| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "PHILIPPINE AMERICAN WAR": |
|
|
Philippine-American War, 2003.
Examines the causes of the Philippine-American War (1899-1902).
1,279 words (approx. 5.1 pages), 9 sources, APA, $ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
American notions of race and civilization greatly influenced U.S. support for the Philippine-American War that took place from February 1899 to July 1902. The paper shows that many historians argue that Americans supported the Philippine-American war out of a genuine desire to civilize the inferior Filipino race. However, years of isolationist foreign policies coupled with the threat of growing European powers had created widespread anxieties among Americans in the 1890s. The paper argues, therefore, that the the Philippine-American War actually served as an outlet for American anxieties about U.S. international power by allowing Americans to reaffirm their racial superiority.
From the Paper
"America could have easily maintained trade with the islands, but chose instead to seek the annexation of Philippines, which cost America many lives and opened up American economy to foreign financers. Nevertheless, support for the annexation of the Philippines was widespread. Rather than considering more peaceful alternatives to the war, many Americans supported the attempt to emulate the ?policy of expansions which [had] been pursued in England? in order to achieve an even greater amount of international power than their European allies.
Americans were also able to calm their insecurities, which had fostered avid support of the war, by proclaiming that the U.S. had a divine responsibility to tame the barbarian Filipinos. Americans asserted their racial greatness by complaining of the white man?s burden as a divine nation to ?uplift and civilize and Christianize the Filipinos.?"
| |
|
Philippine-American War and Insurgency Against America, 2005.
A comprehensive history of the insurgency against American troops in the Philippines directly after the Spanish-American War.
3,126 words (approx. 12.5 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 91.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper describes the war that existed in the Philippines after the Spain's defeat at the hands of the United States during the Spanish-American War. As a direct result of the war, the Philippines were given to the United States and the Filipino people who originally believed that they were fighting a war for freedom and independence against the Spanish begin to turn against American troops who they view as simply another occupying force. The first part of the paper gives a background to the Filipino insurgency and its main leader, General Emilio Aguinaldo. Aguinaldo's tactics of fighting a guerrilla war against American troops is examined, as well as the effectiveness of these attacks on shocking the American public back home. Feeling betrayed by America who promised the Filipino people freedom after the Spanish were defeated, Aguinaldo embarked on a series of deadly attacks on American soldiers in the Philippines. As a result, American troops responded with equal brutality in their reprisals with very little organized military command holding them back. Diaries are heavily cited in this section of the paper, giving primary sources that tell of how desperate the American soldiers were at the time and how they needed to racially dehumanize the enemy in order to commit such vicious acts of reprisal. The second part of the paper deals with how the American press responded to the war. Numerous newspaper articles and other criticisms of the war are given as examples, some written by the early 20th century's most prominent figures such as Mark Twain. The general point of this section is to show how deeply divided the American public was over the war in the Philippines and how many felt that it would lead to American involvement in other world affairs. A direct parallel is also drawn to the Iraq War in modernity. Finally, the paper ends with a detailed account of how individual soldiers from both sides viewed the conflict. The Filipinos clearly viewed the insurgency as a necessary action in order to preserve their promised independence, while many American soldiers were disgusted and frustrated with why they were in the country to begin with, and often responded violently towards the natives since they began to view them as subhuman. The psychology of warfare is briefly discussed, as soldiers often dehumanize the enemy as a means of justification of their own violent behavior. The end of the insurgency is also discussed, with American troops brutally putting down the rebellion and establishing a tight control over the entire area for decades.
From the Paper
"On April 11th, 1898, the President of the United States William McKinley went to Congress and asked the elected body to declare war on Spain for their role in oppression overseas and to accommodate public opinion that was strongly anti-Spanish due to the sinking of the United States battleship Maine only a few months earlier that was blamed on Spanish agents. Congress eventually sanctioned the war, and the Spanish-American war commenced with several battles over Spanish colonies such as Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines. The war itself was over fairly quickly, as hostilities were ended only a few months after war was officially declared. The involvement in the former Spanish colonies clearly demonstrated that America had shifted to a strong imperialistic attitude when it came to the Western Hemisphere and indeed the world in general, and would be forced to endure all of the benefits and tribulations that came from being an imperialistic power."
| |
|
The Spanish American War, 2002.
This paper examines the Spanish American War from the perspective of two different writers, John Offor?s ?Why Did the United States Fight Spain in 1898?? and Lewis Gould?s ?The Spanish American War and President McKinley?.
1,325 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 2 sources, APA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that both authors agree victory in the Spanish American War resulted in the image of the United States as a nation with global interests, acquiring Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Philippine Islands from Spain, and giving Cuba independence. The author stresses that Gould saw McKinley as a purposive and effective executive, but Offor described the president as a tentative man who did not want to go to war, but was pressured by the public to do so. The paper points out that McKinley, the first modern president, assumed a new role during this war, as McKinley led the nation's military effort, functioning directly as commander in chief, which had never been done before.
