top-rated free essay

reading assignment

By LayneKearns Oct 19, 2014 5457 Words
History 1F95
Primary Source
Assignment
• Read the passages of the following two speeches.
• In an introductory paragraph, briefly describe the historical context of these two speeches
• Briefly describe the main arguments of the speakers in one paragraph of roughly 200 words for each author.
• In a fourth paragraph explain how the two speakers’ views about their country’s attitude to the war coincide and/or diverge. • Conclude briefly, explaining how these sources help you understand Soviet and US foreign policy before their involvement in World War II. • Do not exceed two pages, double-spaced.

• Submit your assignment to your TA at the start of your seminar during the week of Oct. 29.

 

HIST
 1F95
 PRIMARY
 SOURCE
 ASSIGNMENT
 -­‐
 
  2
 

 

 

 

 

 

 
A
 Report
 by
 the
 Chairman
 of
 the
 Soviet
 of
 People's
 Commissars
 and
 People's
 
Commissar
 for
 Foreign
 Affairs
 at
 the
 meeting
 of
 the
 VI
 session
 of
 the
 Supreme
 Soviet
 o
 
the
 Soviet
 Union
 on
 March
 29,
 1940
 

 
Comrades
 deputies!
 

 
Five
 months
 have
 elapsed
 since
 the
 last
 session
 of
 the
 Supreme
 Soviet.
 During
 this
 
short
 period
 of
 time,
 events
 of
 paramount
 importance
 in
 the
 development
 of
 
international
 relations
 have
 occurred.
 This
 makes
 it
 necessary
 at
 the
 present
 session
 
of
 the
 Supreme
 Soviet
 to
 look
 at
 the
 issues
 relevant
 to
 our
 foreign
 policy.
 

 
The
 recent
 events
 in
 international
 life
 must,
 first
 of
 all,
 be
 scrutinized
 in
 the
 light
 of
 
the
 war
 which
 began
 last
 autumn
 in
 Central
 Europe.
 In
 the
 war
 between
 the
 Anglo-­‐
French
 bloc
 and
 Germany
 there
 have
 been
 no
 major
 battles
 yet,
 they
 are
 limited
 to
 
separate
 confrontations,
 chiefly
 at
 sea
 but
 also
 in
 the
 air.
 It
 is
 generally
 known,
 
however,
 that
 the
 British
 and
 French
 governments
 turned
 down
 German
 peace
 
efforts,
 made
 public
 by
 her
 already
 at
 the
 end
 of
 last
 year,
 which
 for
 its
 part,
 owed
 to
 
preparations
 to
 escalate
 the
 war.
 

 
Germany,
 which
 has
 lately
 united
 80
 million
 Germans,
 has
 submitted
 certain
 
neighboring
 countries
 to
 her
 supremacy
 and
 gained
 military
 strength
 in
 many
 
aspects,
 and
 thus
 has
 become,
 as
 clearly
 can
 be
 seen,
 a
 dangerous
 rival
 to
 principal
 
imperialistic
 powers
 in
 Europe
 -­‐
 England
 and
 France.
 That
 is
 why
 they
 declared
 war
 
on
 Germany
 on
 a
 pretext
 of
 fulfilling
 the
 obligations
 given
 to
 Poland.
 It
 is
 now
 
clearer
 than
 ever,
 how
 remote
 the
 real
 aims
 of
 the
 cabinets
 in
 these
 countries
 were
 
from
 the
 interests
 of
 defending
 the
 now
 disintegrated
 Poland
 or
 Czechoslovakia.
 
This
 is
 shown
 if
 only
 by
 the
 fact,
 that
 the
 British
 and
 French
 governments
 declared
 

HIST
 1F95
 PRIMARY
 SOURCE
 ASSIGNMENT
 -­‐
 
  3
 
that
 their
 aim
 in
 this
 war
 is
 to
 smash
 and
 dismember
 Germany,
 although
 this
 target
 
is
 concealed
 from
 the
 masses
 of
 the
 people
 under
 the
 cover
 of
 slogans
 of
 defending
 
the
 "democratic"
 countries
 and
 the
 "rights"
 of
 small
 nations.
 

