Hypocrisy Of The Good Guys Of World War Two By Mihir Bose

In "World War II," David M. Kennedy asks many of the important questions regarding War War II. Kennedy prompts the listener to ask how, what, when ,where, and why things happened the way they did. He believes that the war did not occur off it’s own accord, but was planned and happened because the Americans wanted to fight the war in a “particular” way. To fight this way they had to try to control all of the variables such as, the ways and means, timetable, and force configuration.

Hitler and the Holocaust is a very informational novel written by Robert S. Wistrich that not only explains this horrible time in history, but also gives us a look into the mind of Hitler and Nazi ideology. This book is not just centered on Hitler and Germany as it my sound, antisemitism spread like a plague all across Europe even before the Holocaust took place. In this work, Wistrich is not making an argument, but is trying to find an explanation on why so many inhumane actions were allowed.

The excerpt The Ending the War: The Push for National Reconciliation by David Blight, edited by Hoffman, Elizabeth Cobbs, Edward Blum and Jon Gjerde, in Major Problems in American History: Documents and Essays (Wadsworth, Cengage Leaning 2012) Blight argues historical memory that holds more importance than that of the Civil War. Like the Revolution, the memory of the Civil War played a role after the conflict. The concurrent issues in American society after the Civil War and against legislation to increase not decrease the racial problem in the South. Newly freed African Americans struggling to assimilate to society and be accepted as equal citizens in the reconstruction of the Union. This excerpt is rhetorically effective with statements on

World War 2 was known as the good war. The fight for democracy was a big deal to president Franklin and it was a very well fought war. America throughout the war learns to overcome things and start to become more accepting. The war helps unite both blacks and whites to a fight for the same goal. We get our revenge of the bombing at Pearl Harbor, we work with a very brutal dictator, and we tried to stay neutral for as long as we could. For example in doc 1 the president is advised to stay out of the war that it wasn’t worth it. The president ignores and goes on because he sees how the bombing of Pearl Harbor affects Americans. He explains how this is a fight for democracy and America will always have something to do with this. In doc 2 the president says he will be on your side as long as you have the same goal, to fight for democracy. This fight focuses on the fight for democracy while putting other things such as race aside.

The notion of choice in an individual’s life is subject to constant questioning. We have what we like to call the freedom of decision-making, but often it simply seems like a facade. Many believe that one’s morals and ethics are solely responsible for the decisions they make, major or minor. Others attribute the external pressures surrounding them and societal factors as the facilitator of choices. Unquestionably, both personal characteristics and societal factors influence the the majority of choices of individuals everywhere. We must consider, however, that one plats more of a role than the other. Pieces of writing such as Christopher Browning’s Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland, Michael Bess’ Choices Under Fire: Moral Dimensions of World War II, and Milton Mayer’s No Time to Think explore the idea of both influential aspects. Nonetheless, more influence can be attributed to societal factors and this idea is supported throughout all of the pieces of writing. Societal factors, for the most part, are composed of a plethora of external pressures that we either actively acquiesce to or subconsciously conform to. Societal factors play a much larger role for the average individual in regards to decision-making and this goes for individuals of all backgrounds and beliefs. This is shown in the lives of the Chambonnais, the Reserve Police Battalion, and the two famous experiments known as the Milgram Experiment and the Stanford Prison

World War II is generally viewed to be a moral war, or, as Howard Zinn would put it, “a good war.” This conventional impression of World War II results from American propaganda, along with misinterpretations of related events. Quite the contrary, the United States’ foreign policy, especially during World War II, was driven by imperialist goals rather than humanitarian concern. These foreign interventions are usually justified using political ideologies that advocate the spread of democracy but the United States government fails to act in the interests of the common people in other countries; instead, the US government intervened in foreign countries to protect its own needs and those of its private corporations. In addition, the

I have to admit that I had lost contact with my dear Jew friend, Aaron Bauer. It was unfortunate, but I sincerely believed that our decision was to lift each other’s burden and to protect this friendship. Integrating with one another had been a grave danger for both my wife and I, and Bauer understood our situations. I was no longer part of our secret Communist cell, for most of our Jewish members had dissolved into their separate ways following the aftermath of the Nuremberg Laws. Moreover, my wife and I had been busy with our full-time employment in the Volkswagen factory, for the KdF had promise us many trips and also the “People’s car.” There was time when I was excited about the KdF, but I immediately direct my thoughts to my Communists

Westermann compares Manifest Destiny in the United States and German lebensraum in Eastern Europe in Hitler’s Ostkrieg and the Indian Wars: Comparing Conquest and Genocide. Westermann is Professsor of History at Texas A&M University-San Antonio. Hitler’s Ostkrieg and the Indian Wars: Comparing Conquest and Genocide was published in 2016. In it, Westermann highlights similarities between Manifest Destiny in the United States and Hitler’s war in East Europe. Westermann evaluates the racial stereotypes, the philosophies, the national policies, the military strategies, and the role of massacre in both Manifest Destiny in the United States and Hitler’s war in East Europe. Westermann concludes that, while Hitler did envision his war in East Europe as Manifest Destiny in the United States, the two national projects did not share a common goal. Westermann concludes that Hitler demonstrated his limited understanding of U.S. history in his belief that intent of the U.S. Army was genocidal.

