American History

Movies are simply not made to entertain a particular audience. Historical movies like The Letters from Iwo Jima prove to us that we are given the option to understand facts from history not only through books but through movies as well. Full-length films enable its viewers to transport through time and experience history first hand  the cries of soldiers and their defeat, the blasting sound of grenades, the battle itself and in the end - learn

The Letters of Iwo Jima is a war film based on an important historical event and was shown in theaters last 2006. The film primarily tackled the Battle of Iwo Jima, a segment from the Second World War between Japan and the United States and was waged in the island of Iwo Jima in Japan (Morison 2002).  The film is biased to show the perspective of the Japanese during the war. The Japanese Imperial Army forces and their heroism was highlighted and illustrated throughout the movie.

The review of the film can be made through a detailed study of the external and internal aspects of the film.  The external aspect refers to the outside factors that contributed in the making of the film (the director and producer, the actors, historical relevance and basis) and the internal aspect refers to all that was inside the film (the scenes and its background settings, the characters emotions, the message the film wants to present). The film was directed and co-produced by Clint Eastwood (an American), while most of the main and supporting actors were Japanese.  The movie also has a Japanese subtitle because it is intended for American as well as Japanese viewers.  It is rare for a movie to have a foreigner as director who aims present a film from the perspective of a different nationality.  The American audience was able to appreciate the film due to the scenes where American soldiers showed their loyalty and determination to win the battle. On the other half, the Japanese audience applauded when the film was able to depict the ordeals of their ancestors during the war. The setting of the movie took place on Japanese island of Iwo Jima, making the movie more realistic and giving the audience a feel of history. The film was able to show viewers different emotions in the scene where the Japanese were supposedly losing the war and a lot were dying, and at the same time having the island as their last defensive position against the American forces (Morison 2002).

The scenes and its background were exactly patterned with to show the past period.  The film was able to depict the scenes from the battle through careful crafting of the settings for the said scenes.  It was said that the Governor of Tokyo, Shintaro Ishihara was able to convince Eastwood to shoot on Iwo Jima (Ryuganji Movie Website) to make the movie more realistic.  The bunkers and tunnels of Iwo Jima, which still stands today is seen in the movie and contributed a lot in making the audience know and feel how it was to be a soldier in battle during the olden times.   The emotions of the actors shown in the movie can be described as being true to its very essence.  Since most of the actors were Japanese, they were able to easily relate with the movies theme. This is because most of their ancestors participated and took part during the Second World War and they feel like they owe their present stature to their ancestors.  Also, the portrayal of Japanese traits and customs were surely present in the movie, in particular the ritual of hara-kiri than to face and taste defeat from the enemy was given importance in the film to show the audience a bit of Japanese culture. The movies message is also clear  it is not always who has won in a battle sometimes it the journey towards winning and defeat that actually marks history.

It can be said that their portrayal of the actual scenes and events during that period were historically accurate, though some were scrutinized by movie critics and historians.  One of these events is the depiction of the Japanese military police to appear cold-blooded especially when shooting criminals. Aside from this, the introduction of terms like rifle and jeep  was used in the film as seen in history books (Official Association for the Advancement of Unbiased View of History Weblog).  In the movie, we see the portrayals of two people, the Americans and the Japanese, and because of this, we cannot help but compare the two during the course of the film.  In the onset, it can be predicted that since the director is an American, it is expected to see notable characteristics of Americans (heroism, courage, and honor) that is usually seen in American war movies.  They were instead portrayed as having the same characteristics as the Japanese, like the shooting of a captured Japanese soldier in cold blood.  Aside from this there were also scenes in which positive traits were showed, like the treatment of prisoners of war (POW) and the handling of injured enemy soldiers by both the Americans and the Japanese soldiers.

