57:32 am »

the quots and coments are from jazen, who is looking over my sholder
Quote
The most commonly accepted number of death is approximately 214,00 people, including deaths due to radioactive exposure.


should there be another 0 here or is the coma in the wrong place.

Quote
Two people who supported this were then-General Dwight D. Eisenhower and General Douglas MacArthur, who was the highest ranking officer in the Pacific Theater.

Is the '-' needed?[/quote]

Now my turn to say something
I intended to comment last time but ran out of time, any way I can’t see anything wrong though the first two versions where a tad repetitive but as I see that has been changed already. My own history knowledge is a bit faded but as far as I can tell you have the right facts. (I would be worried if you did not as this is your paper after all).
Any way good luck.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2007, 10:02:35 am by Tau Worlock » Report Spam   Logged
jazen
Novelist
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 163


A smile costs little but gives much treat sum1 2 1


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #8 on: May 23, 2007, 04:25:05 pm »

Some of these comments were mentioned earlier by Worlock , but not all as I had to read it through again to pick up some of the errors.
Section 1
I've done all I can on this, I think. I'm flat out of ideas.

Section 2
Paragraph 1
Sentence 4, should it be ‘this time’?

Paragraph 2
Sentence 3, either the coma is in the wrong place or you are missing a ‘0’.
Sentence 5, should be ‘rather than’ not ‘rather then’

Paragraph 3
Sentence 2, is the '-’ needed?  'at the time' could also be added to the end of that sentence, though it reads alright without it.

Paragraph 4
Paragraph appears to be fine.

Overall
I think that this is going well, less errors.
Will I see the last third at any point soon?
Report Spam   Logged

AMERICA here I come,
I will be out of the country - and away from internet - for the next 2-3 weeks.

A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step,
A story of a thousand words starts with a single thought.
Kitsune Tsuki
Co-Administrator
Novelist
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Favorite Genre: Fantasy, Steampunk
Posts: 105


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #9 on: May 24, 2007, 01:07:42 am »

Used your suggestions as well as some from my teacher.  Third one is complete as well.  They're due tomorrow.

Section 1
   World War I was one of the bloodiest wars in all of history.  It is considered a war that could have been avoided.  Though there were a multitude of factors, the two key ones that prevented World War I from being avoided were militarism and nationalism.  Without militarism and nationalism, the war might have never taken place.

   Nearly all major nations at the time had been placing emphasis on improving and expanding their military.  They also used propaganda to make battle seem as if it was a glorious, romantic thing with powerful heroes leading men to a beautiful victory.  This glorification of war and battles lead not only nations, but also the people of these nations to want to go to war.  Enrollment in the army was high, as many people were eager and willing to fight for their nation.  This glorification of the battle was used extensively by the Central Powers.  Most governments at this time were spending large amounts of money to supply their military with top of the line weapons and vehicles, such as machine guns, airplanes, and artillery.  This emphasis on the military also affected the foreign policies of nations, leading countries to be particularly aggressive with their neighbors.

   Something, which emerged only within the last century prior to the war, was nationalism.  The core idea behind nationalism is you should have pride in your nationality.  Nationalism is very much a double-edged sword, it can bring about revolutions against oppressive, and often foreign, governments or it can lead to revolts by lesser ethnic groups within a large empire.  Much of what led up and caused World War I was due to nationalism.  Nationalism, compounded with militarism, made people eager to join their nation’s army and serve their country.  Had the idea of nationalism not been so popular at this time, many of the key factors that began the war would not of happened, such as the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

   Militarism and nationalism are the two key components as to why this war started.  Individually they do not amount to much, but together they create a unified chain of effect, which turned into the First World War.  Had there not been a sense of nationalism in the Serbian organization, known as the Black Hand, that assassinated Archduke Ferdinand, they might of not have any reason to kill him.  Alternatively, had he been killed, but nations were not already prepared or eager for war, the conflict might not of happened on such a large scale.

   Like many wars and conflicts, World War I was caused by a variety of reasons that combined lead to one of the bloodiest wars in history.  If nationalism was not as popular, Archduke Ferdinand may have not been assassinated.  Alternatively, if countries were not so eager to go to war, the issue may have been resolved more peacefully.  World War I would have been unnecessary had one of these two primary components been missing.

Section 2
   After Germany lost to the ally powers in World War II, there was still a second front to win, Japan in the Pacific Ocean.  Japan, the last member of the Axis Powers to fall, had been attacking and conquering local nations before the war in Europe began.  After the war in Europe finished, the Allies, primarily the United States, began to pour all their resources into defeating Japan.  In an attempt to end the war as quickly as possible, the United States decided to unleash the most powerful bomb at that time.  When Japan still did not cease their war efforts, a second atomic bomb was dropped, that time convincing to Japan to accept peace.  Though the potency and effectiveness of the bomb was undeniable, it is often debated whether the use of the bomb was the best course of action.  Some claim that it saved more lives, in comparison to an invasion of Japan, while others argue that Japan was almost defeated and was ready to surrender, making the use of the bomb unnecessary.

   The exact number of casualties caused by the two atomic bombs dropped over Japan is hard to discern.  No exact number can be produced due to the lack of accurate records at the time, as well as the number of indirect deaths caused by nuclear fallout.  The most commonly accepted number of death is approximately 214,000 people, including deaths due to radioactive exposure.  This number is considered minor compared to the potential casualties if the United States invaded Japan.  The Secretary of State, James Bryrnes, declared a year after the closure of the war that approximately 1,000,000 United States soldiers might have died if the United States had invaded, rather than dropping the bombs.  The vast number of potential casualties justified the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

   Others argue that Japan was essentially defeated before the bomb was dropped, and that they would have called for peace in just a few months time, regardless of whether the bomb had been dropped or not.  Two people who supported this were then-General Dwight D. Eisenhower and General Douglas MacArthur, who was the highest ranking officer in the Pacific Theater.  The idea was that continual bombing of Japanese cities, using conventional bombs, would weaken them without inflicting vast amounts of casualties upon United States soldiers.  A second group of detractors from the atomic bomb claim that it was unethical and borderline genocide to use it.  They have criticized the atomic bomb for being indiscriminately destructive.