 
When
 the
 Soviet
 Union
 did
 not
 want
 to
 be
 an
 accomplice
 with
 England
 and
 France
 in
 
carrying
 out
 this
 imperialistic
 policy
 against
 Germany,
 the
 hostility
 in
 their
 attitudes
 
regarding
 the
 Soviet
 Union
 became
 still
 more
 pronounced,
 giving
 a
 vivid
 evidence,
 
how
 profound
 the
 class
 roots
 of
 the
 imperialists'
 hostile
 politics
 against
 the
 socialist
 
state
 are.
 The
 Anglo-­‐French
 imperialists
 were
 ready
 to
 escalate
 the
 war
 started
 in
 
Finland
 to
 a
 war
 against
 the
 USSR
 and
 not
 only
 utilizing
 Finland
 to
 this
 purpose
 -­‐
 but
 
also
 Scandinavian
 countries,
 Sweden
 and
 Norway.
 

 
The
 Soviet
 attitude
 to
 the
 war,
 which
 has
 spread
 out
 in
 Europe,
 is
 well
 known.
 Here
 
too,
 the
 foreign
 policy
 of
 the
 Soviet
 Union,
 which
 is
 penetrated
 by
 love
 for
 peace,
 has
 
been
 quite
 definitively
 displayed.
 The
 Soviet
 Union
 made
 it
 immediately
 known
 that
 
it
 stays
 neutral,
 and
 we
 have
 unswervingly
 adhered
 to
 this
 policy
 over
 the
 past
 
period
 of
 time.
 

 
A
 sudden
 improvement
 in
 Soviet-­‐German
 relations
 found
 its
 expression
 in
 the
 form
 
of
 the
 non-­‐aggression
 pact
 signed
 in
 August
 last
 year.
 This
 new
 good
 relationship
 
between
 the
 Soviet
 Union
 and
 Germany
 has
 stood
 the
 trial
 in
 connection
 with
 the
 
events
 in
 the
 former
 Poland
 and
 has
 thus
 fairly
 showed
 its
 permanence.
 With
 
negotiations
 which
 began
 already
 last
 autumn,
 the
 expected
 development
 of
 
economic
 relations
 assumed
 a
 concrete
 form
 in
 the
 trade
 agreement
 in
 August
 
(1939)
 and
 later
 in
 February
 (1940).
 The
 exchange
 of
 commodities
 between
 
Germany
 and
 the
 USSR
 began
 to
 increase
 on
 the
 basis
 of
 a
 mutual
 economical
 
advantage,
 and
 good
 grounds
 for
 its
 further
 development
 exist.
 

 
Our
 relations
 with
 England
 and
 France
 have
 taken
 a
 somewhat
 different
 course.
 
When
 the
 Soviet
 Union
 did
 not
 want
 to
 become
 an
 instrument
 of
 Anglo-­‐French
 
imperialists
 in
 their
 campaign
 for
 world
 hegemony,
 we
 have
 encountered
 at
 every
 
step
 deep
 hostility
 of
 their
 policy
 towards
 our
 country.
 The
 very
 extreme
 they
 got
 
involved
 in
 the
 Finnish
 issue,
 of
 which
 I
 shall
 discuss
 later.
 But
 during
 the
 past
 few
 
months
 also
 other
 facts
 emerged
 which
 showed
 that
 the
 hostility
 of
 the
 policy
 of
 
France
 and
 England
 towards
 the
 USSR
 was
 not
 small.
 