From the Paper
"Thus, North American investment, particularly in plantations, mills, and mines, increased significantly in Cuba. By 1895, North American businessmen had invested up to 50 million dollars in Cuba, and by 1893, commerce exceeded 100 million dollars. According to Offor, ?For the United States, Cuba was an important market for industrial goods and a source of raw sugar, tobacco, and various minerals; for Cuba, the United States was the essential importer of over 90 percent of sugar produced on the island ?. Still, many North Americans were prejudiced against Spaniards and Cubans. The public viewed Spain as degenerate, with Catholic inquisition cruelties, a corrupt monarchy, and a backward economy. This view led to somewhat of a feeling of superiority."
| |
|
The Spanish-American War, 2002.
Examines the causes and consequences of the 1898 Spanish-American War.
2,616 words (approx. 10.5 pages), 5 sources, APA, $ 78.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
John Hay, the U.S. Ambassador to London, called the war of 1898 with Spain ?a splendid little war.? His statement, often quoted about the war, indicated his recognition that this war would change the position of the United States in the world and have ramifications for decades to come. This paper shows that the Spanish-American War often gets little attention in history texts, overpowered by the bigger, longer-lasting wars such as the War Between the States, World War I and World War II. The fact is that the Spanish-American War, which included significant action both in the Caribbean, especially Cuba, and the Pacific, especially involving the Philippines, had complex causes and complex long-term ramifications.
From the Paper
"The war of 1898 represented a turning point in the United States? international standing. The country acquired its first overseas territories and pushed Spain out of the Western Hemisphere (Rodriguez, 1998). It laid the groundwork for our involvement in World War II, as our growing interests in the Pacific had a profound effect on Japanese action in that arena. Until the Spanish-American war, our influence had been limited to North America. Now we had presence in both major oceans and had contended with other great powers, either by warfare or by maneuvering, and had emerged victorious (Rodriguez, 1998). It was not a challenge to defeat Spain, but the long-term effects of the war dramatically affected history for the following century. The groups who drew us into the war, both in the Caribbean and the Pacific, revolutionary factions in both Cuba and the Philippines, did not fare well. Cuba was liberated from Spain but under profound influence of the Untied States. In the Philippines, the people simply traded one country?s domination for another?s."
| |
|
The Spanish-American War of 1898, 2002.
This paper discusses the Spanish-American War of 1898 by tracing its causes to determine why the United States entered the war, the domestic opposition to the war, and the war?s aftermath.
1,860 words (approx. 7.4 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 59.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the United States, as part of its imperialist expansion, annexed Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, and Philippines during the War. The author points out that the cause of American imperialism and the popular desire for expanding the country?s influence beyond its borders was taken up by the popular press of the time, but was vigorously opposed by several prominent figures, such as Andrew Carnegie and Mark Twain. The paper concludes that the war carries significant lessons for the students of history that are especially relevant in the current global environment, in which the US is once again looking to assert its political and military power.
Table of Contents
Background
Cuban Struggle for Independence
American Imperialism and Yellow Journalism
Sinking of the Maine
Declaration of War
The Philippines
The Caribbean War
Peace Treaty and the Aftermath of the War
Opposition to the War
Conclusion
From the Paper
"True to the advice of its founding fathers like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, the United States had, in the first century of its existence, kept well away from foreign entanglements and concentrated on its domestic consolidation. After the American Civil War (1861-1865) the country experienced rapid industrial growth. This led to the need and desire for expanding its markets beyond its frontiers and for showing its political and military muscle at the international scene. The Monroe Doctrine and the rallying cry of the country?s ?manifest destiny? became popular slogans in the country as more and more Americans began to believe that territorial expansion by the United States was both inevitable and ?divinely ordained.? Certain events in the neighboring territories were soon to provide it the opportunity to flex its muscles."
| |
|
The Korean War and the Korean War Veterans' Memorial, 2005.
This paper discusses the forgotten war, the Korean War, and describes the Korean War Veterans' Memorial.
1,050 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 36.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, although statistically the Korean War took more lives than the Vietnam War, the Korean War has been branded as America's "Forgotten War" because it was over-shined by two "greater" wars, the Second World War and the Vietnam War, which dragged on for more than a decade. The author points out that the Korean War is important because it (1) started the end of the communist expansion in the world, (2) laid the ground for the entry of democracy in the states in Eastern Europe and Russia and (3) began the American foreign policy of military intervention to gain or maintain security, freedom and democracy in the world resulting in a number of military conflicts which continues today. The paper describes in detail the Korean War Veterans' Memorial, adjacent to the Lincoln Memorial directly across the reflecting pool from the Vietnam Veterans' Memorial in Washington, D.C., which was dedicated in 1995 by Bill Clinton and Kim Young Sam, then presidents of the U.S. and South Korea.
