American History

Executive Summary
Henry Lewis Stimson was a central figure in the public life of the United States from the time of his role as a United States Federal Attorney in New York in 1906 until his retirement as United States Secretary of War in 1945. Born into a privileged family in New York in 1867, Stimson was educated at Andover, Yale and Harvard.  Stimson began his professional career as a lawyer in private practice, befriending Elihu Root and President Theodore Roosevelt. Stimson was appointed United States Federal Attorney in New York in 1906, a role in which he pursued enforcement of regulation of corporations. Stimson made a failed run for Governor in New York in 1910 under the tutelage of President Theodore Roosevelt. Stimson was appointed Secretary of War in President Tafts cabinet in 1911. He pursued a program of modernization of the United States armed forces in preparation for World War One. Stimson then served briefly in France during World War One. Stimson was sent to Nicaragua by President Coolidge in 1927 to negotiate a peace in the civil conflict. Later in 1927 he was sent to the Philippines as Governor. Stimson became Secretary of State in the Hoover Administration in 1929. He attempted to engage Imperial Japan through multilateral diplomacy. Stimson advocated a policy of non recognition of Japanese annexation of Manchuria in 1931, a policy which came to be known as the Stimson Doctrine. President Franklin Roosevelt appointed Stimson Secretary of War in 1941 in order to create bi-partisan support for United States involvement in World War Two. Stimson oversaw the Manhattan Project to create a nuclear bomb. Stimson then recommended the use of the bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki which hastened the end of the conflict. Stimson retired from public life in 1945 at the end of World War Two.

Family Background and Education
Henry Lewis Stimson was born on September 21 1867 in New York City. Stimsons ancestors had fought in every American conflict stretching back to King Phillips War in 1675. His father Lewis Atterbury Stimson acquired wealth initially as a banker, after which he pursued a career in medicine. Henry Stimsons uncle Reverend Henry Albert Stimson taught him the gospel of social reform which would influence his later social and political outlook.  Stimson graduated from Philips Academy Andover in 1884 and from Yale College in 1888. He then graduated from Harvard Law School and was admitted to the New York Bar in 1891. Stimson was married in 1893 to Mabel Wellington White, they had no children.

Early Career
Stimson started his career as a clerk in the firm Root and Clarke and after two years was made a member of the firm. It was at this time that he met Elihu Root who was to become a mentor and political patron. When Root left legal practice to become Secretary of War in President McKinleys Cabinet in 1899, a new firm of Winthrop and Stimson was formed in 1901 specializing in corporation law. Stimson invested wisely in the stock market and became a wealthy man. Fond of the great outdoors, Stimson purchased a farm at Cold Spring Harbor.

A famous anecdote demonstrates the bond shared between Stimson and President Theodore Roosevelt. In January 1902 Stimson was riding his horse near Rock Creek Park when he heard the President calling him from the other side of the creek. The President along with Elihu Root wanted Stimson to cross the raging river to join his party. Stimson initially hesitated however President Theodore Roosevelt ordered Stimson in military fashion, after which Stimson showed great fortitude in crossing the river, saying that he could not possibly disobey military orders. President Theodore Roosevelt began to call Stimson Young Lochivar. Roosevelt then appointed Stimson Federal Attorney for New York District in January 1906. Stimsons term as Federal Attorney included the successful prosecution of the New York Herald for printing indecent advertisements, the conviction of the notorious financer Charles W. Morse, as well as the prosecution of the New York Central Rail Road Company for illicit rebating.  Stimson played a pioneering role in enforcing Federal regulation and promoting the concept of the public interest in the emerging American corporate system.

Election Defeat in New York 1910
Stimson was President Theodore Roosevelts candidate in the gubernatorial election in New York in 1910. Whilst Roosevelt himself remained the central figure in the election, Stimson ran a competent campaign based on an anti-corruption platform. However due to a schism in the Republican Party, many Republicans refused to vote for Stimson who they viewed as Roosevelts candidate. Furthermore the gubernatorial election was seen as a test of strength for Roosevelt, which he lost convincingly. Stimsons brief entry into electoral politics ended in defeat.

Secretary of War, World War One
Defeated in the 1910 New York gubernatorial election, Stimson entered President Tafts Cabinet as Secretary of War on May 22, 1911. Stimson continued the work of his predecessor and mentor Elihu Root, restructuring the Army in preparation for rapid expansion prior to World War One. Stimson ended the isolation of the privileged staff corps which brought him into conflict with conservative elements within the Army. Stimson demitted office upon the election of President Woodrow Wilson. Stimson served in the military in World War One. At the age of nearly 50, in 1917, Stimson became second in command of the 305th Field Artillery Regiment, 77th division with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel.

Civil Negotiations in Nicaragua
In 1927 President Calvin Coolidge sent Stimson to Nicaragua for negotiations to end the civil war. Stimson began the process of mediation, meeting with leaders from across the political spectrum. His talks with President Diaz, and the rebel leader General Jose Maria Mocada led to an agreement between both sides to disarm. This agreement came to be known as the Pact of Espino Negro. United States forces supervised the elections of 1928, took over Nicaraguas military functions and bolstered the Nicaraguan National Guard. During his tenure Stimson laid the foundations for what become known as the Good Neighbor Policy of the United States toward Latin American countries.

Governor General of the Philippines
Later the same year Stimson was appointed Governor General of the Philippines, an office he held until 1929. During his tenure, Stimson pursued a four step program to enhance self government. Stimson passed the Belo Act which gave him money for his advisers, he then appointed a party cabinet and amended the rules of procedure for both houses giving cabinet ministers privilege of the floor, he then created the Council of State. Stimsons economic vision was for the corporatization of the Philippines economy, and he opposed the curtailment of the free trade regime between the two countries. Stimson made efforts to curb pork barrel spending, advocating fiscal oversight by the administration over the government. Stimson took measures for the economic development of Mindanao, whilst attempting to build union between Moros and Christians.

The Stimson Doctrine
President Hoover appointed Stimson as Secretary of State in 1929. During his term Stimson was the Chairman of the United States delegation to the London Naval Conference in 1930 and 1931. Stimson was also Chairman of the United States delegation to the Geneva Disarmament Convention in 1932. However most importantly it was at this point that Stimson encountered an imperialist Japan which was embarking upon a program of territorial expansion, a foe whom Stimson would spend the remainder of his career dealing with. Stimson sought to deny international recognition of the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931. The principle that treaties signed under duress after the use of military force would not be recognized in international law by the world community came to be known as the Stimson Doctrine. The Stimson Doctrine sought to prevent internationally illegal action from conferring any legal advantages by withholding recognition, which amounts to support to the aggressor.  US non recognition of Japanese aggression in Manchuria essentially prevented a de facto situation from becoming de jure, denying validity in international law.

Initially US policy was restrained, aimed at bolstering moderates rather than militants within the Japanese establishment, in the hope of encouraging a Japanese retreat. After confirmation of the Japanese aggression in Manchuria, Stimson sought to use an internationalist response to isolate Japan diplomatically upon the basis of the Kellogg Pact to which the United States was a signatory. Stimson also consulted with the League of Nations to exert pressure on the Japanese. Stimson initially looked upon the non recognition doctrine as a means to resolve the dispute with Japan and not as a prelude to military conflict. However as the Japanese persisted in military aggression, Stimson advocated a joint naval deployment with England to exert military pressure on the Japanese. Stimson essentially sought to bluff the Japanese into a cessation of hostilities, rather than actually considering the use of the US Navy in a military conflict. Japan did retreat, however they installed a puppet government in Manchuria.

Stimson began to ponder upon the likelihood of war between the United States and Japan. The options of an economic boycott of Japan and further deployment of the US Navy in the Pacific began to be discussed. Upon the election of President Franklin Roosevelt in 1932 Stimsons involvement in the Manchurian Crisis and the impending conflict with Japan came to a pause. Stimson demitted public office however continued writing on foreign affairs consistently opposing Japanese aggression in Asia and the Pacific. In 1938, Stimson became Honorary Chairman of the American Committee for Non-Participation in Japanese Aggression.

World War Two and the Atomic Bomb
The policies pursued by Stimson during his tenure as Secretary of State under President Hoover in the early 1930s seemed largely unsuccessful by the late 1930s. Japan had continued expanding militarily across Asia and the Pacific, despite the Stimson Doctrine, economic boycott and the bluff of US military intervention. With a large scale military conflict with Japan looming, in June 1940 President Franklin Roosevelt appointed Stimson to a second term as Secretary of War. President Roosevelt sought to use Stimsons stature within the Republican Party to boost support for the war effort. Stimsons opinion on the inevitability of conflict with the Japanese had evolved since his stint as Secretary of State under President Hoover.

Stimsons perceived of the likelihood of American involvement in the European Theatre. This lead to his support for Britain economically and militarily against Nazi Germany. Stimson testified before Congress on behalf of the Lend Lease Bill which he viewed as an economic declaration of war by the United States upon Hitlers Germany.