In summary, The Letters from Iwo Jima was able to illustrate and give the audience another perspective about the said historical event which some readers could easily miss when reading books. In turn we are given additional knowledge and perspective not only regarding the battle itself but also with regards to its participants (both the Japanese and the American soldiers). In reading historical books, we are given facts from a battle  the participants, the location, the number of estimated deaths, etc. In watching historical movies, we learn about the sentiments of the participants, we see right before our eyes how a beautiful island is destroyed by bombs in minutes and we are able to see the heroic emotion of those have who died. Movies warm our hearts and make us appreciate history to a whole new level.

How the institution of slavery affected the development of the American South and the lives of people living in that region

The period between 1800 and 1865 is a significant period in the history of America. This is because it is the time when the war between various states took place. The war came to be referred to as the war of the states or the American Civil War. It was a war that saw hundreds of thousands of Americans lose their lives while millions of others were left without a place they could call home. During this period, the institution of slavery which at the time was getting support from the people of the south affected the development of people living in that region. This discussion looks at some of the economic, cultural, political and social implications of the institution of slavery during this period (Kenneth. 2000).

In the period between years 1800 and 1865, America was divided into two major factions. Among the issues of contention that led to the division was the institution of slavery. The southern region was in full support of the practice while the northern region led by Abraham Lincoln opposed vehemently to this practice. According to Abraham and his group, slavery was an inhuman practice which was archaic. The southern region on the other hand argued that abolishing slavery would rip them off their only source of income. It was therefore a tussle between these two regions (Kenneth. 2000).

Besides slavery being an economic pillar in the southern region, it was also used to gain racial control so that the whites could remain in power while mistreating the blacks. The main role that was played by slaves however, was the economic role as the slaves provided labour to work in the cotton plantations. The southern region was heavily dependent on agriculture as their source of income and thus abolition of slavery was seen as a big blow to their economy (Joseph. 1999).

Socially, it is rather obvious that the institution of slavery brought about instability in the society. It was the institution of slavery that led to the division that was experienced in America which later culminated into the bloody Civil War. There were a lot of indifferences between people of the same country, all because they did not agree on the contentious issue of slavery (Parvin. 1995).

The institution of slavery also brought with it political turmoil. It is argued that America as a country had never before experienced such high levels of political instability as it was during that period. There was heightened political hostility and the outbreak of the Civil War did not come as a surprise to many. It was a time bomb that was bound to explode if the political pressure that was being experienced at the time was anything to go by (Joseph. 1999).

Although the institution of slavery was hailed as the backbone of the economy for the people in the southern region, it also had some negative effects on the economy of the region. The southern region did not develop in terms of buildings and cities. There were no industries in which some of the slaves could work in and thus there was stunted growth economically which adversely affected this region.
The institution of slavery in the southern region of America between 1800 and 1865 had major impacts on the lives of Americans. Equally, the institution was affected in a number of ways. To begin with, it is common knowledge that the institution of slavery and the controversy surrounding it was one of the major causes of the bloody American Civil War. Even though there were other underlying issues that led to the outbreak of this war, the issue of slavery was significant in the outbreak of the war. As already mentioned, the institution of slavery also affected Americans in a number of ways mainly culturally, politically, socially and most of all economically (Frank  Kenneth 2004).

However, when Abraham Lincoln who led an anti-slavery movement was elected to power as President of America, he passed a law that made slavery illegal in the country. It was as a result of this ruling by Abraham Lincoln that 12 states broke away from the main confederation and this came to be known as the secession. Although slavery may have had negative impacts, it was also a major lesson for the Americans to learn. As much as the people in the southern region did not agree, it had become apparent that abolition of slavery was important to create a level ground for every person without having the attitude of master and servant (Edward. 2009).

Nevertheless, despite the various challenges that were encountered in abolishing slavery in America, the practice slowly died down and this paved way for growth both economically, socially, culturally and politically. Democracy was given a chance and America now stands out as one of the most democratic states the world over. Indeed, slavery had major impacts on the people of the southern region in terms of politics, culture, socially and economically.

Americas colonial history can be described in terms of the economic, political and social events of the early sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The two centuries came with two sets of societies altogether. No historian will contest the fact that the start of the 1600 and its formative years marks the starting point of the American colonies history of existence.