 
It
 should
 be
 sufficient
 if
 I
 point
 out
 that
 the
 French
 authorities
 did
 not
 devise
 
anything
 better
 than
 to
 arrange
 two
 months
 ago
 a
 police
 raid
 on
 our
 Trade
 
Delegation
 in
 Paris.
 The
 police
 investigation
 of
 the
 Trade
 Delegation,
 despite
 all
 
quibbling,
 resulted
 in
 nothing.
 It
 only
 brought
 disgrace
 on
 the
 initiators
 of
 this
 
outrageous
 incident
 and
 showed
 that
 there
 were
 no
 real
 grounds
 for
 this
 hostile
 
action
 toward
 our
 country.
 As
 we
 see
 from
 the
 circumstances
 connected
 with
 the
 
recall
 of
 our
 plenipotentiary
 representative
 comrade
 Surits,
 the
 French
 government
 
seeks
 trumped
 up
 grounds
 to
 emphasize
 its
 unfriendly
 attitude
 toward
 the
 Soviet
 
Union.
 To
 make
 it
 clear
 that
 mutual
 relations
 do
 not
 interest
 the
 Soviet
 Union
 more
 
than
 France,
 we
 summoned
 comrade
 Surits
 home
 from
 the
 post
 of
 the
 

HIST
 1F95
 PRIMARY
 SOURCE
 ASSIGNMENT
 -­‐
 
  4
 
plenipotentiary
 representative
 in
 France.
 

 
Or
 take
 similar
 examples
 of
 animosity
 in
 actions
 against
 the
 Soviet
 Union,
 such
 as
 
the
 seizure
 by
 British
 warships
 in
 the
 Far
 East
 of
 two
 of
 our
 ships
 heading
 for
 
Vladivostok
 with
 cargo
 bought
 by
 us
 in
 America
 and
 China.
 If
 to
 this
 we
 add
 such
 
facts
 as
 refusal
 to
 fulfil
 old
 orders
 for
 industrial
 machinery
 placed
 by
 us
 in
 England,
 
sequestering
 of
 funds
 of
 our
 trade
 representation
 in
 France
 and
 many
 others,
 the
 
hostile
 nature
 of
 measures
 against
 the
 Soviet
 Union
 by
 the
 British
 and
 French
 
authorities
 will
 be
 more
 manifest.
 

 
There
 have
 been
 attempts
 to
 justify
 these
 hostile
 acts
 against
 our
 foreign
 trade
 by
 
arguing
 that
 through
 our
 trade
 with
 Germany
 we
 assist
 her
 in
 the
 war
 against
 
England
 and
 France.
 It
 does
 not
 take
 much
 to
 convince
 oneself
 that
 these
 arguments
 
are
 not
 worth
 a
 penny.
 You
 just
 have
 to
 compare
 the
 Soviet
 Union,
 say,
 with
 
Rumania.
 It
 is
 well
 known
 that
 half
 of
 the
 whole
 foreign
 trade
 of
 Rumania
 consists
 of
 
trade
 with
 Germany,
 and
 the
 share
 of
 Rumanian
 domestic
 product
 in
 her
 export
 to
 
Germany,
 for
 instance,
 of
 some
 basic
 commodities
 like
 crude
 oil
 products
 and
 grain,
 
far
 exceeds
 the
 share
 of
 our
 own
 domestic
 product
 in
 exports
 to
 Germany.
 
Nevertheless,
 the
 British
 and
 French
 governments
 have
 not
 resorted
 to
 hostile
 acts
 
toward
 Rumania
 and
 does
 not
 consider
 it
 possible
 to
 demand
 an
 end
 to
 the
 
Rumanian
 trade
 with
 Germany.
 A
 strikingly
 different
 attitude
 prevails
 against
 the
 
Soviet
 Union.
 Consequently,
 the
 hostile
 acts
 of
 Britain
 and
 France
 against
 the
 Soviet
 
Union
 cannot
 be
 explained
 by
 the
 USSR
 trade
 with
 Germany,
 but
 by
 the
 futile
 
expectations
 of
 the
 ruling
 circles
 in
 England
 and
 France,
 to
 use
 our
 country
 in
 the
 
war
 against
 Germany
 and
 they,
 because
 of
 this,
 are
 conducting
 a
 policy
 of
 revenge
 
towards
 the
 Soviet
 Union.
 

