Cold War

Causes of the Cold War:
Social; The difference in opinion of communism. The west was opposed to communism and wanted the people to be "free" thus they wanted democracy to be used around the world, yet a democracy was not widely viewed as the best form of government hence conflict arose.
Political; Basically the United States and the Soviet Union had different opinions and could not settle their contrasting political views. (US=democracy, SU=communism)
Economic; The US was encouraging free trade throughout the world. But the Soviet Union wanted to use their own international commerce.Thus conflict arose in the fact that they weren't seeing eye to eye in what kind of trade should take place.

Overall I think the primary cause was the political views being different between the US and the Soviet Union. The US was merely pushing for democracy and couldn't see the benefits in being a communist nation, plus the US seemed to assume that any one that was communist would want to take over the world hence emotions ran high as well. The Soviet Union on the other hand saw democracy as a slow rolling process and no way to run a country, thus they didn't understand why the US was pushing so hard for their political views to be used by others.

I think that both nations were to blame for the cold war. They were both close minded and unwilling to so any benefits in the opposing views.

Prezi: Why Japan was Defeated

Japan was defeated because of their lack of resources, and the fact that they were putting to much on their plate at one time. Japan had wanted  to occupy a large buffer zone in east Asia and the Pacific. In this buffer zone they would be able to counter attack America by using their island bases. At the same time they were attempting to build up a stock piles of vital materials taken from the occupied areas (aka the buffer zone). But the Americans had adapted plans that would stop the Japanese, and as a result the Japanese plan failed. Then to top it all of the Americans dropped the Atomic bomb, and Japan was done for. Japan surrendered to the Allies. After the surrender the Allies occupied the area to insure success. Then Americans helped Japan to build back up, thus reconstructing it to what it is today. http://prezi.com/juininzcalvg/copy-of-why-japan-was-defeated/

"Monroe Doctrine for Europe" and the "European New Order"

So basically the "European New Order" was just to counter the Atlantic Charter and a convenient expansion to Hitlers previous "Monroe doctrine for Europe". In the "European New Order" the dictators "pledged themselves to remove the causes of war, eradicate the threat of Bolshevism (practices of ultra radical socialists or political ultra radicals) put an end to plutocratic exploitation and establish close and peaceful collaborations among the people of Europe." Which is basically a bunch of mumbo jumbo if you ask me. Hitler just wanted his views to reign over everyone. The "European New Order" was really just a way of spreading the political, economic, and social system Hitler wanted. This order was just propaganda and nothing else. Hitler was just using this to his advantage. My question though is did it work? Did the "European New Order" really influence anyone or was it a dud?

Stock market crash?

I have a question regarding the effects of WWI. What confuses me the most is the stock market crash. I understand the US was spending ton's of money and other nations were struggling just to get a scrap of bread, and that caused a big unbalanced money distibution which in the end may have caused it crash the way it did. But why did it crash so fast. Why was it that in one day the stock markets fell 9%? Why didn't that happen over little bit longer span of time?

NIght by Elie Wiesel

This book showed me how hard and incredibly strong the people that had to indoor the Holocaust were. With their lack of food and the Nazi's lack of humanity toward them, it showed me that the people who made it through the Holocaust were not a force to be reckoned with. They had been mentally and physically but up to the challenge and although they may have thought they would never survive they did, and they mastered life's greatest challenge. It showed me the strengths that humans can pull out and how strong we can really be. And in the end when situations like that occur it is truly the survival of the fittest and you have to give it everything you've got.

Imbalance of nations

In my opinion the after effects of WWI caused a plethora of good things to happen in the US. People began to research new medical advancements, which in the end improved inoculation of disease, and increased the human life span. After WWI there was also an increase in technology such as the radio and automobiles. Hence communication, and transportation excelled substantially, the US had hit the dawn of a new era. Unfortunately not all places could advance, nations like Germany were stick in a rut because they had been in the middle of everything. But sense the US had not been fighting on its own turf and had money coming to it from the nations that it had helped and supplied the US was having a hay day. But i have a question. Was it because the US was having such economic prosperity, and technological advancements, and other nations were being left to try to pull things together that the depression came about. Did that imbalance ultimately cause the depression?

Technology

Technological developments in WWI are thought to be a big advantage to the war. But was it really? I don't think so. As a result of technological development i think it hindered progress. I think it caused people in the war to depend on them in a way. It seemed that the people thought the new technology would do everything for them. They assumed that gas would just take everyone out, but really it just slowed down movement of their own army's. They also thought that tanks would help them but the tanks couldn't cross many tranches and all and all were more of a problem to keep going than they were benefiting the army. As a result of the new technology, there was less concentration on the actually army battle plans, and less emphasis on coming up with ways to defeat the enemy by foot. So did technological developments in WWI advance anything? I would definitely say no.