The American native society had a tight hold of their territories albeit without any form of a structured government but had a well organized defense outfit to check intruders (Adams, 1921). The invasion by the English and other European giants and subsequent formation of the thirteen colonies was characterized by tribal and cross culture fights pitting mainly the native tribes against the colonizing English between 1600-1650. This points to an era of cultural disorientation and societal instability. Disease, poor weather and tribal warfare made it impossible for meaningful political, social and economic endeavors to materialize.

Small-scale farming was the main economic activity in this era. The introduction of tea and tobacco in early 1600 gave the American colonies the opportunity of agriculture for trade and subsistence. The 1700 came with a different social, economic and political arrangement (Adams, 1921). The thirteen colonies each had an elaborate governance structure. The American colony of Pennsylvania had its first constitution in1701, no doubt then that the society already had a sense of respect for human rights and freedoms as they would call it the Charter of Privileges. This new set of laws guided governance and peoples conduct within and without the society (Schlesinger  Arthur, 1993).

Agriculture took a new angle during this era. Large scale farming replaced the old fashioned small scale and subsistence farming of the early 1600. Big plantations were put up by wealthy landowners of the southern colonies who also engaged in hunting. This agrarian culture effectively put to an end the perennial hunger of the previous decade. There is a marked difference in the educational setup of the two eras. The early sixteenth century saw nothing much of formal education. Public schools were established and grammar schools became common place between 1700 and 1750.

College education gained value and in effect Yale College was founded in 1701. Later, a pioneer journal was published and the freedom of the press and liberties was enacted (Schlesinger, 1993). The era of 1600-1650 had witnessed a culture of ignorance and disenfranchisement coupled with religious and cultural intolerance. Impunity went unpunished resulting in many killings and murders with anti-establishment figures being banished or executed.
   
The society of the 1700-1750 era led a different lifestyle compared to that of 1600-1650.These people were a lot more economically stable (Gipson, 1936-1970). A pointer to this is their love for fashion and big life contrary to their early sixteenth century counterparts where starvation and hard labor punctuated their lives. The former had enough to spend and spare and even dress well owing to a healthy economy while the latter barely managed to scrape through life.

The Great Awakening movement by Jonathan Edwards in the 1730s and 1740s demonstrates a great difference in religious faiths of the two eras as he calls his group new lights and the previous religions old lights. With this evangelistic movement, the religious and social orientation changes and differs greatly from that of the 1600 - 1650 era.

In the US, the relationship between the religion and the government has been strong. For many years, immigrants were moving to the US to worship especially after the English Civil War and after the religious conflicts in Germany and France. Though not only Christians that were allowed to worship in the US, different groups had different religious believes and views as well as backgrounds though they were all honored by the US government. In some states, there were different views on religious toleration. In some places like Rhodes Island were protecting the religious minorities, others like Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth Colony had already established churches(Philip, 2002). On the other hand, the Dutch colony of New Netherland had already established Dutch Reformed Church and had banned all other worships. The reason behind the closeness of religion to the government is because of financial support. The established churches and other form of worshipers were responsible in providing relief and would help in alleviating poverty.

Efforts of separating religion and government
The separation of the religion and the government has been a legal and political principle that has been document by different founders of the US. Example, the 1st amendment of the US constitution reads, Congress shall make no law respecting and establishment of a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof (Philip, 1975). According to the letter that was written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist, he said that the religion and the government must be separate for the benefit of both of them, he advised the government not to create any law favoring any religion. Though the principle has been handed over to the American generations, it has not been fully embraced by the US Supreme Court (Daniel, 2003).

Locality Case
Its evident that Christian plays the majority in the US and they contribute a lot in the formation of government. This has ruined the efforts of separating the religion and the government. In the locality, there are different religions and they have to be respected as they are part of the society. There are Christians from different denominations, Muslims, Synagogue and atheists. They are all to be accommodated in the society and they have to be comfortable with the ruling government. Though there is a tread of following the Christian treads, its not a must to continue practicing the tradition as the community is looking for change.