Stimson was now convinced of the imminence of war with the Japanese, and began to focus upon the best way, morally and militarily to enter the war. Stimson promoted the first peace time draft to prepare the United States Army for large scale conflict. However Stimsons preoccupation was the creation of favorable opinion amongst the American public for war with the Japanese. Stimson actively contrived to make Japan the aggressor, provoking an attack to which the United States would have to respond to in the name of self-defense. Stimson wrote of how he could maneuver the Japanese into firing the first shot.  As such Stimson faced criticism for having sacrificed the lives of those who died in the Japanese Attack on Pearl Harbor simply so that the United States could claim the moral high ground in the ensuing conflict and offer an easy explanation for war to the American public which would rally opinion behind the war effort.  However such criticism may be tempered by the fact that it was ambiguous as to the exact nature of such a maneuver. It is almost certain that Stimson did not envisage an attack upon Pearl Harbor among possible scenarios of a Japanese attack.

Stimson controversially recommended the internment of 100 000 Japanese-Americans whom he deemed to be potential traitors. His decision was based upon what he called a military necessity, whilst recognizing that such a decision would damage the principles of the United States Constitution.

Stimson faced further moral dilemmas in terminating the war against the Japanese. The means to most efficiently end the war in the Pacific were being debated in Washington. Stimson had been in charge of the program to develop an atomic bomb, directly supervising the head of the Manhattan Project, General Leslie Groves. It was Stimsons record of service and integrity which allowed Congress to fund a project which they knew little about.  Much of the dilemma surrounding the potential use of the atomic bomb revolved around the uncertainty of the Japanese military response in the event of a conventional United States invasion of Japan. Much uncertainty existed as to whether the Japanese would fight until the very end or how easily they would surrender. The estimated number of casualties from such fighting, and the possibility of cutting off the supply of food to the Japanese population and its effect was also unclear. An elaborate cost-benefit analysis of using the atomic bomb was constantly being conducted in Washington. Furthermore the impact that the use of the atomic bomb would have upon the post war international scenario was considered. It was thought that a show of United States nuclear force would act as a deterrent to Soviet Russia, bringing them into a potential nuclear alliance or agreement. However Stimsons priorities were to end the war and secure control of international atomic energy.  On August 6 1945, an atomic bomb was dropped on the Japanese City Hiroshima. On August 9 1945 Nagasaki was similarly attacked by United States forces.  Stimson insisted that Kyoto be removed from the bombing campaign on account of its cultural and religious significance.

Stimson later provided context and justification for his actions. Stimson clarified that the initial imperative for nuclear research was to beat the Germans in the race to produce a nuclear weapon and thus reduce the length of the war.  Whilst the fruits of the Manhattan project came too late for use in the European Theatre, the bomb was utilized in the Pacific Theatre. Stimson felt that the Japanese with a combined strength of five million men were capable of fighting to the end, which may inflict over one million American casualties.   An overwhelming demonstration of American military superiority would appeal to the more liberal non militaristic sections of the Japanese establishment to surrender. It would also avoid the devastation of the Japanese economy that a prolonged invasion would produce. Stimson did attempt to avoid a nuclear attack by giving the Japanese a warning which came to be known as the Potsdam Declaration. Stimson felt that the Japanese surrender and the relatively smooth nature of the United States occupation of Japan validated his decision to deploy nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Stimson opposed the Morganthau Plan to de-industrialize and break up Germany into smaller states. Stimson understood the dependence of smaller economies in Europe upon the German industrial powerhouse for post war economic recovery. Stimson recognized the inherent abundance of natural and human resources which the German economy possessed, and did not wish for the German people to become permanently impoverished and direct their anger toward the United States and its allies rather than the Nazi regime which had directed them to such a disaster.

Stimson sought rigorous judicial processes to try Nazis for war crimes after World War Two.  Stimson in conjunction with the United States Department of War drafted the initial proposals for the International Tribunal which lead to later developments in international law such as the Nuremburg Trials in 1945 and 1946.  Upon the end of World War Two, in September 1945 Stimson retired from active public life.

Career Summary
Henry Stimson made a great contribution to American public life in the first half of the 20th century.  Starting as a Federal Attorney in New York in 1906, he pursued what he saw as the public interest by prosecuting cases of fraud and corruption amongst corporations. Stimson then served as Secretary of War in President Tafts cabinet, overseeing the preparation of the armed forces for World War One, a war he would then personally serve in. Stimson was then sent by President Hoover to negotiate a settlement in Nicaragua in 1927, and then to serve American interests in the Philippines as Governor. The latter part of his career in the 1930s and 1940s was mainly spent dealing with the threat posed by Imperial Japan. His first efforts at multilateral diplomacy produced a policy of non recognition of the Japanese incursion into Manchuria, which came to be called the Stimson Doctrine. However in the face of an increasingly belligerent Japan, Stimson shifted his thinking toward the inevitability of military conflict. It is ironic that the man who placed so much emphasis on internationalism and multilateral diplomacy ended his career on an infamous note, recommending the dropping of atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Stimsons lasting legacy will be his role in the Manhattan Project which heralded the nuclear age which has since defined American power and international relations.  

George Washington was an extraordinary leader and path-breaker. As the first president of the country, he led the way for other presidents to follow. He was unique among the Founding Fathers of the nation, and is generally honored by being regarded as the Father of the Nation. He played a central role in consolidating the government of a newly independent nation, his contributions to the shaping of political offices and practices of the new nation are of paramount importance. He had the wisdom, vision and courage to lead the disparate states of America into nationhood. The United States of America came into glorious existence, thanks in no small measure to him.

George Washington was born in 1732 in the state of Virginia. He was a fourth-generation American, his great-grandfather was an English adventurer. Washingtons grandfather and father were tobacco farmers. Washington grew up on a farm and was adept at horse-riding even as a young boy. He may have gone to a school in a neighboring town, but he studied more under a personal tutor. Math was a subject he liked, and this could explain his disposition to become a surveyor later on. He could have gone to England for higher studies just like two of his half-brothers, but owing to the death of his father his studies had to be terminated (Calkhoven, 8). At the early age of fourteen, he decided to begin his working career by joining in the British Navy. Though America was a colony of Britain, the friction and animosity between the two nations did not develop yet. However, since his mother forbade him to take to the seas Washington became a surveyor, mapping and measuring vast uncharted territories of Virginia.

Subsequently he joined the state militia and fought on the side of the British against the French in the French and Indian War (1754-1763). Washingtons long experience in the wilderness and in the war helped him develop his character and outlook. To lead the disorganized and untrained men of the Continental Army to victory against a mighty empire was no easy task, but Washington was up to it because of the favorable conditioning he received when he was fighting as the commander of Virginia militia. By the time he was about to take up the first of the two jobs that would make him a living legend in his own times, he was grounded in the concept of Western expansion and was thoroughly familiar with various military arts.

After participating in the war, Washington returned to his lands at Mount Vernon, married, and led the peaceful life of a well-established planter, during the 1760s. But Americans were feeling increasingly frustrated about British policies and regulations toward them. There was a growing movement of resistance to the mother country, and Washington too made his voice heard. He was not a great orator or a political firebrand, yet he had considerable influence on his fellow countrymen by virtue of his strong character and presence of mind.

In May 1775, he went as one of the Virginia delegates to the Second Continental Congress that was held in Philadelphia. Although he did not speak much at the Congress and did not stand out prominently among other members of the conference, something about his leader-like bearing and manner made him particularly appreciated by many people present there. Very unexpectedly, he was elected as the Commander in Chief for the Continental Army. It would seem like Washingtons destiny came searching for him. A month later, he would assume his command at Cambridge, Massachusetts (Warren, Jr). The soldiers he commanded were not professional soldiers and had very minimal military training. The army was in great shortage of weapons and resources. In addition, smallpox raged among the soldiers and took a great toll during the first year itself. The war would last for six years, during which time most of the great qualities and skills Washington had would be put to test. Through the long years of the conflict, Washington proved himself to be a very capable commander who was shrewd and practical above all. In 1783, America won independence from Britain.

After triumphantly commanding many battles and leading America to final victory, Washington promptly resigned himself to a life of peace and quiet with his family at his Mount Vernon homestead. He did not want to participate in the national affairs because he was confident that there were enough capable men who would look after them. But the infant nation could not do without Washington. Washingtons self-imposed retirement would last only for a brief period.

Washington kept himself in touch with the hectic proceedings that were going on the path toward state formation, and he was rather disappointed at the course of the events. Desiring the creation of a strong constitution, Washington traveled to Philadelphia in 1787, and he was elected to preside over the Constitutional Convention. Once again, he spoke very little but saw to it that the proceedings went on as smoothly as possible and clashes among various speakers were quickly resolved. Subsequently he worked hard to muster support for the new constitution which faced considerable opposition. After the constitution was ratified, Washington considered his work to be over and wanted to go back to his farm (Jones, 103). It was not to be. Washington was unanimously elected as the first President of the country, and remains the only President in American history to be elected unanimously. People could simply find no alternative to him.

Washington became the President on April 30, 1789. John Adams was the Vice-President. Washington was offered a large sum as salary, which at first he declined. But he realized very soon that whatever he would do now would set a precedent. As he was wealthy enough he could do without a salary, but the other presidents who would follow him may not be in the same position. He certainly did not want only wealthy individuals to contest for presidency. Hence he accepted the money. Washington was acutely aware of the importance of his actions in setting precedent and example.