From the Paper
"The symbolisms in the memorial are brilliant pictures of a war that will never be forgotten. For as long as the memorial continues to exist, the memories of a war, which advanced freedom at the cost of the lives of millions of people, will eternally be thought of and etched in the minds of guests. Moreover, this memorial also serves as a reminder that freedom, though sweet and liberating, must never be taken for granted and must certainly be forever guarded, secured and remain dear in our hearts. It must also be remembered that there are still countries in the world that do not enjoy the rights given by a true democracy. The pursuit for the expansion of democracy must certainly not be abandoned. Still, millions of people are yearning for a free, equal state where social, economic and political justice stands and endures."
| |
|
The Persian Gulf War, A War Without Formal Declaration, 2002.
Looks at how the United States government engaged in the Persian Gulf War and several other wars after WWII without officially declaring war.
1,208 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the history of U.S. military engagement since the end of WWII, with particular emphasis on the Persian Gulf War of 1990. It points out that Congress has not formally declared war since December 11, 1941, against Germany and that, during the course of the last several decades in United States history, the citizens of the U.S. have been continually forced into war without a formal declaration of war supported by the U.S. Congress. The paper then discusses the War Powers Act, which has made it possible for Congress to avoid making actual declarations of war while still permitting major military engagements such as the Persian Gulf War.
From the Paper
"Congress has not formally declared war since December 11, 1941 against Germany in response to a formal Declaration of War by Germany against the U.S. (Paul, 2002). When Congress does formally declare war, a task that requires small effort on the part of representatives, an enemy is clearly defined and the task at hand is readily made clear. A clear cut victory is also expected as was the case of the Declaration of war against Germany and Japan. During the course of the last several decades in United States history, the citizens of the U.S. have been continually forced into war without a formal declaration of war supported by the U.S. Congress. The most recent example prior to 2003 of this was the war started in the Persian Gulf. Such action taken by the president of the U.S. exemplifies the pomposity and overbearing authority the president has placed upon himself over the citizens of this country."
| |
|
The Vietnam War and the Iraqi War, 2004.
This paper compares the similarities of the Vietnam War and the Iraqi War.
850 words (approx. 3.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses that the world of nations is becoming embittered because the United States demonstrated an unethical utilization of military and political power in the Vietnam War and the Iraqi War. The author believes that the War on Iraq, like the War in Vietnam, was a mere ploy of politicians attempting to prove their superiority. The paper relates that the Vietnam War was fought to free the Vietnamese from a dictator the U.S. previously supported and that the war on Iraq was fought, again, to free the Iraqis from a dictator the U.S. previously supported.
From the Paper
"The Vietnam War was fought on the basis of freedom, democracy and the need to hinder the spread of the evil of Communism. The slogan of the times was that if the spread of communism was not stalled America would soon lose its freedom and democracy the world over would be wiped out. These words may seem dramatic to the rational mind but to really understand the mood of the time such words must be used. The government of the time played on the emotional fear of the people through propaganda to make them believe that unless they supported the Vietnam War they would be unpatriotic and cause the nation to lose its sovereignty. Though Vietnam was thousands of miles away the war soon reached the borders of the US for as the war began so did dissent."
| |
|
War in Iraq War on Terror, 2007.
A discussion of how the war in Iraq and war on terror became linked as election issues.
2,646 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 13 sources, MLA, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper the author argues that the war in Iraq was utilized as a persuasive tool to win an election, in which the war was linked to the more global and less definable "war on terrorism." The author further contends that in the 2004 presidential elections the voters were seeking security, and therefore they linked the two issues. This paper demonstrates that the war on terror and the war in Iraq are not connected and in fact contraindicated for the long term safety of the US, specifically with regard to future acts of terrorism. Salient quotes from primary and secondary sources are used to support the author's thesis.
From the Paper
"The importance and reality of this link are now being questioned at every level. People, in both high and low places are questioning the validity of the connection and asking if this aggressive move, on the part of the US, even in the face of much international opposition was in fact appropriate to improve security in the US and her interests all over the world. The political positioning that has become increasingly obvious has undermined the faith of individuals in the nature and necessity of the War in Iraq, as people feel they were sold a bill of goods, rather than leveled with in regards to the strategic importance of the Iraq in the global war on terrorism in both the short and log term. In fact this work argues that the only connection between the war on terrorism and the War on Iraq is that the later has and will continue to serve to increase terrorist activities and actions against the US, no matter how the government spins it."
| |
|
The Just War Theory on the War Against Drugs, 2001.