To balance the effect of practicing Christian and the Wednesday prayer, the mayor has to give other religions an opportunity to go to their respective worship places to pray before they come for the thanks giving meeting, or on the other hand, to have unity in the community and have no religion of preference, all should be meeting in a hall not attached to any religion and all religion leaders would lead prayers in terms. This will make the minorities feel as part of the society and would increase harmony among the community and the government. Since the mayor has authority to decide what would be followed during this ceremony, he has to be careful as other religions might unite against one religion (Philip, 2002).

Conclusion
America is one of the countries that value religion and expresses the fear of God in most of its affairs. This has been a matter of concern as its looks as if one religion group is more favored by the government compared to other religions. Christian plays the majority and it has been a matter of concern of other religions to have equal consideration in government affairs. Recognizing and including minority religion in the government affairs would eliminate the issue of seeing as if Christians are more favored by the government than other religions.

The separation of state and church does not really produce a wall high enough to prevent the intrusion of the state on church affairs and vice versa.  The Bill of Rights is a set of fundamental laws that forbid the government from interfering in the affairs of individuals that do not affect society, such as religious practices.  Therefore, the purpose of the First Amendment was not to protect Americans from religion (but) to protect religion from government intrusion (Patton 1995).  Judd Patton explains that despite the declaration of the separation of church and state by the framers of the Constitution, the First Amendment could not really be for it.  This is because the framers themselves had to affirm their Christian faith before they became functionaries.

Since the establishment of the United States, various laws and policies were created not just according to the parameters of the Constitution but also based on the principles of human dignity and equality, oftentimes backed by the teachings in the Christian faith.  There are even times when the policy-change advocated for ran against the precepts behind the Constitution.  Nevertheless, the people behind these were Christian leaders, armed with biblical ideals (that were) attacking the nations political and economic values-attitudes and practices that contradicted the nations founding principles (Loconte 2005).

The First Amendment may have set the basic rule for the separation of church and state but it certainly has not resulted into a wall high enough for the state to be truly devoid of religious influence.  The framers were largely inspired by their own religious beliefs.  Alexis de Tocqueville wrote that men cannot do without dogmatical belief (Democracy in America 2007 p.325).  All the framers were devout Christians and they all admitted that their inspiration in establishing the republic came from their religious belief. Therefore, not only is the wall not high enough, it also gives an advantage to one religion, Christianity. This wall can only be higher if the implementing rules of the clause on church and state separation favor not only one religion.

The Great Depression was one of the greatest crisis the United States, if not the world, has ever faced.  Its immediate cause was the  Wall Street Crash  or  Black Tuesday  on October 29, 1929 when stocks in the New York Stock Exchange began falling at a rapid rate.  Many businesses closed down and scores of people became unemployed.  The ascendancy of Franklin D. Roosevelt to the presidency was the beginning of steps taken to address the Depression and enabled America to gradually rebound from economic collapse.  It was a crucible in determining which direction America, through the Roosevelt administration, would take and even though it was not perfect, it was still considered the right choice.
The United States was still rolling on the momentum of the  Roaring 20 s  as economic prosperity propelled American society to greater heights and so did speculation.  Unfortunately by 1929, most of them guessed wrong and many people suffered from the mistakes made in the stock market.  People could not pay debts owed to banks and banks had no money to give out loans, causing them to close.  Businesses closed down as people ceased patronizing them as they became frugal.  As a result, money, the lifeblood of the economy ceased to flow.  Attempts to stimulate the economy under the administration of President Herbert Hoover failed. The Hoover administration passed measures such as the Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act of 1930 which increased tariffs at incredibly high levels that was beyond what most people could meet and it had a disastrous effect on international trade as nations assumed protectionist stances.  The problem with this measure was this was sponsored by interest groups which did not sit well with the majority (Cravens 212 Schultz 15).