 
It
 should
 be
 added
 that
 all
 these
 hostile
 actions
 of
 Britain
 and
 France
 were
 carried
 
out
 even
 though
 the
 Soviet
 Union
 up
 till
 now
 has
 not
 taken
 any
 unfriendly
 actions
 in
 
regard
 to
 these
 countries.
 Fantasy-­‐loaded
 plans
 attributed
 to
 the
 Soviet
 Union
 about
 
some
 Red
 Army
 march
 "to
 India",
 "to
 the
 Orient"
 etc.
 are
 such
 obvious
 absurdities
 
that
 only
 such
 people,
 who
 completely
 have
 lost
 their
 senses,
 can
 believe
 in
 this
 
ridiculous
 nonsense.
 (Laughter).
 This
 is
 not
 the
 point,
 of
 course.
 The
 reason
 comes
 
obviously
 from
 the
 fact
 that
 the
 neutrality
 policy
 pursued
 by
 the
 Soviet
 Union
 is
 not
 
for
 the
 taste
 of
 the
 Anglo-­‐French
 ruling
 class.
 Furthermore,
 it
 seems
 that
 their
 
nerves
 are
 not
 quite
 all
 right.
 (Laughter).
 They
 want
 to
 impose
 on
 us
 a
 different
 
policy,
 a
 policy
 of
 enmity
 and
 war
 against
 Germany,
 a
 policy
 which
 could
 allow
 them
 
to
 use
 the
 USSR
 for
 imperialistic
 purposes.
 It
 is
 time
 for
 these
 gentlemen
 to
 
understand
 that
 the
 Soviet
 Union
 is
 not
 and
 never
 will
 be
 a
 tool
 of
 an
 alien
 policy,
 
and
 that
 the
 Soviet
 Union
 has
 always
 conducted
 and
 will
 always
 pursue
 her
 own
 
policy
 irrespective
 of
 whether
 it
 pleases
 the
 ruling
 gentlemen
 in
 other
 countries
 or
 
not.
 (Tumultuous,
 prolonged
 applause).
 

 
Source:
 
http://everything2.com/title/Molotov%2527s+speech+after+Finnish+Winter+War  

 

HIST
 1F95
 PRIMARY
 SOURCE
 ASSIGNMENT
 -­‐
 
  5
 

 

 
Radio
 Address
 Delivered
 by
 President
 Roosevelt
 From
 Washington,
 December
 29,
 1940.
 
My
 friends,
 
This
 is
 not
 a
 fireside
 chat
 on
 war.
 It
 is
 a
 talk
 on
 national
 security;
 because
 the
 nub
 of
 
the
 whole
 purpose
 of
 your
 President
 is
 to
 keep
 you
 now;
 and
 your
 children
 later,
 
and
 your
 grandchildren
 much
 later,
 out
 of
 a
 last-­‐ditch
 war
 for
 the
 preservation
 of
 
American
 independence
 and
 all
 of
 the
 things
 that
 American
 independence
 means
 to
 
you
 and
 to
 me
 and
 to
 ours.
 
