cold war effects
Since I did not live through the cold war, I think that I can look back with a much more critical eye, and evaluate the cost and benefits of the cold war. Had I lived through the Cuban missile crisis, I probably would have said that the whole cold war was a success because I am still alive. I don't think that I ever can have the same respect for the situation, no matter how many accounts I read, or films I watch. I think that this should be taken into account when reading my analysis of the facts To what extent did the cold war really aid the world (and America specifically), who were the real winners, if any? Yes I know it is a broad question, but I think that I can re-specify it so that this paper will be a readable length. During the research process, I noticed that there were three general views of how the cold war ended: (1) It was a great American victory; we stopped the evil empire. (Rourke, 2) (2) It was an American loss, because the cost of the war, and it's after effects were so great. (Rourke, 2) (3) It was a zero-sum game, in the end the costs were equal to the benefits On the one hand there were some mostly good things did come from the cold war: the freedom of the Russia
The current fracturing that was caused by the end of the cold war is considered worse (by some) than the original cold war, now we have just as many hot spots to watch, but many more leaders and governments to deal with. If the USSR was analogous to a dragon, then today's state of affairs is comparable to a hydra. They both breath fire, but with the dragon you only have to watch one head versus the hydra which has so many heads that it is impossible to watch them all at once. that is more or less robust and suited to preserve them a longer or shorter time." If we were to look over the negatives for a moment, the cold war was possibly the best thing that happened to the United States. During the 'war' we experienced a record economic and populous growth (boom of the 1950's, 60's, and 80's), and expanded the rights of Americans. Successfully evading a nuclear war with the USSR, the U.S. stands alone as the last great superpower. Competition between the two sides strengthened international agencies like the U.N., setting a historical precedent that the world had never seen before. A current popular theory states that NATO could have contained communism without using military forces (assuming that the communist agents would use a revolution, and not direct military invasion). A large poor working class is needed for a communist revolution to be successful, if the United Sates, and later NATO, had invested in all the key nations, so that a middle class equal in size to the poor was created, it would thwart any true revolution. In certain instances, communist nations did use aggressive military tactics to acquire territory, and most likely no amount of money could stop these invasions. In these cases the only way to keep these lands free would be to intervene with military forces. But should we protect these people? If you believed in the domino effect, then you would say that the containment of communism is imperative because the accession of territory would strengthen the communist forces, and they would expand again with greater force than before. If you
Some common words found in the essay are:
, Russia United, United Nations, Sates NATO, Cuban Missile, Independence Constitution, Soviet American, Americans Successfully, cold war, Middle East, Korea Grenada, nuclear war, cuban missile crisis, 20th century, avoidance nuclear, military forces, missile crisis, rourke 2, cuban missile, avoidance nuclear war, costs benefits, nuclear weapons,
Approximate Word count = 1405
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