Another measure was the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) to resuscitate bankrupt infrastructures.  This underscored the governments willingness to intervene in the economy and business, a realm which was  traditionally  off limits to the former in the spirit of free enterprise where the initial belief was there was to be no interference from the government.  The Great Depression had changed that attitude as the need for such intervention became apparent as no one else was willing to take up the cudgels for these institutions and infrastructures in distress.  Yet despite these efforts, other wrong measures overshadowed Hoovers otherwise well-meaning efforts such as the increase in taxes with the hope it would generate more revenue for the government to act and voluntary cooperation between government and business as most of the latter were reluctant to cooperate (Cravens 228 Schultz 40).  This was further underscored by  Hoovervilles  (hovels made of boxes) and  Hoover Blankets  (newspapers).

Other sectors in societies were greatly affected by the Depression. There were those, especially living in the Midwest, who went further west to seek greener pastures as it also happened that the Dust Bowl struck this region where severe drought, made worse by dust storms destroyed farms and ruining lives.  Without profits from produce, a lot of farmers lost their farms as they were unable to pay rent or mortgage thus prompting an exodus further west where jobs were said to be waiting in California, Oregon and Washington state but even here, the new arrivals faced hardships. John Steinbeck captured these surreal and depressing scenes in his novel The Grapes of Wrath (Cravens 90). Another affected sector were the veterans of the First World War who relied on the government for their pensions and their civilian jobs.  The Depression deprived them took these away and were immediately demanding the release of a bonus promised to them by law in 1924.  It was supposed to be released by 1945 but the Depression made them demand it immediately.  They formed the  Bonus Army  and camped in Washington, DC until their demands were met.  Unfortunately, they were dispersed violently resulting in deaths and the government was soundly criticized for the rough handling of the incident (Schultz 17-19).  It was rather unfortunate that in the minds of most Americans, the problems they were facing were  credited  to Hoover.  His failure to address the crisis brought about by the Depression led to the election of Franklin Delano Roosevelt to the White House.

Upon assuming office, Roosevelt stated in his inaugural address in 1933, Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is, fear itself   needless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance  (Roosevelt).  He was exhorting the American people not to let fear of the uncertain to dominate them, nor should they allow the current circumstances to control them in the sense of giving them a sense of helplessness, if not hopelessness.  American women made their voices heard in letters they wrote to the First Lady, Eleanor Roosevelt.  The gist of these letters underscore the hardships women were going through as they felt the effects of the Depression when their fathers and husbands lost their jobs or businesses.  They lament on not being able to afford even the simplest of needs for they had become too expensive and worried about giving birth and raising children during these times.  They exhorted them to help them and to do something (Cravens 45).

These concerns, gave Roosevelt the impetus to launch the New Deal.  The New Deal was a series of programs built around three R s relief, recover and reform.  Relief stresses efforts by the government to alleviate the suffering brought about by the Depression recovery of the economy and a return to stability and reforms needed in the economic system. Within the month of March, the government passed several laws such as the Emergency Banking Act (March 9), the Economy Act (March 20), the Beer-Wine Revenue Act (March 22), and the Civilian Conservation Corps Act (March 31).  In May, there was the passage of the Federal Emergency Relief Act (May 12), the Agricultural Adjustment Act (May 12), the Tennessee Valley Authority Act (May 18), and the Federal Securities Act (May 27).  All these were enacted within the first 100 days of Roosevelt in the White House.  In 1935, there was a second  Hundred Days  as the Roosevelt administration launched another series of measures to follow up in initial measures such as the creation of a Works Progress Administration, stemming out of the CCC and Federal Emergency Relief Administration and the Home Owners Loan Corporation to help homeowners in distress as banks were closing down.