A few years before Washington became the President, he already made a decision of crucial importance which would fundamentally determine the future course of politics in America. Just after the American victory against the British, a strong sentiment prevailed in the soldiers of the American army that the country needed a strong and decisive leader to handle the confusion and the chaos of the times. People doubted whether it was wise to experiment with democracy under such conditions. It was seriously proposed to Washington that he should consider becoming the king of America. He strongly rejected the proposal and even expressed his dismay that such thoughts were entertained in his army (Millerceter.org). Once in office, he took every care to see that the pomp and ceremony attached to his office was minimized and did not reflect that of the European royal courts. He preferred to be addressed simply as Mr. President.

Although he had no previous experience whatsoever in carrying out the duties of civil administration, he soon proved himself to be an able administrator. His style of management was marked by fairness and integrity. Washington was setting standards of exercising authority and administering justice for the future presidents to follow, but these standards were so high that in the history of America they were met only very rarely. Washington was not a very learned and knowledgeable man, as most of the other Founding Fathers were. He was not a philosopher or even a great writer or a speaker. Except for his remarkable achievements during American War of Independence, he was a man from a humble background. Yet the thing that most amazed his colleagues and contemporaries was his unyielding integrity of character and his great ability to deal with people.

Washington was very keen to establish a strong economic foundation for the country. He approved many programs proposed by Alexander Hamilton. By the time he left his office, Washington managed to put a strong and thriving economy in place. Washington was committed to westward expansion, but there were still some obstacles to integrate America from coast to coast. As Hamiltons proposals and reforms were opposed by Thomas Jefferson and others, there emerged a clear bifurcation in the administration, Washington regretted this. He himself was a non-partisan and kept trying his best to patch up the differences among the people (Warren, Jr.).

Washington quelled the so-called Whiskey Rebellion when there raged riots in protest of some new taxes imposed on liquor. He showed that he could resort to forceful action when there was a need to do so. However, he was soft and gentle most of the time. Washington was in the habit of extensively touring Northern and Southern states to take a look at the state of affairs in various regions personally. By the end of a very successful first term, Washington wanted to quit, but he was not allowed to. During his second term, he took a major decision not to involve America in any kind of European wars, though France very much wanted the help of the United States. This decision by Washington would be later very much hailed by historians as it tremendously boosted the prospects of peace and progress for America.

By the end of his presidency Washington accomplished much, but he was always saddened by the growing rift between the members of his administration, which would in the decades to come lead to the standard American two-party system. He very much refused to do a third term, and quietly settled in the countryside for the remainder of his life.

George Washingtons greatness is acknowledged by one and all. His personality and achievements as the commander of the Continental Army and later as the President of the United States have provided inspiration for generations of Americans and continue to do so. In their tribute to him, the Time Magazine once said,
More than all the other Presidents, George Washington has marched through our centuries untouched by critics, growing larger under the baleful eye of history. An uncommon man made from common parts remains our grand legacy and our hope in this moment of bewilderment in our third century.

The social, political and economic crisis that might affect one country during a certain period of time has a direct impact on her neighbors and her business associates. The Great Depression that affected America after the end of World War I had such a negative impact not only on the American citizens but also most countries in the world.

This paper seeks to address the state of Americas economy during and after the World War I. It will deal the how the various (social, economical and political) sectors, manufacturing and production industries were affected during and after the World War I. The paper will also look at the various effects of the Great Depression and the impact that the Wall Street crash had on the economy of the nation and the world at large. In addition, the paper will look at the economic, political and social consequences of the New Deal Policies that were adapted. The similarities between the Wall Street crash and the current economic crisis will also be looked at.

The social, political and economic events that occurred during and after the World War I had different consequences on the growth and development of the nation during that period. Unfortunately, it is these events that led to the Great Depression, the Wall Street crash and the collapse of the economy.

Social, Political and Economic Events during the World War I
The social, political and economic setting of America greatly changed during the war. On an economic front, it is during the war that the production and manufacturing industry of the nation thrived, especially the war industries. The manufacturers were under pressure to increase their rate of production in order to keep up with the war (McCrae, 2006). This urgency and demand from the government helped in invention of new and advanced machines and equipment that could keep up with the production. This was a good sign and achievement for the production industry. The socioeconomic impact according to McCrae (2006) is that the effects of the recession that affected the nation in 1897 were soon forgotten as there was demand for more labor and more employment opportunities were created. As a result more youths who were initially jobless were recruited as labors in different factories. On a positive note also, the number of employed African  American also increased. This was because most men had been called to fight in the war and therefore there was need for more manpower.

It is during the war that there was an increase of the rural urban migration especially by AfricanAmericans who went to look for employment opportunities. Politically, the growth in the number of employed women led to the rise of women movements, and they pushed for universal suffrage (right to vote) (McCrae, 2006). However, this did not come to pass as the male politicians crushed the idea. For the first time after the 1897 recession, the economy of America was on the road to recovery and stability. The unemployment rate dropped drastically and the manufacturing and production sectors prospered.

Social, Political and Economic Events after the World War I
The effects of the World War I had varied effects on the economy of America. This period which was known as the roaring twenties, signified the beginning of the rise and down fall of the US economy.
According to Keuchel and OSullivan (1989), the census of 1920 indicated that during the war there had been a massive ruralurban migration and therefore most Americans lived in urban centers. As a result of this and the World War I, the economic activities changed from rural agrarian to urban industrialization (Keuchel  OSullivan 1989). A number of sector were affected by the WWI, some of them include

Agriculture sector after WWI The agriculture sector was greatly affected by this since the number of farmers dropped to only  of the countrys work force. The prices of farm produce during this period also declined and the future of farmers looked bleak. This did not stop, as the net income generated by farmers dropped from 9.1 billion in 1919 to 7.8 billion in 1920 and further 3.4 billion in 1921. This was a great crush to the farmers who had invested heavily in farm machinery and equipment between 1915 and 1919 (Keuchel  OSullivan 1989).

Stock Market after the WWI The performance of the Stock Market after the WWI was something that left many non-American investors filled with envy. Keuchel and OSullivan (1989) have observed that at the beginning of the early 1920s, the stock market showed signs of success but it was not until the late 1924 that the markets flourished. Between the 1924 and 1929, it is estimated that the New York Stock Exchange recorded a 400 growth, and the DowJones industries also performed well during this period. They recorded an average of 120.5 growth in 1924 and this increased up to 381 in 1929 (Keuchel  OSullivan 1989). The increase in the volume of brokers loans was the reason that propelled the fast growth of the stock markets.

After the war, many soldiers who had been sent to the battling fields returned home. Most factories closed down because the rate of production had dropped and most employees were laid off and the economy that was once thriving started to gradually slow down (McCrae, 2006). This was a strong signal of a looming economic depression.

Effects of the World War I
The effects of the World War I were both positive and negative. There were the positive effects in terms of job creation, economic growth and the change from a rural agrarian economy to urban industrialization. The performance of the stock markets after the war was also and good sign of economic prosperity and growth. However, October 1929 changed all this (McRae, 2006  OSullivan et al, 1989).

The Wall Street Collapse
The collapse of the Wall Street caught many investors and the general population unawares. Shares of companies like General Motors dropped from 73 to 8 a share and Montgomery Wards from 138 to  4 (McRae, 2006  OSullivan et al, 1989).

The effects of the Great Depression that lasted for more than five years as highlighted by Trueman (2000) were
More than 12 million people were rendered jobless this was at average of 12,000 people losing jobs daily.
20, 000 companies were declared bankrupt.
1,500 banks filed for bankruptcy.

More than 23,000 American committed suicide in a year this was the highest ever case of suicide recorded in American history.

The government of the day did not help much the president of the day was quoted as saying
It is not the function of the government to relieve individuals of their responsibilities to their neighbors, or to relieve private institutions of their responsibilities to the public(Keuchel  OSullivan, 1989).

The collapse of the Wall Street had severe effects on the Americans. Suicides and starvations were the order of the day since most of them lost millions of dollars worth of investments.
The New Deal economic recovery plan was adapted in 1933 under President Roosevelt. The deal minimized competition in market products but instead increased the strength of labor bargaining, however many analysts criticized this plan and blamed it for the slow growth and economic recovery (Keuchel  OSullivan 1989).The New Deal recovery plan incorporated the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), in its recovery strategy.

The causes of the Great Depression during the transformative twenties are the same as the causes of the economic crisis that affected America and the rest of the world from 2008 (Cox 2008). Excessive  reckless lending by banks and other financial institutions to would be investors was the reason for the occurrence of the economic crisis in 2008.  This reckless lending enabled most investors to buy homes and properties whose prices were abnormal. It is the failure by the investors that most financial institution experienced losses and as a result the crisis. The crisis led to an increase in the unemployment rate and lay off of workers by many companies many companies and organizations had to partially close down because they could not keep up with the rising cost of living at that time (Cox, 2008).

One notable similarity between these two events is that before the recession occurred, the performance of the financial institutions and banks was above average and there was an easy availability of loan facilities.