In the Age of War and Displacement is characterized by imperialism, nationalism, racism, and power. In an era of both freedom and confinement, Simon Wiesenthal describes his experience of the Holocaust, which is used to analyze, what it means to be human. After World War One (WWI), the Germans lost, “Hitler assumed authority and began to blame the Jews for what happened in WWI” (Bingle). Within a few months, Germans started to believe Hitler that they were the master race or supermen, and had no trouble committing genocide of any group Hitler labeled as “bad” or “subhuman”. The Sunflower, address the nature and task of human but also gives a Jewish perspective of “Humanness”. Wiesenthal asks, “Were we truly all made of the same stud? If so, why were some murderers and other victims? Was there in fact any personal relationship between us, between the murderers and their victims, between our camp commandant, Wilhaus, and a tortured Jews (Wiesenthal 7)?

World War two is remembered as the Good War, but like most wars, mobilization of the patriotic public opinion is necessary . Advertisers came up with a series of mottos to help sell World War Two to the people: One of the major words being “freedom” . The war was supposed to protect Americans freedom, use honorable means, and bring freedom to foreign nations but that’s not exactly what it did. When people think of WW2 as the Good War, many memories of the war are being left out. World War Two was not a Good War in the least bit.

In the decades since World War II, there have been many attempts to glorify this generation through the media. Myth and the Greatest Generation: A Social History of Americans in World War II by Kenneth D. Rose, attempts to pare back the delusions of grandeur that often characterize histories of the World War II generation to show society as it was rather than how we have come to perceive it. Rose claims that often times when commentators focus on wars, they choose stories that are meant to make the population feel good as opposed to showing the realities. As a result, in retrospect wars seem to generate heightened patriotism and national unity (1). In this book, Rose hopes to give true honor to the Americans of this generation, not by glorifying their contributions, but by presenting a picture more in line with the historical record, hoping that in doing so his work will deliver a more accurate portrayal of “Americans at war” (3). Rose chooses not to rely heavily on secondary source material, but rather to highlight the first-hand accounts of individuals who experienced the war. He does so in order to give them proper credit but also to show that the so-called Greatest Generation was not without flaws, and was indeed an ordinary generation that lived through traumatic events that tested their character (7).

“I think it is fair to say that during World War II there was a high sense of purpose. The country had a very clear vision of its own standing, of its own morality. It was not an ambiguous time. Today, we live in a world that is highly ambiguous, very fractured, with many of the historical, traditional values in a state of collapse, really.” World War II occurred during 1939 to 1945.

The second chapter of the book, "The Plague of Nationalism," fits into the myth of war by telling the people of any country that it is o.k. to hate and it is o.k. to kill even though the cause might not be just. He states that: "Lurking beneath the surface of every society, including ours, is the passionate yearning for a nationalist cause that exalts us, the kind that war alone is able to deliver. We abandon individual responsibility for a shared, unquestioned communal enterprise, however morally dubious" (45). There is a myth within nationalism that it is right. However morally wrong the reasons of war are, the myth of nationalism brain washes us into thinking that we are right. We are doing this for the right reasons and therefore to support our military however morally dubious the cause is. Chris Hedges writes about a general who, "during a dispute with Chile, flew his helicopter over the Chilean border in order to piss on Chilean Soil" (42). Coming from the view of a person who wasn't involved on either aspect of the war, this sounds a bit over the edge. Chris Hedges talks about how nationalism and racism are almost directly related in war time. People do things they wouldn't normally do under the circumstances. War drives us to do things we wouldn't normally do, thus dominating a

World War II is considered by many to be the single most significant event of the 20’th century. The outcome of that war defines the modern world. World War II led to the tragic death of a huge population of people across the globe. What led to the loss of so many lives? What led the nations of the world to tread down the path of war? This analysis tries to answer those questions in terms of autonomy and responsibility, and focuses on Japan. Japan was a major player in the war. As an aggressor of the war Japan had entered into military action before the European war had started and was not defeated by the Allied powers until VE Day. Several factors came together to Create war

Two days after Britain and France declared war on Nazi Germany, on the 3rd of September 1939, President Roosevelt issued a proclamation of neutrality and ordered the suspension of munitions sales to all “belligerents” (nations involved in war.) This included its “allies” the British and the French, as they were counted as “belligerent” nations.