Despite Roosevelts efforts, even his administration faced criticisms from sectors who were not satisfied, notably from the extreme right and left.  From the left were several members of Congress who were calling for a  socialist  approach and echoed by others such as Father Charles Coughlin who found the policies of the New Deal  capitalistic,  and governor Huey Long who also shared the same sentiments of government intervention and control which would lead to the equal distribution of wealth.  From the right was the Liberty League which a breakaway party from the Democratic Party who found Roosevelts policies to be fomenting class conflict as the policies appear to threaten big businesses (Cravens 90).  The Supreme Court declared the NRA and CCC unconstitutional for it violated the rights of businesses.  Roosevelt responded through  court packing  to replace the older members of the Supreme Court opposed to the New Deal (Schultz 24).  It was a shrewd political maneuver by Roosevelt who felt it was necessary as he felt the Depression was no time for political bickering and debate on its constitutionality as economic recovery was the main priority and he felt that as president, he had to do that it took to make this happen and did not need any impediment as the American people wanted action and democracy had to momentarily take the back seat.

All together, these laws serve to alleviate the sufferings of the American people by providing them jobs, though it did not pay as much as their former jobs but if there was something positive about it was that it helped make people productive rather than be idle and to wallow in self-pity of being unemployed.  It also regulated certain commodities such as liquor, something not done before in order to provide more revenue for the government which in effect, put an end to Prohibition seeing the futility making Americans teetotalers.  Furthermore, these laws also saw the government fully intervening in business matters, something never done before in America s free enterprise society which revealed its apparent flaw of going out of control when businesses would be left on their own and behave recklessly with all the speculations they did.  Roosevelts  court packing  underscored his sentiment that the Constitution is not a  suicide pact  where the letter of the law had to be followed when people were suffering economically.  The spirit of the law should be the one upheld.

The American people demanded immediate action from the government and got it.  A considerable number of them had taken part in these programs, especially the CCC and TVA.  With the regulation of banks, money was gradually trickling back into the economic bloodstream of the country.  Despite the measures enacted during Roosevelt s first 100 days, and again in 1935, it did not bring immediate relief yet it was slow and recession still persisted throughout Roosevelts presidency which was an uphill battle as economic activity was not peaking (Schultz 24).  It was only at the outbreak of the Second World War and America s entry in 1941 that ended the Depression as the economy went on war footing and it generated more jobs than ever before as well as sending able-bodied men into military service.  Ironically, the war was the thing that significantly solved the unemployment issue in the United States as well as took away their minds from worrying as they had bigger concerns to deal with when the war came along.

Even though it did not bring immediate relief, it can be said that the measures implemented by Roosevelt was received well though not all were satisfied and demanded more or something else from the Roosevelt administration.  Roosevelt in a way, had to adapt measures which was akin to the socialist model practiced in Europe where the government had to intervene in businesses to regulate it and at the same time, help provide or see to the needs of the less fortunate when nobody else would help them.  Roosevelt did his best to provide hope for the American people far better from the drastic measures done in Europe and Japan where militarism favored aggression as a way to solve their problems from the Depression. If there was one lesson to be learned here, leaders like Roosevelt did what had to be done to address the problem, even if it meant antagonizing some sectors whom he felt were either the cause of the Depression or the impediments to his programs.  The American people counted on him to alleviate their suffering and he gave them his best efforts though it was not exactly perfect.

The Korean conflict had a number of factors that contributed to it. One of the factors although it is not the major one could be the size of Korea as a country which is small in the middle of large countries such as Russia, China and Japan. Because of this fact, each surrounding country wanted to take over Korea to be under their territory, something which Korea had trouble in dealing with. Most of the time, she could find herself under the control of the neighbors like China which controlled her at intervals for over 1000 years.

The major cause of the conflict came into play when Japan took control of Korea just like the other neighboring countries had done. They ruled Korea from 1904 until the end of the World War II when the Soviet Union and the United States of America joined forces to drive Japanese out of the Korean territory. They agreed that after the Soviet Union was to rule in the north with the United States taking the Southern Korean. The 38 parallel was to make the dividing line between the North and the South Korea. The two countries ruled for a period of two years after which they both left Korea. The North which was under the Soviet Union leadership was left with a communist government while the south which was under the leadership of the US, a democratic government was left behind.