Conclusion
The Transformative Twenties period is a period that will forever remain in the history books of the Americans. It is during this period that the economy of the nation flourished and after some time the nation went to a Great Depression.

This paper has critically analyzed the impact of the World War I to the economy of America and the world in general. It has looked at the effects during and after the war and the Great Depression. It is therefore safe to conclude that the social, political and economic effects of the World War I can still be felt by the current regimes. This can be witnessed in the economic meltdowns and the increase in the rate of unemployment that is being witnessed.

The value of history lies in the different perceptions and inputs of how observers saw these incidents unfold. It corresponds not only to the establishment of varying opinions but to the creation of a new perspective in identifying common patterns existent within parties. The case of the Vietnam War is a clear testament to these. It offers scholars the ability to synthesize the issue to either its success or challenges as it coincides with the capacity of readers to synthesize these according to specific themes.

Analyzing both Zinns interpretation and that of Roark, et.al., it can be argued that the authors diversify their focus in interpreting this event in American history. It conveys similar and contrasting approach in synthesizing the impact of the conflict and how it has been interpreted by scholars in the field. For the part of Zinn, he saw that the occurrence of conflict resulted not only to the humiliation of the American force but also balancing the challenges of international policy with that of public sentiment.

Looking at this idea further, it can be seen that the theme promulgated by Zinn his work conveys not only the impact of U.S. policy in Vietnam but also other key elements that have helped shape the outcome of the war. This inability to extend its scope and application of power both locally and abroad have indeed contributed to the defeat of American security policies. In addition, Zinn was clear to highlight how these have been supplemented by rising national clamor and the element of miscommunication within the place of conflict (Zinn, 2005).

Seeing this, Zinns depiction of history as it portrays to the Vietnam War corresponds to the value of elaborating the circumstances that shape the onset and end of the conflict. His accounts portray numerous factors that have been influential to its development and determined which all the actors that played an important part for its development and conclusion accordingly.

On the other hand, Roark et.al, definition of the Vietnam conflict revolved around establishing a timeline and associated themes. These themes then coincided with a particular trend shaping both local and international politics. Such dynamics then highlighted more of an analogy rather than incorporating interpretations for these events accordingly. Given these, their account of history is rather objective compared to Zinns work that seeks to illustrate a particular stance concerning what happened in Vietnam.

Similarly, there is also the trend towards finding the appropriate direction in allowing readers to make their interpretations accordingly. Rather than leading the readers to their specific goal and purpose, Roark et.al, elaborates on key issues happening in both the U.S. and Vietnam and allowed viewers to comprehend on what factors have either caused U.S. defeat or victory. These dynamics in turn instituted better and effective patterns of extending and responding towards available information.

Like Zinn, Roark et.al, also pointed out important actors and events that have helped shaped the conflict. It can be argued that it is their way of extending the relevance of these principles and provide a holistic interpretation of what really transpired and what affected the escalation of conflict in Vietnam. Seeing this, the point of divergence between the two texts corresponds to establishing the timeline accordingly and differentiating each one according to themes the idea explored and provided by Roark, Johnson and Cohen in their article.

In the end, the two texts indeed provide a different outlook in the Vietnam War. Though they may have varying styles in portraying this event, they share the same capacity to extinguish popular patterns of allowing readers to effectively analyze the context of the war in different spheres of thinking. It is through this that they can gain a thorough and concrete understanding of the event that transpired.

I totally disagree with this statement because I consider the American pursuits at the time to be informed by their conscious protection of the integrity of their territorial boundary. Hence this paper is reinforces ideals of protecting the American territory through ratification of various treaties and Acts such as the Pinckneys Treaty, the Treaty of Greenville, the Land Ordinance Act, the Northwest Ordinance and the Proclamation Line of 1763. In addition I will highlight various wars which liberated America from the British Empire. Among the obstacles they faced was a strong force from the British Army and to counter it they pursued dialogues and formulation of policies to guide them through the adventure. Since the Britain had settled near major harbors in US from where they easily ventured into mainland American states, the US designed a plan to expunge them from dominating their harbors.

After the American Revolution the United States became a significant force in naval commerce. This precipitated the US to engage in conflict with England and other maritime nations which dominated the maritime trade. These misunderstandings culminated in the war of 1812 whereby America wanted to annex Canada. Alternatively, Britain attacked major US seaports. Despite the fact America lost major fights, it was able to defeat the British forces in New Orleans. Ostensibly, this war exposed major weaknesses in the American coastal defense. Consequently, after the war, America devised a plan that oversaw westward expansion through major American harbors.

When England increased taxes on British colonies, it precipitated the American Revolution consequently it resulted in the Shay Rebellion in Massachusetts.  The royal proclamation of 1763 was issued after Britain acquired the French territory in North America. In US, this proclamation instigated the American revolutionary war and later the Supreme Court ruled that only the US government was permitted to purchase land from Native Americans and not private individuals. Alternatively, the Land Ordinance Act of 1785 was intended to raise money through land sales in the extensively unmapped territories to the west left unsettled after the end of the Revolutionary War. The North West Ordinance established the model through which the US expanded westward across North America by the admission of newer states instead of expanding the existing states. The Treaty of Greenville ended the Northwest Indian War while Pinckneys treaty guaranteed the US with navigation rights in the Mississippi River. The treaty outlined the boundaries of the US with Spanish Colonies East of Florida and West Florida. West Florida was the region which experienced numerous sovereignty transformations during its history.  With the Louisiana Purchase, American westward expansion expanded into the Mississippi River.

Republicanism, as it is understood and defined in The United States is, a value system of governance in which citizens have inalienable rights that cannot be voted away by congress and this is seen as being the distinctive difference between Republicanism and Democracy. Several historians have asserted that the ideals of republicanism, first embraced by Americans though Thomas Paines essay Common Sense, may have inspired the Revolution but did not really come to fruition until Thomas Jeffersons presidency.

In Thomas Paines article, Common Sense he states that, Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher( Pain, 1776). This statement can be seen as embodying the core values from which Republicanism would develop.  Republicans believe in limited government and it is for the very reasons that Paine asserts in the opening argument of his essay.  This concept did not gain in popularity until Thomas Jefferson came into power.

The Republican Party was the initial party of Thomas Jefferson and it was founded in 1793.  This was a result of events like Shays Rebellion where farmers lead by American Revolutionary veteran Daniel Shayes had an armed uprising against the government in response to many debtors throwing citizens in debtors prison for unpaid taxes.  The Republican Party as it is known today was founded in 1854, which has driven many historians to refer to Thomas Jeffersons party as the Democratic-Republican Party.  Jefferson originally created the political party to oppose the foreign and economic policies of the Federalists.

In sum, I believe that while Thomas Jefferson had the initial political backing at the time to start the Republican party, which seemingly believed in less government influence in the lives of American citizens, it is not the same as the Republican party known today.  The party known today is more liken to the one that originated in 1826.

Answer to Question 1 (Factors)
After the Civil War, the United States remained firmly divided. The Reconstruction placed Southern whites in a position of control over the black population. Successive waves of European migrants provided cheap labor in urban and manufacturing areas. Most of the migrants came from Ireland, Italy, Hungary, Poland, and Germany. The country also experienced long-term population booms which led to the industrialization and urbanization of semi-undeveloped areas.

The United States was also beginning to make colonial leaps in the Orient, establishing formal trade relations with Japan and China. Along with its colonial ventures, the United States experienced long-term industrial growth. The country had essentially become a leading economic power.

During the so-called progressive era, the United States acquired Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines from Spain (Spanish-American War). The countrys entry into the First World War was nothing short of dramatic. It was a testament of the military and economic strength of the nation.

Responding to these changes, the political system shifted from a multipolar to a bipolar party system. There was an increasing tendency for the polarization of the party system. This was not without basis. Changes in the economic, political, and social realms had associated risks. A two-party system would address these issues more efficiently than a multi-party system (the political change though was never institutionalized). The polarization tendency would hasten the creation of a formal regulation system (regulatory commissions) and improve the federal governments involvement in fiscal issues. Regulations in immigration, food security, drug trafficking, and anti-trust actions were noticeable. In the past, multiple political parties failed to deliver the political goods because of political discontinuity and dissension.

Answer to Question 2 (Weak State)
The Weak State theory holds that religious, ethnic, and social tensions may limit the ability of the state to deliver political values (creation of a weak state). In its conception, the United States was relatively a weak state. State authority was loosely divided between the federal government and the state government. However, political parties saw the need to strengthen federal authority for four general reasons 1) a loosely divided government was always subject to political and demographic tensions 2) uncontrolled migration would weaken the bond of the individual to the state (aggregate) 3) there was a need to strengthen the bond of the union (deinstitutionalizing secession) and 4) the role of the government superseded that of the individual or a group.

Progressivism can be roughly defined as increasing participation of a government in the affairs of the state. In the United States, the Progressive Era was the start of the growth in the role of the government. The American people saw the beginnings of federal regulation of business through regulatory commissions and antitrust laws. This era was also the beginning of things which were not associated with the progressive era. Population centers were zoned, properties defined, and state power dramatically increased.