A detailed analysis of the increasing war against drugs and whether this war is a just and valid one.
1,260 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 4 sources, $ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks into the Just War Theory of St. Augustine, and determines whether the war against drugs is war that is just and fair, or one that should be given up. The author argues that the war on drugs is something that can never be fully eradicated and rather one that can only cause for the reduction of drug use. Included are statistics as supporting evidence.
From the Paper
"The war against drugs in the United States is one that has been fought for many years, and seems to have no end. Its ?soldiers? always seem to come upon new enemies, which there are already countless numbers of to begin with. Many proponents of the war against drugs point to the facts that drug use has declined over the years, and the numerous amounts of arrests and drug busts that are made. While those proponents support the governments quest in the elimination of drug trafficking, there are also those who disagree.The opponents say that there is no end in sight, that the drugs will continue to be produced no matter what, these people desire the profit from the occupation, and will do anything to get it. Chances are, neither of the majorities of either of these groups have looked into whether this war against drugs is a just one, and should continue, or end. Which leaves the question, should we as Christian?s be supporting this war, or would it be wrong and immoral to do so. This knowledge can only be obtained by looking into the just war theory, and making a decision from there. "
| |
|
James Turner Johnson and George Weigel's "Just War and Gulf War", 1995.
This paper reviews James Turner Johnson and George Weigel's "Just War and Gulf War" justifying the Gulf War against Iraq on moral and practical grounds.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 1 source, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"James Turner Johnson and George Weigel, in Just War and the Gulf War, present a reasonable argument that the Gulf War, from the point of view of those prosecuting the war against Iraq, was indeed a just war, according to the moral criteria of that tradition. At the same time, the authors are not naive about the victory and its results. They point out that "the only peace that can be achieved in this region is one limited to that defined by international law, not a 'new order' that will be extraordinarily difficult to bring into being" (40). This is important to note because it emphasizes that the just war doctrine should be applied to each war individually. The authors are not saying, in other words, that any threat to peace in the Middle East, for example, should be answered by the kind of international effort posed in the war against Iraq. "
| |
|
The War on Terrorism and the War on Drugs, 2002.
An examination of the similarities and differences between the fight against drugs and terror.
940 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An analysis of the relationship between the war on terrorism and the war on drugs. Part II discusses the similarities between the war on terrorism and the war on drugs. In Part III, the relationship between the war on terrorism and the war on drugs is outlined. Lastly, this paper concludes with recommendations for effectively dealing with the war on terrorism and the war on drugs.
From the Paper
"Few events in life have the potential to impact each and every single member of society, whether it is on a macro (indirect) or micro (direct) level. Even fewer such events actually do impact every single citizen. The Columbine school shootings, the Kent State university shootings, the Oklahoma city bombings, Pearl Harbor, and Vietnam are just a few of the events which are forever embedded into the psyche of millions of Americans. On September 11, 2001, two airplanes crashed into the World Trade Center buildings in New York, another airplane crashed into the Pentagon, and a fourth airplane crashed into a field in Pennsylvania. In addition to the sheer magnitude of these airplane crashes, what makes these crashes notable is the fact that all four airplanes were hijacked by suspected terrorists. As a result of these horrific terrorist attacks, thousands of individuals lost their lives in an instant, countless others were left to stand by helplessly, to learn to rebuild their lives without their loved ones."
| |
|
The War Hawks and the War of 1812, 2002.
Discusses the idea that the War Hawks of America were the cause of of the 1812 war against Spain.
2,150 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 13 sources, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Historically, the war of 1812 has been attributed to Royal Navy outrages against American commerce and the impressment of sailors on American vessels in the years before 1812. However, a more plausible explanation focuses on the War Hawks and their combined desire to ensure egress for American products, eliminate perceived British support for the western natives and provide an excuse to move against Spain in Florida.
| |
|
Vietnam War and the World Wars, 2002.
A comparison of Vietnam and the World Wars.
650 words (approx. 2.6 pages), 2 sources, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares and contrasts the Vietnam War with both World War I and World War II. It will explain how these wars were similar in causes, reasons for participation, military tactics and propaganda and winners and losers.
| |
|
The Korean War Verses Other Wars in American History, 2000.
Compares the Korean War, which was fought for ideological reasons, to other wars in American history.
2,275 words (approx. 9.1 pages), 5 sources, $ 70.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The Korean War is a war that many people will never forget. All wars in American history fought before the Korean War was based on either national survival or the gain of territory. A strong conflict was created between the Soviet Union and the United States. The conflict was so strong that wars were fought in the midst of this cold war. The Korean War was the first American war that was not fought for national survival, for territory, for manifest destiny or for hegemony. ?Korea was the first ideological war.?"
|
|
|