Because of the need for unity between the north and the south, problems started. There were two governments in place one formed by the southern people which was a democratic government and the other one was a communist government. The northern government formed the democratic peoples republic of Korea which was headed by Kim II Sung as a prime minister and the southern government was led by Syngman Rhee who was their president. The north wanted Korea unified as a communist state with the south advocating for a democratic state. Elections were held to form a single government between the North and the south and were supposed to be supervised by the UN to ensure that they were fair. Elections were held, of which the South was declared to have been undertaken in a free and fair way but the Northern regions elections could not be accepted because the UN supervisors could not be allowed into the North by the Soviets who were present. As a result, they were declared unacceptable. This led to formation of the separate states. Disputes started to emerge between the two sides with each side becoming more aggressive.

The United States pulled out its soldiers from the south from 40,000 who were there to only 500 soldiers and limited the number of weapons they were sending to the region. This was partly because of the fear of the southern president attacking the North and also because of the policy that had been passed in the US concerning Asia (NSC 482). Because of the power that the Soviet and China had developed through military advancement such that by 1949 they already had a nuclear bomb, the US opted for a different way of resolving the conflict other than war.

In 1950, the troops from North Korea launched a surprise attack on the south. The UN intervened and called an emergency meeting on the same day but the meeting was boycotted by the Russian security delegation because the UN had recognized Chiang Kai-Sheks government as the official government in Taiwan and ignored Maos communist rule in Beijing. At the meeting, it was claimed by the US that North Korea had interfered with world peace by attacking South Korea. America wanted North Korean troops to back off from the 38 parallel, a view that was supported by nine out of the eleven member countries. On 27th of June 1950, the US suggested that the UN should use force to get the North Korean troops out of the south because of them boycotting the Security Council. The UN formulated its plans in which 16 member states were to provide troops under the joint command of the UN which could support the South Korean army. The UN troops were under the command of an American General MacArthur.

The UN troops launched an attack against the North Korean troops in September of 1950 and managed to effectively cut North Korean army into two and managed to push them out of the south. They continued advancing to the North Korean territory despite the warnings from China. This led to an attack on the UN troops by China between 1950 and 1951 managing to push back the UN forces. MacArthur was sucked by President Truman after they had clashed generating the war into a stalemate between the UN and China. They agreed on a ceasefire at Panmunjon in 1953 which still exists to date.
The reasons that brought about conflicts between the North and South Korea were not justified. This was not North Korean verses South Korean war but instead it was a war between the US and the Soviet Union. It was the battle for supremacy between the US and the Soviet Union that fueled the conflicts between the two regions. In the first place, they are the ones who brought differences between the north and the south by first dividing them and instilling in them different forms of governance. Because of the effects that the war could have on the people of both the South and North Korea, the Northern troops could have desisted from entering the southern territory. From the start, it was evident that because of the differences that existed between the two, forming a unity government could do them more harm than good hence they should have continued with the separate governments they had formed.

The cold war between the United States and the Soviet Union was more or less the same as the Korean conflict because it was still the struggle for supremacy between the Soviet Union and the US led to these wars. It was because of President Woodrow Wilsons commitment to liberal internationalism that was aimed at promoting democracy together with free enterprise that conflicted with the Soviet Unions world wide class revolution which was aimed at bringing a socialist future that triggered the cold war. Differing economic interests between the two is also thought to have brought about the conflict. The US was out to create a new currency stabilizing scheme which the Soviet Union was opposed to because it was based on American capitalism. The issue of military superiority also had a hand in the conflict. The Soviet Union was the second most powerful and the US felt threatened by it. Therefore, it was keen on increasing its military capacity. The two came face to face in their fight for supremacy and had to deal with one another.    

Looking at the factors that led to the Korean conflict and those that contributed to the cold war, it is evident that the driving force between the two was the battle for supremacy between the Soviet Union and the US. These battles had significant effects to both states. It led to an expensive arms race which involved development of nuclear weapons, brought about alliances between states for and against each of the two and also had economic implications. They also led to propaganda wars and created a military and bureaucracy complex. It was not healthy for both of them and the world at large because of the tensions that it brought with them. Therefore, it is important for measures to be put in place to ensure that there is sovereignty among countries to avoid conflicts.