The Republican Party was split into two moderate camps those who oppose regulation, and those who supported strict legislation. President Theodore Roosevelt was supportive of strict legislation, partly because he wanted to limit the power of corporations. He was keen on increasing the grip of the federal government on trade and foreign relations. After the Spanish-American War, the federal government extended its authority on military recruitment.

This was reinforced with the countrys entry into the First World War. The centralization of decision-making in the hands of the federal government (building military complexes, drafting of men, and restricting individual action) served to increase the role of government in society. In short, the progressive era ended the weak state status accorded to the United States.

The Nature of Each Colony and Colonists Goals John Smiths Account of the Founding of Jamestown in 1607       The colonists who moved to Virginia were from the English nobility, gentry, and merchants in addition to laborers. The colony, located in Virginia, was governed by a council which was chosen by the kingdom of England and headed by a president who was elected by members of the council. At the colony, everyone had a task to accomplish The members of the council were responsible for contriving the fort, others were responsible for other tasks such as cutting trees, making fishing nets, etc.      

Smith states that the voyage to America and the establishment of the colony were for business purposes, but he doesnt explicitly mention the identity of the organization or company that was responsible for the operations. However, by taking into account the fact that the Virginia Company was responsible for managing colonization activities in Virginia, the reader can conclude that Jamestown was established under the supervision of that company.John Winthrops Vision for the Massachusetts Bay Colony      

In this article, Governor Winthrop doesnt describe the actual nature of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, but he discusses his vision for it. His goal was to ensure a new and better way of life there by establishing a model of charity based on the teachings of Christianity. Religion and charity are the only aspects of life in the colony that Winthrop discusses in this article.William Bradfords History of Plymouth Plantation      

The English colonists acquired a patent from the Virginia Company for the establishment of the colony in the northern part of Virginia. At the end of their to voyage to America, they found that they arrived in Cape Cod instead of Virginia, and a new colony was established there in 1620. Since the new colony wasnt located in Virginia, the patent that the colonists had became totally useless for them. Therefore, they decided to create a new governing law for the colony. The result was signing the Mayflower Compact in 1621. This compact emphasized the necessity of religion as the main foundation of life in the colony. The colonists main goals were serving (a) the advancement of the Christian religion in the area, (b) and the honor of the king and kingdom of England.                                          

Successes or Failures of Each Colony      
The common similarity between the three articles is that each author argues that every success that his respective colony experienced was caused by Gods blessingsJohn Smiths Account of the Founding of Jamestown in 1607      

The challenges that Jamestown faced in its early days were (a) the frequent attacks by native savages, (b) the lack of food, (c) sickness, and (d) the relatively high weather temperatures. The failure of  the colony seemed inevitable to colonists, but everything began to change after the capture of Smith by local Indians. He was later released due to the fact that his captivity was rejected by their emperor, Powhatan, and his daughter, Pocahontas. Powhatan believed that Smith would be useful in certain occupations, while Pocahontas motive for saving him isnt explained in the article (its implied that it was love). Indians eventually decided to consider Smith a friend and then returned him to Jamestown. Throughout the days following those events, Pocahontas had been visiting the colony continually with her attendances to deliver provisions, which was what saved colonists there from the threat of a deadly famine.      

Smiths account of the founding of Jamestown implies an emphasis that Gods help is what ends all sufferings, and that Gods always helps people accomplish their goals if those goals are good. He argues that everything that happened and was somehow beneficial for the colony was in fact one of Gods blessings (e.g., when the Indians started to feel sympathy for Smith). Smith believes that without Gods help, Jamestown wouldnt have succeeded and would have collapsed rapidly. John Winthrops Vision for the Massachusetts Bay Colony      

In his article, Winthrop discusses the successes that he wishes and expects for the Massachusetts Bay Colony, not the actual successes, and thats because he wrote the article on board the Arbella (i.e., before arriving in the American). Winthrop explains the methods by which the teachings of the Bible can ensure success and prosperity for any Christian society (he doesnt see any possibility of failure). He also emphasizes the necessity of love as the foundation of (a) the relationship between the members of society, and (b) the relationship between people and God. And thats because love makes bonds perfect.      

This article discusses the methods that the Bible established for aiding the poor and people who are in need for help. The rich who enjoy abundance and prosperity should share what God gives them with their brothers who arent as fortunate as them. Moreover, people who enjoy welfare should lend others who are in need for loans borrowers who are likely to repay should be lent according to the requests, while others who are unlikely to repay should be lent according to their needs only. In cases of borrowers inability to repay, lenders should forgive. In the cases of common perils (e.g., wars), members of the society should be more generous and more devoted to each other. In fulfilling all these duties, the rich shouldnt ignore the rights and shares of their families.      

In this article, Winthrop  relies heavily on logical reasoning and quoting and citing from the Bible when necessary. For every point he discusses, he derives an example (story) from the Bible to clarify his idea and reinforce his arguments. Without discussing the importance of love in a Christian society, nearly all arguments presented in this article can considered useless and meaningless.William Bradfords History of Plymouth Plantation      

One of the things that helped the colony succeed was its good relation with the local Indians (the name of the tribe isnt mentioned in the article). Fortunately for the English colonists, there was an Indian who had little knowledge of English language, Samoset. He provided colonists with useful information about his people and the nearby Indian towns, but his most useful help was referring the colonists to another Indian in his town who had decent knowledge of English, Squanto. Squanto taught the colonists how to set corn plantations, where to find good places for fishing, etc. He remained a faithful and useful guide from them until his death.      

For the first two years of the colonys life, colonists followed a communal farming system no one had the legal right of owning a piece of land as a private property. All people who worked in the fields were rewarded equally regardless of how much work they did, their age, etc. This system bred much discontent among colonists and resulted in a decline in the levels of production. In 1623, the colony was suffering a shortage of crops, and therefore colonists began to put a new plan for a more-productive agricultural system. The result was creating a new farming system based on giving each family a parcel of land, but the ownership wasnt permanent (i.e., no inheritance). This new system fixed the problems that accompanied the implementation of communal farming and, thus, resulted in notable increases in production levels.      

Like Smith and Winthrop, Bradford attributes every success and end of a trouble to Gods blessings. Examples of events that Bradford considers as blessings are (a) the colonists safe arrival in America, and (b) meeting Squanto. Bradford attributes mistakes and problems to humans disobedience of Gods orders. For instance, he attributes the problems associated with applying communal farming to the fact that this system, which was created by humans, cuts off the relations that has been set by God amongst people.                                                    

The Bay of Pigs invasion was the unsuccessful attempt by Cuban exiles, backed covertly by the United States government to overthrow the Fidel Castro whose forces took over the island nation during the 1959 Revolution which saw the overthrow of the authoritarian regime of Fulgencio Battista. The Cuban exiles who participated in the invasion had been trained by the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency). In 1960, American President Dwight D.  Eisenhower initiated the termination of US diplomatic relations with Cuba due to the increasing hostility between the two nations. The US government opposed Castro s dictatorship regime plus the fact he installed a socialist (communist) regime there and as such the US could not tolerate a communist regime in their backyard (at the height of the Cold War) considering Cuba is roughly 90 miles from the American mainland.

Following the  domino theory,  Political analysts back then were concerned that Cuba would be a springboard to promote Marxist revolutionary fervor throughout the western hemisphere hence it was considered important to aid Cuban anti-revolutionary guerrillas to overthrow Castro s regime in (ironically) the same manner he came to power.  The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), acting on directives from the White House, was tasked in the formation of the Cuban Revolutionary Council and training Cuban exiles to liberate Cuba. Eisenhower s successor, John F. Kennedy approved the invasion plan.  These US-trained exiles landed in what is called the Playa Giron to begin what would be an attempt to overthrow Castro s government. The invasion was discovered and after three days of fighting, the anti-Castro forces were defeated by Castros forces who were well-armed and well-equipped.  The debacle of what became known as the Bay of Pigs invasion made an impact of the newly-installed Kennedy Administration.  The embarrassment it caused made it hesitant or unwilling to mount another operation to unseat Castro.  This hesitation enabled Castro to solidify his position as Cubas  Maximum Leader  and strengthen his ties with the Soviet Union, his chief patron which would run up to the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.

Various historians have presented their views about the invasion. For instance, historian Piero Gleijesses attributes the failure of the invasion to misunderstanding within CIA which undermined good planning of the invasion and led to a communication breakdown within the White House .Jack Pfeiffer who was a historian working with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)  considered the CIA incompetence to have contributed to the failure. Hersh (1997) points out that Arthur Schlesinger argues that though President Kennedy had doubts about the feasibility on the invasion, he did not want to look weak, indecisive and tolerant to communism by canceling the invasion. The attempted invasion completely changed relations between of the US and Cuba as well as Kennedy s administration approach towards Cuba.  This paper provides an analysis on the extent to which US failure during the Bay of Pigs changed Kennedy s administration approach to Cuba.

Discussion
Paterson (1989) confirms that the relations between the United States and Cuba were hostile even before the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961.  America s opposition to Castro s communist government can be attributed to the US anti-communism and Cold war containment foreign policy that was adopted by the Eisenhower administration. On the other hand, Fidel Castro criticized the US interference in Latin America matters and strong opposition against communism.  Castro s administration triggered US hostility by putting into place policies that had negative impact on American companies in Cuba, aligning itself with the Soviet Union and supporting the Marxist   Leninist ideology. The failure of the US during the Bay of Pig was an embarrassment to Kennedy administration and Kennedy who had portrayed himself as a defender of democracy and freedom had his image damaged for interfering with internal matters of a sovereign nation. The State Department Document (State Department Documents. Cuban Missile Crisis and Aftermath, Memoranda 255) confirms that after the failed invasion attempt, the US initiated negotiations with Castro s administration to have the Brigade prisoners who had been arrested freed.

The political implications of the invasion shaped the US foreign policy in Latin America. For example, the US efforts to have Cubans oppose Castro s leadership were undermined by his increased popularity in the country due to the support he received from citizens who had suffered previously from repressive regimes, particularly from Battista. In addition, the Bay of Pigs invasion resulted to the integration of nationalistic elements in the policies and increased anti-American views in Cuba.  Castro took advantage of this to drum up more support for him and thereby solidify his hold on power as he added a nationalistic undertone in his speeches condemning the invasion and in effect, the US.  The US approach towards Cuba remained hostile and its efforts to overthrow Castro s administration led to the launch of Operation Mongoose, a plan to destabilize and sabotage the Cuban economy and government.

Due to the deterioration of relations between the Kennedy administrations with Cuba, anti-communism foreign policy of the US had the government support the Operation Mongoose. Dallek (Dallek, 2003) asserts that the need to protect the US interests and reduce Communism influence had fuelled Kennedy s administration criticism of Cuba .The failure of the Bay of Pigs invasion had   military strengthening and monitoring measures to counter communism insurgence and socialist regimes put into place by the Kennedy administration. For example, the creation of the Operation Mongoose program in November 1961 was aimed at undermining Castro s administration after the failed Bay of Pigs invasion. The Cuba document (Cuba, 1961-1962) confirms that a US policy assessment that was initiated in May 1961 led to the adoption and implementation of the program by the US government (Cuba, 1961-1962 report).It was a covert program meant to overthrow and undermine Castro s leadership in Cuba.

Kennedy approved the plan and appointed CIA counterinsurgency specialist Edward Lansdale to coordinate operations within the program. The activities undertaken under the program included sabotage operations and collection of intelligence about Castro s administration .Robert Kennedy and Maxwell Taylor had vital roles in the program. The US government subjected Cuba to propaganda programs to discredit Castro s leadership and economic isolation. The US also supported anti-Castro guerrilla raids which Castro s administration believed to be instigated by the US government. The US government hoped that after Castro s government was overthrown, the US would help to institute a new government in Cuba. Kennedy s administration opposed communist control in Cuba and the Communist formula used by Castro in his leadership. The continued hostility of the Kennedy administration towards Castro s administration made Castro seek assistance from the Soviet Union. The assistance was meant to prepare Cuba for the possibility of a US large scale attack against Cuba in future. It was while the Kennedy administration implemented the Operation Mongoose when the Soviet Union began constructing missile site in Cuba, an issue that led to the Cuban Missile Crisis. A suspension of mongoose activities became necessary after the 1961 discovery of Soviet missiles in Cuba.

Castro s conviction that the US would launch further attacks against Cuba had him approve the establishment of Soviet missile construction sites in Cuba. However, the discovery of the sites by the US in 1962 triggered the Cuban Missile crisis .The US President, John Kennedy convened an Ex-Comm (Executive Committee of the National Security Council) meeting in order to address the crisis.  This led to intense and guarded debate within the government to explore the most effective way of having the Soviet remove its missiles from Cuba. After exploring different ways of addressing the crisis, Kennedy imposed a naval quarantine against Soviet Union in Cuba to prevent arrival of more Soviet offensive weapons.  . It was clear that the Soviet influence and missiles in Cuba were a security threat to the US because a nuclear missile launch against the US by the Soviet would have had detrimental effects. Kennedy administration demanded that the offensive weapons of the Soviets be removed from Cuba.  Although the crisis had threatened to trigger a nuclear war, negotiations between the two averted the war when the Soviet agreed to have its missile installations in Cuba dismantled while the US gave an assurance not to invade Cuba.

Kennedy s administration failure to launch an air strike against Soviet missile sites in Cuba was opposed by some government officials hence Kennedy decided to use diplomacy to have the Soviet Union remove its missiles from Cuba without triggering military confrontation or a nuclear war. Kennedy therefore supported the naval quarantine measure that was recommended by the ExComm. Trachtenberg (Trachtenberg, 1985) asserts that the ExComm committee was actively involved in addressing the crisis hence was comprised of individuals who had reliable information about the undertakings of the US government during the crisis. The committee had the responsibility to advise the Kennedy administration on the alternative ways of solving the crisis. The Soviet preference to solve the crisis peacefully and Castro s agreement to have Soviet missile sites closed prevented military confrontation and eliminated the possibility of a nuclear war. Giglio (Giglio, 2006) states that during the crisis, there were some principle pressures and constraints that acted on Kennedy. James (James, 1990) states that one issue that put him under pressure was the proposal by his advisors to initiate immediate military air strikes against Cuba. The State Department Document (State Department Documents. Cuban Missile Crisis and Aftermath, Memoranda 76) states that the US interpreted the Khrushchev actions to be a means of gaining flexibility and time as well as delaying tactics to avoid military confrontation with the US. According to Sorenson (Sorenson, 1999), the aversion of global nuclear war in 1961 can be attributed by the intentions of the US and Soviet to solve the crisis peacefully as well as hinder grave consequences of such action on both nations.

The Kennedy administration after the missile crisis did not renounce its policy of having Castro s government overthrown .The US government foreign policy towards Latin America opposed the presence and spread of communism influence in the region. Rabe (Rabe, 2000) states that the US government continued to adopt various measures to counter Castro s leadership and communist influence in Cuba .For example, the US government policy in the region supported breaking off of diplomatic relations between other Latin American and Cuba. The relations between the two the US and Cuba were characterized by political grand standing, arguments, international crisis and  war of liberation . This situation was made worse when the US imposed a trade embargo on Cuba in 1962. As a result, the Kennedy administration opposition against Castro s administration took a different turn from military confrontation and sabotage to an economic warfare.  Although the proponents of the embargo considered it to be an effective means of squeezing Castro out of power, those who opposed the move anticipated that it would lead to more anti-American hostility and undermine economic progress in Cuba.  The US through the embargo broke off all financial and trade transactions with Cuba, an issue that greatly affected the Cuban economy.  The Kennedy administration efforts to have Castro leadership ended led to the CIA involvement in sabotage operations. From June 1963, the Kennedy administration intensified war against Cuba. The CIA integrated program of sabotage, propaganda and economic denial was implemented.

There Kennedy administration was able to assume a determined and tough stand against Cuba because of Castro s communism ideology as one way of ensuring that the national interests were protected. According to Paterson (Paterson, 1962), the Kennedy administration hostile approach towards Cuba can be attributed to the conviction that both Cuba and Soviet Union were a security threat to the United States. The administration began showing more concern for issues of peace and war. Schlesinger (Schlesinger, 1965) states that Kennedy s foreign policy aimed at countering communist influence in Cuba which was considered to be a communist menace that undermined the rights of citizens to participate in free elections and acted as a base through which communism was infiltrating  into Latin America. For example, Kennedy administration emphasized on the need of freeing the Cuban people from Castro s leadership. As a result, Kennedy commitment to overthrow Castro and stop the spread of communism continued to affect the US relations with Cuba. However, the US government support for democracy in Latin American especially in Cuba was questioned after he launched the Alliance for Progress Plan. The plan was meant to support social reforms in Latin America but criticism of the plan can be attributed to the US military aid to revolutionaries and to the right-wing dictators in the region who intended to remain in power.

The United States adopted foreign policies of containment and deterrence in the 1940s to counter the threat of communism influenced US policy towards Cuba. These policies were a component of the Cold War meant to stop the expansion of communist influence hence they remained critical for Kennedy administration. The pro-communist policies and anti-American approach taken by Castro s administration were seen to be a security threat to America and a base for the making of a new Soviet satellite in the region. The State Department Documents (State Department Documents. Cuba 1961-1962(Memorandum series 176 and 226) confirms that the US government acknowledged the threat of communism insurgence in various parts of the world hence its approach towards Cuba was influenced by the containment and deterrence policies.

Economic warfare towards Cuba was important for the Kennedy administration to tighten the noose of Castro s administration and Cuba s economy. The US policy towards Cuba led to economic sanctions and restrictions on Americans to travel to Cuba.  This led to limited political, commercial and civilian relations between Cuba and US. For example, Kennedy s administration initiative to have trade embargo imposed on Cuba made good commercial relations between the US and Cuba impossible to achieve.  By February 1963, many Americans could not travel to Cuba. Although Kennedy administration policy towards Cuba was meant to pressure Castro s government to embrace democracy, the embargo failed to achieve the objectives set by Kennedy administration. Instead, the embargo damaged US diplomatic, economic and national security interests. Political analysts have argued that  in order to promote democratic systems and halt the spread of communism in Latin America, the Kennedy administration should have focused also on  supporting  political systems where freedom flourish.

The Kennedy administration continued to support efforts that aimed at eliminating Castro s administration. Since Kennedy   and his advisers were members of the  containment generation , their tough stand against communism increased tensions with Cuba. They were convinced that communism leads to poverty and economic dislocation hence had to be contained through global scale counterforce. The Kennedy s administration foreign policy was a mixture of traditional anti-communist convictions and sincere idealism. Views that communism inspired civil wars and revolutions had the administration oppose Castro s communist government. The American government even made efforts to urge Latin American nations to break diplomatic relations with Cuba and to resist the influence of communist nations such as the Soviet Union. This is considered to be the major reason why the Kennedy administration was bothered about the growing relations between Cuba and Soviet Union.

The 1961-1963 Kennedy administration policy towards Cuba was characterized by ideological antagonism, covert actions and opposition against Castro s leadership.Chang (Chang, 1988) supports the argument that the US hostility towards communism was also directed towards Communist China. For instance, the Eisenhower s policy towards China encouraged its isolation and prevention of communist influence in Asia. Chang (Chang, 1988) points out that apart from the Soviet Union, Kennedy s administration anti-communism efforts and policy aimed at countering China s communism. The Kennedy administration considered containment and isolation policy that was supported by Eisenhower necessary to stop the communist influence of Castro s administration. For example, the US administration supported raids carried out by Cuban exiles against the Castro s government.

Conclusion
Kennedy s administration foreign policy supported US Cold War policies which was to contain the spread and influence of communism played a major role in encouraging the invasion of Cuba during the Bay of Pigs. In the case of Cuba, However, the failure of the  Kennedy s administration to oust Castro affected America s approach towards Cuba and other communist nations. Hostile relations between the US and Cuba threatened to trigger a nuclear war between the US and the Soviet Union during the Cuban Missile Crisis and although the crisis was solved peacefully through negotiations, the reality of a nuclear war was made evident by the crisis. Although the US claimed a moral victory in this showdown with the Soviets, it paid a price of compromise as it made a promise not to invade Cuba in its dealings with Moscow which had somewhat upset Castro.  If it is any consolation on the part of the United States, they continue to keep their naval base at Guantanamo which is still there to this very day and was a sore spot on the side of Castro despite his revolutionary zeal.  On the other hand, some analysts argue that although the US conviction on the threat of communism is justified, exaggeration of the threat contributed greatly to Kennedy s administration numerous confrontations and crisis with other nations.

I strongly disagree with this argument. Hence, this paper argues about the purpose of the American Revolution, the significance of the Bill of Rights and the American Dream as articulated in the Constitution by our founding fathers. The original purpose of the American Revolution was to liberate America for Americans. In order to accomplish this dream, Americans rejected the authority of the British Crown which governed them from overseas without adequate representation. After centuries of domination, America organized a successful revolution, which culminated in their declaration of independence from Great Britain.  This revolution generated a series of socio-political and intellectual makeover in the early American society and governance. To maintain the status quo of the initial purpose of the war, Americans rejected internal plutocracies prevalent in aristocratic Europe at the time. For instance, the Shay Rebellion resulted in the review of the Articles of Confederation and energized the Philadelphia Convention.

The Americans championed for the advancement of Republicanism which acknowledged liberalism. The revolution necessitated the creation of representative governance accountable to the people. Ultimately, the American dream was manifested in the Constitution. The constitution was later amended to accommodate the views of present day ideologies through the Bill of Rights. These amendments guaranteed Americans with numerous natural rights and effectively balanced the national governance with wide-ranging personal liberties. Thus, the American ideology which embraced republicanism created a conducive environment for propagating democracy which induced the cataclysm of impunity and oversaw the initiation of fundamental freedoms which have maintained the pillar of political principles in the US. The Whiskey Rebellion was liberally justified since indiscriminate imposition of taxes was equal to unpopular domination.

To rationalize the wishes of the people, Thomas Jefferson repealed the whiskey tax after he took the presidency. The Aliens and Seditions Acts neither broadened the national government nor did they strengthen it, instead they violated the American dream since they restricted the fundamental freedoms and rights such as freedom of the media and the free speech. The Louisiana Purchase did not violate the original purpose of the revolution since it promoted American trade and increased the territorial boundary of the US. The Barbary wars protected the American interests in the Mediterranean Sea.  Alternatively, the war of 1812 reaffirmed the American provision of universal access to free trade and protection of the international law and protection of territorial boundaries.

Yes, I absolutely concur with this assertion. Thomas Paines common sense was a radical publication which ignited the American Revolution from the Great Britain. Consequently, this paper will explain what is meant by Bill of Rights, the significance of Republican government, the consequences of conflicts between Republicans and Democrats, the role Thomas Paine in the American Revolution and Thomas Jeffersons contribution to the American dream.

Thomas Paine inspired the American Revolution thorough his book (common sense). Paine opposed slavery and promoted republicanism. Republicanism simply means public affairs or public thing. Paine detested monarchial rule and he founded human liberalism through his ideologies. Thomas Jefferson referred to Paines dogmas as the liberal experiment of the USA. The founding fathers and political leaders and their parties and the ordinary citizens considered themselves as proprietors of republican government and hence they associated themselves the structure of governance espoused by republicanism ideologies since this form of governance conducted its affairs for the interest of the public, individually as well as collectively. The articles of the confederation were the first constitution of USA after the American revolutionary war in which America liberated itself from Great Britain. They established American independence and set rules for operations of the US confederation. The Bill of Rights represented the first ten amendments to the US constitution. They created ideological differences between Republican and Democrats and perpetuated the Shay Rebellion which demanded the status quo in terms of debts and taxes to be maintained. The Shay rebellion resulted in the re-evaluation of the Articles of Confederation.

On the hand the Whiskey Rebellion was ignited by the Whiskey Act of 1971 whereby an excise tax on Whiskey was imposed. This act was repealed by the Jeffersons Republican Party. Finally, the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions were political declarations which respected the rights of states and detested the oppression of the national government. The clauses of Alien and Sedition Laws contained in these resolutions embodied spirited defense of the principles of freedom and self-governance embodied by the US constitution.

World had witnessed several wars throughout the history for different purposes. Colonization has resulted in many wars between the aboriginals and also between the different European countries that were setting up colonies. But American wars created impact and resulted in its origin, stability and to elevate as super power.

Revolutionary war as American war of Independence
The period of Revolutionary war renowned as The American war of Independence or American Revolution was 1775 to 1783. The war was between the empire of Britain and thirteen British colonies on the North American continent with oceanic places also. The Revolution war led to birth of a new nation. The war began on April 19, 1775.

Causes of the Revolutionary war
The American people were greatly suffered by the Great British crucial ruling. But they sought to do everything by themselves.

The Britain Government determined to collect taxes which had obligation on the French and Indian war. To collect the taxes the British formed some acts as Sugar Act, Stamp Act and others.
The American Colonies people also considered to send their people to British Parliament or at least choose for Britains legislator.

The American Colonists were waiting for the end of the Seven Years war (Known in America as French and Indian War) for their place in the British Empire. But the victory of Britain Empire over France changed all. The British policies collects money from the colonists by way of taxes for the improvement of colonial administration and insertion of hordes in America and these were disagreed with colonists.  The colonists also wanted their participation in the British parliament. All of theses activities by the mid 1770s resulted in the interactions between the American Colonists and British management and they became nervous and discordant. The ruthless taxes and the membership in Parliament conferred augment to a famous saying taxation without representation.

Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, and others fought for an independent America from British. Then Americans started supply of guns and bullets in destruction of British ruling. The stockpiles led to the war against British. The first shot fired in 1775 at Lexington and Concord. General Thomas Gage, the British Commander around Boston, did not want to irritate the Americans. In April Gage arrested many patriots and also people who supported them at Lexington. He launched this troop at night on April 18 to capture the colonists by circumvent of violence. The army force which waited for the arrival of the British in Lexington started firing as soon as they arrived. But some Americans thought it was not war, it was the beginning. In June 1775, the American colonies created a Continental congress with a continental army under the commander George Washington. The two years period of the war struggled between the patriots and British. With their sea power the British won. But in 1776 and 1777 George Washington was succeeded at Trenton and Princeton, New Jersey. General Horatio Gates who commanded the patriot forces, won at Saratoga, New York in October, 1777. Through the influence of this victory France entered in this war. During 1778 and 1781 the British military paid attention on the south and they won. But the Americans and French associates attacked the British general Lord Cornwallis and took him to custody. At last the Americans and British signed a preliminary peace agreement on November 30, 1782 and signed final treaty on September 10, 1783. This treaty was approving the United States in conditions of national boundaries.

Birth of America
At the successful winning of independence, Americans began to form a self government in both Continental Congress and at the local and state levels. The Americans together formed a new government in Philadelphia, but all Americans did not approve this new constitution. Despite this condition, the constitution was approved. Americans elected George Washington as the president of new republic because of his personal fame and popularity. Washingtons decisions led to the division of central government in two parts, factions and political parties. The second president, John Adams made these divisions with poorer quality. In the third presidency of Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809) the new nation expanded as double by procuring the Louisiana Territory from France. Jefferson was the successor President.

Civil War and Stability
The civil war in America was the important event of American history, even more than the American war of Independence. The atrocious civil war fought between the Confederate States of America and the United States of America. American developed into a huge country from the original thirteen colonies by expanding from both the sides from east to west. America became huge after the embracing the both sides from east to west to its existing thirteen colonies.

The civil wars battles and their generals put a permanent mark on American life, north and south. The Civil War continued since five years from 1861 to 1865. In 1861 the United States faced a great crisis. The differences of northern and southern America in various factors like economical, political and social were the main causes of this Civil War. The North became increasingly industrial and commercial and south had developed in agricultural. Agitation was arising for anti-slavery in the South and unavoidable debates were going in the North. Thus slavery became the central point of civil war. In this period Lincoln succeeded for establishment of liberty from slavery.  In addition to this, Lincoln uttered about the confinement of slavery. Slavery should not be expanding in new states, but some political combats pointed on the expansion of slavery in newly created regions.  There was a fear to southern states for losing the control over the central government to antislavery forces. In opposite, there was a risk to northern states that the domination of slave power over the government would lead to divergence of the ethnical issue of slavery.

Thomas Jefferson influenced north and south with the Jeffersons ideas about the rights of states and the right of revolution mentioned in Kentucky, Virginia and Declaration of Independence respectively.  Northerners revealed the equality of men by Jeffersons statement. Lincoln also mentioned it. Northerners agreed to use military force to keep the south in the union. Even Southerners opposed in danger Federal intimidation. The result was a horrific Civil War. Many Americans were slaughtered in the Civil War.

Reconstruction
After fighting of four years, the union was reinstated through oblige of arms. The problems of reconstructing the union were difficult as fighting the war. Renouncement of the secession and elimination of all the forms of slavery were the two important goals of the war, but after the war there was some disagreement among the northern leaders. Reconstruction was already begun in the earlier stages of the war ended in the year 1877 which led to the in the three amendments of the Civil War to the constitution the XIII, dealing with the abolishment of slavery, the XIV with extent ion of federal legal protections to citizens irrespective of race, and the XV, abolished the racial restrictions on voting.

World War II a channel to American Supremacy
The course of world was affected by many events, among them the World War II has produced such an impact that world is still facing. It has successfully demolished the Nazis power and has elevated two world powers as USA and USSR as an outcome of the war.
       
USA has consolidated its place as a world power after the World War II. It helped USA to dominate the world and also created conditions for effective control in the home country itself. The New Deal measures were used to overcome the greater turmoil of the war and also to overcome the problems faced in thirties such as unemployment, the economic distress and the consequent turmoil.

As Lawrence Wittner writes, The war rejuvenated American capitalism. By the end of 1944 the corporate profits were rose to  10.8 from  6.4 billion in 1940. American officials and economic strategists were happy about the wartime situation and end result and also forced for a permanent war economy, by combining business and military. Soon after the completion of World War II, American people, military and other people preferred disarmament, demobilization and also the administration of Truman which created a chaos and cold war. USA economy faced a severe setback after the war and more than 20 million people were also died. But USA came back strong regaining its military strength, rebuilding its large manufacturing industry and stabilizing its political system.

The US internal and external polices focusing on the war, enhanced the military budget and fuels the economy with war related orders. By these policies it started more aggressive foreign policies and repressive policies at home.

The causes of the World War II and rise of Communist Russia were magnified and shown to world and its people to justify its actions and made sure that its proceedings were unquestioned that helped to regain its supremacy in the world.

Conclusion
The American wars, internally and externally had changed the future course in its own growth as well as the world at large. The revolutionary war otherwise called as American war of independence has given birth to America after a furious fight with British, where it consolidated itself internally after civil war by making necessary amendments to the constitution and gained supremacy as a result World War II with its war strategies.

After the Civil War was over USA experienced a rapid growth of its economy and industry in particular. The growth was combined with a considerable influx of immigrants. Those were predominantly young men willing to work and earn in spite of all hardships offered by the half-savage country and it seemed there were no number to them. Under the circumstances American bourgeoisie did not take into consideration interests of workers at all. The latter could have struck or rallied as much as they please being replaced by hosts of the newcomers. That is why United States stayed impregnable to socialist ideas penetrating from the Old World though. At the same time America of the second half of XIX offered the plenty opportunities for those who wished to get rich and Andrew Carnegie was the characteristic example of fulfillment of American Dream being a real self-made man. Having come to the USA at the age of twelve Carnegie began to work as a bobbin boy at the cotton mill. Being a child Andrew worked twelve hours per day six days per week being paid 1.2 per week. His parents had to work hard either. Nevertheless he succeeded to make fortune yielding to Rockefeller only. His success allowed him to demand form others to work hard. By the time Carnegie published his Gospel of Wealth he owned a number of plants and had thousand of workers working for him twelve hours a day and six days a week as Carnegie himself had worked before. So such successes as Carnegie supposed everyone to work hard to get rich. Those who failed were esteemed as idlers and lazy losers who simply did not wish to work.

Eugene V. Debs  one of the most prominent American socialist and trade union leader  was hardly the exact antithesis of Carnegie. Born to a wealthy family he quitted going to school and began to work as a boiler man. Later he changed many occupations yet eventually quitted working and began to struggle for workingmens rights. Having been offered a flying start of his life Debs failed to take advantage of it and did never finish his formal education though.

There was no industry in China then so material benefits of America were created by American industrial failed to become oligarch so went on working twelve hours a day six days a week. Life and working conditions American industrial workers worked under were often justly compared to those of slaves. They earned the same wages as Carnegie used to earn being a child and these scarce earnings were hardly enough for having life sustained. Life conditions of female workers were still more appalling. It was not rare when women received less money for the exactly the same job as that being done by men. That circumstance compelled many of American women to engage in prostitution which was in great demand inhabited predominantly by men-newcomers.  Eugene V. Debs compared profit prostitution then was yielding to the profit of other American trusts.

Though the working masses as the whole seemed tot have been treated like women which are usually consumed not being given any credit. The measures supposed to improve workingmens life and working conditions taken by government and proposed by politicians resulted in nothing but in insulting laborers intelligence. Politicians of the main parties of that time proposed to reform tariff policies and implement currency reforms. Yet these reforms may have been of no use for American industrial workers. Both protective tariffs in the USA and free trade policies of England allowed Carnegies of both countries to make tremendous super profits while industrial workers still suffered from want. When American industrial workers resorted to strike or rally they were put to prison or being shot by the police and army detachments.  As it was mentioned above both heroes and martyrs of the struggle for industrial workingmens rights were soon replaced by pliable immigrants form the Old World which went on coming to America in their pursuit of happiness. So from the point of view of American government and oligarchy governmental measures toward workingmen were more than effective. Furthermore accidentally or not American trade union and leftist leaders unlike their European and Russian like-minded doers of the  same level seem not to be apt to learning being inferior not only to the leftists of the Old World but to their American opponents. That difference is evident when Carnegies Gospel of Wealth and Debs Capitalism and Socialism are compared with one another.  

Just having gotten through Andrew Carnegies essay the one who succeeds to do it might feel himherself superior to another one who failed. Gospel of Wealth evinces rather high educational background of the author and supposes the reader to have the like. Being an embodiment of American dream, a really self-made man Andrew Carnegie proves certain right for an active minority of the nation to accumulate the main resources in their hands by the law of competition. He denies the poor any right to enjoy any help simply because of their need. Carnegie asserted that those only deserve being helped financially who could help himself. By Almsgiving more injury is probably done by rewarding vice than by relieving virtue he wrote. No one is known for having helped Carnegie himself when he being a child and a teenager really needed it. Nevertheless he managed to be success due to his personal efforts only. His success probably suggested him to believe the social inequality to be the natural foundation of human civilization. Civilization took its start from the day that the capable, industrious workman said to his incompetent and lazy fellow, If thou dost not sow, thou shalt not reap, and thus ended primitive Communism by separating the drones from the bees he wrote.

The workers who used to work for his plants and mills were assigned a week rate of output and those who failed to fulfill the plan were treated like drones after they have impregnated the queen bee. According to Carnegie whose views agreed with social Darwinist postulates fashionable then.
At the first sight it could seem amazing but Carnegies opponents essay Capitalism and Socialism proves Carnegies case. Being composed in a plain manner it could be without a doubt understood by anyone no matter whether heshe can read and write the essay is however an example of cheap demagogy. Labeling capitalism with disgrace Debs however proposes no concrete idea of industrial workers problems solution. By the above mentioned essay the author produced an impression of a looser deprived of the access to the pork barrel. As the many American leftist leaders debs wished to participate in government. That is why he took part in presidential elections and mentioned demand of complete enfranchisement of women and the equal rights of all the people regardless of race, color, creed or nationality to get more voters for himself. Yet half educated and greedy leftist and trade union leaders failed to participate in managing this country and eventually took an active part in activities of organized crime during the Great Depression while their like-minded doers in retarded Russia were successfully building the society of general equality and the power of labour.