   The atomic bomb was useful in the fact that it ensured us victory in the Pacific Theater.  However, the need for a second bomb to be used, only a few days after the first bomb, was unnecessary.  The first showed the potency of the United State army, not only to Japan but all nations of the world.  Furthermore, the targets of both bombs could have been chosen significantly better.  Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki provided no military advantage to the Japanese.  If both bombs were dropped on cities that held some sort of military importance to Japan, it might have been slightly more justified.

   Though it is easy to say whether it was or wasn’t justified to use the atomic bomb, it’s extremely hard to deny the potency and power of the atomic bomb.  Hiroshima and Nagasaki were almost completely flattened by the explosions.  Much of the rubble was warped and twisted, leaving a grim reminder of the power of these weapons.

Section 3
      Possibly the two most horrific events of the 20th century was World War I and World War II.  These two wars share much in common.  Both were primarily focused on Central Europe, Germany was the main aggressor in both wars and both were caused by the same reasons; nationalism and imperialism.  Alone, these two ideas are extremely powerful, capable of completely changing nations, but combined they can lead to war.  This potent combination of nationalism and imperialism were both the core reasons behind World War I and World War II.

   Kaiser Wilhelm II and Adolph Hitler both encouraged teaching nationalism, or loyalty to the nation of your birth, in schools.  They both saw the potency of national pride.  It gives people an identity that they are proud of and are willing to fight to defend their identity. Politicians, in a way to gain support of the governments actions from the people, exploited this nationalism.  It also was used as a method to help recruit soldiers, and bolster their armies.  This idea was not limited solely to the German nation; it was spread throughout all of Europe.  However, nationalism can work against a nation, by inspiring minor ethnic groups within a country to rebel and create a country.  This was one of the key reasons why the Serbian organization known as the Black Hand assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand, which became the incitation for World War I. 
Hitler used nationalism to rally people for his cause and bring Germany out of post World War I depression.

    Imperialism played significant roles in both World Wars.  In World War I, Germany used imperialism to gain power by annexing neighboring nations and bringing them under German control.  Nations from both the Allied Forces and the Central Powers used auxiliary troops during World War I.  Under the rule of Hitler, Germany slowly annexed nations during his raise to power, going so far as to conquer all of Poland and France.  Japan also practiced imperialism during World War II, conquering a multitude of islands in the Pacific Ocean.  It was through Germany’s and Japan’s imperialism that started World War II and brought the United States into the war, respectively.  It was Germany’s invasion of neighboring countries that lead the Allied Powers to fight, thus starting the war.  Hitler’s obsession of bringing other nation’s under German control lost him the war as well.  When Germany decided to invade Russia, Hitler had to move troops from the western front (fighting Great Britain) to the eastern front (invading Russia).  This repositioning gave the Allied Forces a chance to launch a counter-attack.  This proved to be one of the worst mistakes Hitler made, literally losing him the war.

   After the closure of World War II, imperialism lost much of its appeal, and slowly faded away.  Soviet Russia did practice a form of imperialism via the satellite nations surrounding it, but for the most part imperialism had come to an end.  Nationalism, on the other hand, flourished and was one of the key elements in the Cold War.  There was much animosity between both Russia and the United States.  Nationalism spread among the two nations and their allies, each nation thinking it was better then the opposing super power.

   Both imperialism and nationalism played fairly important roles in both World Wars, and even afterwards.  The greatest examples of the power of nationalism and imperialism were Germany during both World War I and World War II.  Kaiser Wilhelm II and Adolph Hitler used the principle of nationalism to its full extent in rallying the people of Germany behind their cause.  Likewise, they used imperialism to extend the influence of their nation throughout the world.  These two leaders show the incredible potency of nationalism and imperialism.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2007, 02:04:36 am by Akriel » Report Spam   Logged

In a poll of Columbia\'s grad school of journalism, 57% believe in ESP, 57% in dowsing, 47% in the ability to read a person aura, and 25 believe in the lost continent of Atlantis

To the River Red, across the ochre steppe
A thousand fathers killed,
A thousand virgin daughters spread with swords still wet,
With swords still wet with the blood of their dead
jazen
Novelist
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 163


A smile costs little but gives much treat sum1 2 1


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #10 on: May 24, 2007, 07:05:17 am »

Hope you get this before you hand in the paper.
I skim read section's 1 &2, but concentrated on section 3.
Section 3
Paragraph 1

First sentence it should be ‘were’ not ‘was’. Try separating sentences 2 and 3 by a coma.

Paragraph 2
Sentence 3, don’t need the last 2 words (you have already said what they are defending). Last sentence change the ‘for’ to a ‘to’.
The last sentence is on a new line, I would bring it back up.

Paragraph 3
Sentence 6, try ‘It was Germany and Japan’s imperialism that started World War II…’ and remove the word ‘respectively.’

Paragraph 4
Can't spot anything right now.

Paragraph 5
Can't spot anything right now.

Overall
It's good from what I can see, I will check it again but thought I would post quickly with my first thoughts.
Hope it goes well and you do well.
Report Spam   Logged

AMERICA here I come,
I will be out of the country - and away from internet - for the next 2-3 weeks.

A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step,
A story of a thousand words starts with a single thought.
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy