From May to June of 2009 there were multiple strikes protesting the ongoing violence against of Indians in Australia. For years there has been an immigration problem with Indians fleeing to Australia in order to pursue a more conductive and all around better life. As there is little to no opportunity in India to achieve greet goals in life, many educated Indians strive for the best environments to get out do something useful with their lives considering some the most intelligent people come from their homeland. The people of Australia have been convicted of targeting the Indians in racist acts, but the government has little to nothing to say on the subject and deny all the racist acts. With thirty percent of the attacked people in one city being Indians, the government just refers to it as a routine robbery or murder. The majority of the Indian targets have been students with an average of three reported abuse cases in one week. There have also been sixty to seventy cases of serious attacks in the few weeks of protests, which may have been a benefit to the Indians cause for attracting worldwide attention through the media. The Indians are only trying to receive a better education in country that is not in ruins with horrible economy and overpopulation. The Australians have a respectable point of view also, that they do not need foreigners coming in and taking all their jobs or overpopulating their country as well. The illegal numbers may also rise, which increase the taxes on the Australians. The racism part of the ordeal should not even be brought to this conflict. This could be any race that came into their country no matter Japanese, Chinese, or Indian the people of Australia are solely against the illegal immigration factor. If the immigrants have been legally granted access to the country there should be no hatred towards these people. As the harder and the more effort someone puts into achieving a goal should be able to obtain this goal. The Australians are only being given more competition to get jobs, but this should just motivate them to get out and work for it. Violence should never be the answer to making a point, which the Indians are using in their advantage. As for the Australians there are only hurting themselves and making themselves look weaker. As Mohandas Gandhi would say “Anger is the enemy of non-violence and pride is a monster that swallows it up.” The Indians have conquered scenarios similar to this in the past with the British by staying strong and showing no violence give the enemy nothing to fight against and will sooner or later loose this urge of violence. There are also problems like this in USA against the illegal Mexicans which crossing the border to find a better life. They do have some major differences also, such as, the Mexicans are a major part of the drug cartel and have taken created many violent situations which the Indians have shown no need to start.
KGB is the Soviet Union’s abbreviation of Committee for State Security, which is similar to USA’s CIA. The KGB was established in 1954 and lasted till 1991, but it was merely an evolved form of the early Cheka during Lenin’s rule. The KGB was a new approach for the Soviet system. After Stalin’s death this agency was establish with intent of leaving behind earlier outrageously violent approaches. This secret police organization that was running during the Soviet era had some main responsibilities to take care of. A few of these responsibilities were to protect the country’s political leadership, to watch over border troops, and the overall protection of the citizens. While the KGB was for the better of the citizens they did operate very corrupt, using terror tactics at times to protect the privacy of their government. The corrupt acts that the KGB operated on to conceal the governments privacy involved investigating any crime against the government, they controlled and screened all the information that made it public, and any political criminals crimes were dealt with by the KGB and punishment mostly overseen. The intents for this new secret agency may have been much less violent, but they had much more intelligence on their side. The KGB would frequently take orders to blackmail westerners to become Soviet spies with sometimes intentions of kidnapping or even assassinating their targets. Using planned out methods to gather information on enemy nations. The KGB was also coincidentally formed and abolished at the beginning and end the race for nuclear weapons. Was this secret police formed for the good of the people or was it just a way for the Soviet Union to snoop around with rival nations that were striving for the top spot in the superpower race? People do have every right to believe that the KGB was one of the sneakiest agencies because of its 500,000 members that were strictly assigned to spying. With little to no information let out to the public about all of their operations and intents for later years the KGB had been violating the citizen’s rights and national laws via espionage or illegally obtaining information. All citizen’s backgrounds and lives were recorded with the secret police’s ease of access, yet the citizens had no clue what the government was sending out the KGB to do behind their backs. Over time the citizens of the Soviet Union grew to despise the KGB’s methods and how secretive they were being with information that should be open to the people that are loyal to this nation. If the government could not trust the people how can the people possibly trust the government. This quote said by Mikhail Baryshnikov, a Soviet Union, citizen displays the fear of the government system; “I was not extremely patriotic about Mother Russia. I played their game, pretending. You have to deal with, you know, party people, KGB. Horrifying.” The KGB rapidly dispersed by the end of the cold war considering there was no more spying to be done and the need for this police system had not gone over well with the people of the nation. All systems need to show loyalty to the people if they want to gain trust, but if secrets are held and fear rises, the organization will only take steps back in developing a powerful country. WC: 553
The Bombing of Dresden was a ruthless attack from the 13th to the 15th of February by two allied militaries, the British Royal Air Force (RAF) and USA’s United States Army Air Force (USAAF), on a city in Germany known as Dresden. In 4 waves of 1,300 raiders the forces dropped more than 3,900 tons of explosives and fire starting materials on this Nazi Germany city. This city had earlier been spared from such destruction by the allied troops because of its little input on the war and its innocent people living within it, although it was still considered a part of Nazi Germany making it a fair target. Considering the war was being fought against the Nazis and not just all of the innocent German’s this city seemed to be an insignificant spot to destroy with its dense population of refugees and civilians. There were a couple of statements made by Britain and USA for this relentless attack; there was evidence( supposedly) of weapons being created in Dresden to supply to the Nazi troops, there was no anti-aircraft missiles to threaten any of the raiders, and the Soviets Red Army could be shown how powerful Britain’s and USA’s forces are in order to scare Stalin for post war problems. At the same time Britain and USA knew that the war was soon to come to an end with Germany surrendering in Italy and slowly losing its power. So was this bombing necessary to get the point of wrong doing across to the Nazis or was it just overkill that ended around 30,000 people’s lives? I strongly disagree with USA’s and Britain’s reasoning and doing of such an act. Did a town of 350,000 innocent civilians really need to be burned down to no more than rubble and ashes? A devastating 15 square miles of nothing but civilization was destroyed in around 48 hours. A quote from a Survivor of the Dresden bombings depicts her sight, “By the time the Americans flew in for the third and last air raid, smoke from the burning city nearly obliterated visibility.” One member of the United States Army Air Force regresses, “We bombed from 26,000 feet and could barely see the ground because of clouds and long columns of black smoke. Not a single enemy gun was fired at either the American or British bombers.” People were just living there everyday lives and not disturbing the war efforts for the allies and they are vaporized to dust just to be reminded again that there leader is crazy and his dream for lebensraum is a bit extreme. At this point in the war (war ends months after bombing) all of the people in Germany already have a pretty firm grasp on just how much Hitler is a lunatic and a friendly reminder like this was not needed. Some might say that if Germany had won this war Hitler would have taken the same brutal actions upon everyone else. And yes I agree with this, but do we need to stoop down to Hitler’s low life actions? I thought the whole point of this war was to stop this madman and put an end to the way he views things, so why would we compare ourselves to him? He previously had obliterated the city of London having no intent on attacking the military, but instead attacking innocent people of Britain. These citizens stayed strong and never gave in to Hitler’s plan of turning them on their government so why did we need to show our weakness and take revenge on the citizens of Dresden? This only makes our countries look weaker and showing that we could not be the bigger man in this fight for revenge by halting these cowardly actions. WORD COUNT- 626
The League of Nations was invented by Woodrow Wilson after WWI in order to prevent the outbreak of another horrific great war. The League of Nations is a gathering of the leaders of each country to discuss problems that may have potential to light a fuse. The First World War started with the contribution of bad communication and the interception of a single letter to reach its recipient. The League of Nations is therefore direct communication and no misunderstandings. Some countries might have seen this as a way of every country being at equal playing grounds with equal power, and for the dominant nations this may have been degrading or even insulting. Therefore they despised the tactic. The more powerful nations wanted more input and Wilson wanted equality. Could these different views of lead to the failure of the League of Nations to prevent the Second World War? These possibilities have always been considered and the arguments have been proposed. So why did this plan for peace not materialize and function to halt another war? It was simply too slow and complicated for each country to gather its leaders, meet in one spot, and all agree on a topic. The French or British never contributed an army to the League, USA did not support the League of Nations, and with no army came no aggression or control, the biggest threat it could pose was for the weaker nation to stop trading with the big bad mean nation. France and Britain noticed the rise of the German army, with the development of the new war technologies being created, but were reluctant to stop it because of the possible spread of communism from Russia. Hitler was also a manipulating power fiend that convinced all the nations of his loyalty to respect and follow the Treaty of Versailles. At the same time the Treaty of Versailles was just too extreme for the Germans to put up with and Hitler being the psychotic lunatic that he is could not follow such an odious set of rules, so… Czechoslovakia, Austria, and Poland were invaded, alliances with Italy and Japan were formed, and bang it all begins. In my opinion and from what knowledge I have on this subject, is that there was only one World War from 1914 to 1945 with a twenty year break for the Germans to rethink their strategies and organize another army. With the absence of the motivation displayed by the League of Nations members the Second World War was bound to occur. With the devastating aftermath of WWI such as the great depression throughout the world, German debt, and the unknown victor another war had to happen and the nations had the opportunities to stop it, but these opportunities were not capitalized on. Everybody knew there was another war around the corner during that time period so for the most part resistance was not upheld in order to fight their destination.Basically the League of Nations failed to ensure peace. Following WWII, for the most part, the majority of the countries went through a golden age of prosperity and freedom. As long as there is people with opposing religions and ideas there will never be peace. This has been displayed even in todays world by the non-stop fighting throughout the middle eastern part of the world.
The people of Australia have been convicted of targeting the Indians in racist acts, but the government has little to nothing to say on the subject and deny all the racist acts. With thirty percent of the attacked people in one city being Indians, the government just refers to it as a routine robbery or murder. The majority of the Indian targets have been students with an average of three reported abuse cases in one week. There have also been sixty to seventy cases of serious attacks in the few weeks of protests, which may have been a benefit to the Indians cause for attracting worldwide attention through the media. The Indians are only trying to receive a better education in country that is not in ruins with horrible economy and overpopulation. The Australians have a respectable point of view also, that they do not need foreigners coming in and taking all their jobs or overpopulating their country as well. The illegal numbers may also rise, which increase the taxes on the Australians. The racism part of the ordeal should not even be brought to this conflict. This could be any race that came into their country no matter Japanese, Chinese, or Indian the people of Australia are solely against the illegal immigration factor. If the immigrants have been legally granted access to the country there should be no hatred towards these people. As the harder and the more effort someone puts into achieving a goal should be able to obtain this goal. The Australians are only being given more competition to get jobs, but this should just motivate them to get out and work for it. Violence should never be the answer to making a point, which the Indians are using in their advantage. As for the Australians there are only hurting themselves and making themselves look weaker. As Mohandas Gandhi would say “Anger is the enemy of non-violence and pride is a monster that swallows it up.”
The Indians have conquered scenarios similar to this in the past with the British by staying strong and showing no violence give the enemy nothing to fight against and will sooner or later loose this urge of violence. There are also problems like this in USA against the illegal Mexicans which crossing the border to find a better life. They do have some major differences also, such as, the Mexicans are a major part of the drug cartel and have taken created many violent situations which the Indians have shown no need to start.