Tonight,
 in
 the
 presence
 of
 a
 world
 crisis,
 my
 mind
 goes
 back
 eight
 years
 ago
 to
 a
 
night
 in
 the
 midst
 of
 a
 domestic
 crisis.
 It
 was
 a
 time
 when
 the
 wheels
 of
 American
 
industry
 were
 grinding
 to
 a
 full
 stop,
 when
 the
 whole
 banking
 system
 of
 our
 country
 
had
 ceased
 to
 function.
 I
 well
 remember
 that
 while
 I
 sat
 in
 my
 study
 in
 the
 White
 
House,
 preparing
 to
 talk
 with
 the
 people
 of
 the
 United
 States,
 I
 had
 before
 my
 eyes
 
the
 picture
 of
 all
 those
 Americans
 with
 whom
 I
 was
 talking.
 I
 saw
 the
 workmen
 in
 
the
 mills,
 the
 mines,
 the
 factories;
 the
 girl
 behind
 the
 counter;
 the
 small
 shopkeeper;
 
the
 farmer
 doing
 his
 spring
 plowing;
 the
 widows
 and
 the
 old
 men
 wondering
 about
 
their
 life's
 savings.
 I
 tried
 to
 convey
 to
 the
 great
 mass
 of
 American
 people
 what
 the
 
banking
 crisis
 meant
 to
 them
 in
 their
 daily
 lives.
 
Tonight,
 I
 want
 to
 do
 the
 same
 thing,
 with
 the
 same
 people,
 in
 this
 new
 crisis
 which
 
faces
 America.
 We
 met
 the
 issue
 of
 1933
 with
 courage
 and
 realism.
 We
 face
 this
 new
 
crisis-­‐this
 new
 threat
 to
 the
 security
 of
 our
 Nation-­‐with
 the
 same
 courage
 and
 
realism.
 Never
 before
 since
 Jamestown
 and
 Plymouth
 Rock
 has
 our
 American
 
civilization
 been
 in
 such
 danger
 as
 now.
 
For,
 on
 September
 27,
 1940,
 by
 an
 agreement
 signed
 in
 Berlin,
 three
 powerful
 
nations,
 two
 in
 Europe
 and
 one
 in
 Asia,
 joined
 themselves
 together
 in
 the
 threat
 that
 

HIST
 1F95
 PRIMARY
 SOURCE
 ASSIGNMENT
 -­‐
 
  6
 
if
 the
 United
 States
 interfered
 with
 or
 blocked
 the
 expansion
 program
 of
 these
 three
 
nations-­‐a
 program
 aimed
 at
 world
 control-­‐they
 would
 unite
 in
 ultimate
 action
 
against
 the
 United
 States.
 
The
 Nazi
 masters
 of
 Germany
 have
 made
 it
 clear
 that
 they
 intend
 not
 only
 to
 
dominate
 all
 life
 and
 thought
 in
 their
 own
 country,
 but
 also
 to
 enslave
 the
 whole
 of
 
Europe,
 and
 then
 to
 use
 the
 resources
 of
 Europe
 to
 dominate
 the
 rest
 of
 the
 world.
 
Three
 weeks
 ago
 their
 leader
 stated,
 "There
 are
 two
 worlds
 that
 stand
 opposed
 to
 
each
 other."
 Then
 in
 defiant
 reply
 to
 his
 opponents,
 he
 said
 this:
 "Others
 are
 correct
 
when
 they
 say:
 `With
 this
 world
 we
 cannot
 ever
 reconcile
 ourselves.'
 .
 .
 .
 I
 can
 beat
 
any
 other
 power
 in
 the
 world."
 So
 said
 the
 leader
 of
 the
 Nazis.
 
In
 other
 words,
 the
 Axis
 not
 merely
 admits
 but
 proclaims
 that
 there
 can
 be
 no
 
ultimate
 peace
 between
 their
 philosophy
 of
 government
 and
 our
 philosophy
 of
 
government.
 In
 view
 of
 the
 nature
 of
 this
 undeniable
 threat,
 it
 can
 be
 asserted,
 
properly
 and
 categorically,
 that
 the
 United
 States
 has
 no
 right
 or
 reason
 to
 
encourage
 talk
 of
 peace
 until
 the
 day
 shall
 come
 when
 there
 is
 a
 clear
 intention
 on
 
the
 part
 of
 the
 aggressor
 nations
 to
 abandon
 all
 thought
 of
 dominating
 or
 
conquering
 the
 world.
 
At
 this
 moment,
 the
 forces
 of
 the
 states
 that
 are
 leagued
 against
 all
 peoples
 who
 live
 
in
 freedom
 are
 being
 held
 away
 from
 our
 shores.
 The
 Germans
 and
 Italians
 are
 
being
 blocked
 on
 the
 other
 side
 of
 the
 Atlantic
 by
 the
 British,
 and
 by
 the
 Greeks,
 and
 
by
 thousands
 of
 soldiers
 and
 sailors
 who
 were
 able
 to
 escape
 from
 subjugated
 
countries.
 The
 Japanese
 are
 being
 engaged
 in
 Asia
 by
 the
 Chinese
 in
 another
 great
 
defense.
 In
 the
 Pacific
 is
 our
 fleet.
 
Some
 of
 our
 people
 like
 to
 believe
 that
 wars
 in
 Europe
 and
 in
 Asia
 are
 of
 no
 concern
 
to
 us.
 But
 it
 is
 a
 matter
 of
 most
 vital
 concern
 to
 us
 that
 European
 and
 Asiatic
 war-­‐
makers
 should
 not
 gain
 control
 of
 the
 oceans
 which
 lead
 to
 this
 hemisphere.
 One
 
hundred
 and
 seventeen
 years
 ago
 the
 Monroe
 Doctrine
 was
 conceived
 by
 our
 
Government
 as
 a
 measure
 of
 defense
 in
 the
 face
 of
 a
 threat
 against
 this
 hemisphere
 
by
 an
 alliance
 in
 continental
 Europe.
 Thereafter,
 we
 stood
 on
 guard
 in
 the
 Atlantic,
 
with
 the
 British
 as
 neighbors.
 There
 was
 no
 treaty.
 There
 was
 no
 "unwritten
 
agreement".
 
Yet,
 there
 was
 the
 feeling,
 proven
 correct
 by
 history,
 that
 we
 as
 neighbors
 could
 
settle
 any
 disputes
 in
 peaceful
 fashion.
 The
 fact
 is
 that
 during
 the
 whole
 of
 this
 time
 
the
 Western
 Hemisphere
 has
 remained
 free
 from
 aggression
 from
 Europe
 or
 from
 
Asia.
 
Does
 anyone
 seriously
 believe
 that
 we
 need
 to
 fear
 attack
 while
 a
 free
 Britain
 
remains
 our
 most
 powerful
 naval
 neighbor
 in
 the
 Atlantic?
 Does
 any
 one
 seriously
 
believe,
 on
 the
 other
 hand,
 that
 we
 could
 rest
 easy
 if
 the
 Axis
 powers
 were
 our
 
neighbor
 there?
 

HIST
 1F95
 PRIMARY
 SOURCE
 ASSIGNMENT
 -­‐
 
  7
 
If
 Great
 Britain
 goes
 down,
 the
 Axis
 powers
 will
 control
 the
 continents
 of
 Europe,
 
Asia,
 Africa,
 Australasia,
 and
 the
 high
 seas-­‐-­‐and
 they
 will
 be
 in
 a
 position
 to
 bring
 
enormous
 military
 and
 naval
 resources
 against
 this
 hemisphere.
 It
 is
 no
 
exaggeration
 to
 say
 that
 all
 of
 us
 in
 the
 Americas
 would
 be
 living
 at
 the
 point
 of
 a
 
gun-­‐a
 gun
 loaded
 with
 explosive
 bullets,
 economic
 as
 well
 as
 military.
 
We
 should
 enter
 upon
 a
 new
 and
 terrible
 era
 in
 which
 the
 whole
 world,
 our
 
hemisphere
 included,
 would
 be
 run
 by
 threats
 of
 brute
 force.
 To
 survive
 in
 such
 a
 
world,
 we
 would
 have
 to
 convert
 ourselves
 permanently
 into
 a
 militaristic
 power
 on
 
the
 basis
 of
 war
 economy.
 
Some
 of
 us
 like
 to
 believe
 that.
 even
 if
 Great
 Britain
 falls,
 we
 are
 still
 safe,
 because
 of
 
the
 broad
 expanse
 of
 the
 Atlantic
 and
 of
 the
 Pacific.
 But
 the
 width
 of
 these
 oceans
 is
 
not
 what
 it
 was
 in
 the
 days
 of
 clipper
 ships.
 At
 one
 point
 between
 Africa
 and
 Brazil
 
the
 distance
 is
 less
 than
 from
 Washington
 to
 Denver-­‐five
 hours
 for
 the
 latest
 type
 of
 
bomber.
 And
 at
 the,
 north
 of
 the
 Pacific
 Ocean,
 America
 and
 Asia
 almost
 touch
 each
 
other.
 Even
 today
 we
 have
 planes
 which
 could
 fly
 from
 the
 British
 Isles
 to
 New
 
England
 and
 back
 without
 refueling.
 And
 the
 range
 of
 the
 modern
 bomber
 is
 ever
 
being
 increased.
 
During
 the
 past
 week
 many
 people
 in
 all
 parts
 of
 the
 Nation
 have
 told
 me
 what
 they
 
wanted
 me
 to
 say
 tonight.
 Almost
 all
 of
 them
 expressed
 a
 courageous
 desire
 to
 hear
 
the
 plain
 truth
 about
 the
 gravity
 of
 the
 situation.
 One
 telegram,
 however,
 expressed
 
the
 attitude
 of
 the
 ,small
 minority
 who
 want
 to
 see
 no
 evil
 and
 hear
 no
 evil,
 even
 
though
 they
 know
 in
 their
 hearts
 that
 evil
 exists.
 That
 telegram
 begged
 me
 not
 to
 tell
 
again
 of
 the
 ease
 with
 which
 our
 American
 cities
 could
 be
 bombed
 by
 any
 hostile
 
power
 which
 had
 gained
 bases
 in
 this
 Western
 Hemisphere.
 The
 gist
 of
 that
 
telegram
 was:
 "Please,
 Mr.
 President,
 don't
 frighten
 us
 by
 telling
 us
 the
 facts.
 Frankly
 
and
 definitely
 there
 is
 danger
 ahead-­‐danger
 against
 which
 we
 must
 prepare.
 But
 we
 
well
 know
 that
 we
 cannot
 escape
 danger,
 or
 the
 fear
 of
 it,
 by
 crawling
 into
 bed
 and
 
pulling
 the
 covers
 over
 our
 heads.
 
Some
 nations
 of
 Europe
 were
 bound
 by
 solemn
 non?intervention
 pacts
 with
 
Germany.
 Other
 nations
 were
 assured
 by
 Germany
 that
 they
 need
 never
 fear
 
invasion.
 Non?intervention
 pact
 or
 not,
 the
 fact
 remains
 that
 they
 were
 attacked,
 
overrun,
 and
 thrown
 into
 the
 modern
 form
 of
 slavery
 at
 an
 hour's
 notice
 or
 even
 
without
 any
 notice
 at
 all.
 As
 an
 exiled
 leader
 of
 one
 of
 these
 nations
 said
 to
 me
 the
 
other
 day:
 "The
 notice
 was
 a
 minus
 quantity.
 It
 was
 given
 to
 my
 government
 two
 
hours
 after
 German
 troops
 had
 poured
 into
 my
 country
 in
 a
 hundred
 places."
 The
 
fate
 of
 these
 nations
 tells
 us
 what
 it
 means
 to
 live
 at
 the
 point
 of
 a
 Nazi
 gun.
 
The
 Nazis
 have
 justified
 such
 actions
 by
 various
 pious
 frauds.
 One
 of
 these
 frauds
 is
 
the
 claim
 that
 they
 are
 occupying
 a
 nation
 for
 the
 purpose
 of
 "restoring
 order".
 
Another
 is
 that
 they
 are
 occupying
 or
 controlling
 a
 nation
 on
 the
 excuse
 that
 they
 
are
 "protecting
 it"
 against
 the
 aggression
 of
 somebody
 else.
 For
 example,
 Germany
 

HIST
 1F95
 PRIMARY
 SOURCE
 ASSIGNMENT
 -­‐
 
  8
 
has
 said
 that
 she
 was
 occupying
 Belgium
 to
 save
 the
 Belgians
 from
 the
 British.
 
Would
 she
 hesitate
 to
 say
 to
 any
 South
 American
 country,
 "We
 are
 occupying
 you
 to
 
protect
 you
 from
 aggression
 by
 the
 United
 States"?
 Belgium
 today
 is
 being
 used
 as
 
an
 invasion
 base
 against
 Britain,
 now
 fighting
 for
 its
 life.
 Any
 South
 American
 
country,
 in
 Nazi
 hands,
 would
 always
 constitute
 a
 jumping-­‐off
 place
 for
 German
 
attack
 on
 any
 one
 of
 the
 other
 republics
 of
 this
 hemisphere.
 
Analyze
 for
 yourselves
 the
 future
 of
 two
 other
 places
 even
 nearer
 to
 Germany
 if
 the
 
Nazis
 won.
 Could
 Ireland
 hold
 out?
 Would
 Irish
 freedom
 be
 permitted
 as
 an
 amazing
 
exception
 in
 an
 unfree
 world?
 Or
 the
 islands
 of
 the
 Azores
 which
 still
 fly
 the
 flag
 of
 
Portugal
 after
 five
 centuries?
 We
 think
 of
 Hawaii
 as
 an
 outpost
 of
 defense
 in
 the
 
Pacific.
 Yet,
 the
 Azores
 are
 closer
 to
 our
 shores
 in
 the
 Atlantic
 than
 Hawaii
 is
 on
 the
 
other
 side.
 
There
 are
 those
 who
 say
 that
 the
 Axis
 powers
 would
 never
 have
 any
 desire
 to
 attack
 
the
 Western
 Hemisphere.
 This
 is
 the
 same
 dangerous
 form
 of
 wishful
 thinking
 
which
 has
 destroyed
 the
 powers
 of
 resistance
 of
 so
 many
 conquered
 peoples.
 The
 
plain
 facts
 are
 that
 the
 Nazis
 have
 proclaimed,
 time
 and
 again,
 that
 all
 other
 races
 
are
 their
 inferiors
 and
 therefore
 subject
 to
 their
 orders.
 And
 most
 important
 of
 all,
 
the
 vast
 resources
 and
 wealth
 of
 this
 hemisphere
 constitute
 the
 most
 tempting
 loot
 
in
 all
 the
 world.
 
Let
 us
 no
 longer
 blind
 ourselves
 to
 the
 undeniable
 fact
 that
 the
 evil
 forces
 which
 
have
 crushed
 and
 undermined
 and
 corrupted
 so
 many
 others
 are
 already
 within
 our
 
own
 gates.
 Your
 Government
 knows
 much
 about
 them
 and
 every
 day
 is
 ferreting
 
them
 out.
 Their
 secret
 emissaries
 are
 active
 in
 our
 own
 and
 neighboring
 countries.
 
They
 seek
 to
 stir
 up
 suspicion
 and
 dissension
 to
 cause
 internal
 strife.
 They
 try
 to
 
turn
 capital
 against
 labor
 and
 vice
 versa.
 They
 try
 to
 reawaken
 long
 slumbering
 
racial
 and
 religious
 enmities
 which
 should
 have
 no
 place
 in
 this
 country.
 They
 are
 
active
 in
 every
 group
 that
 promotes
 intolerance.
 They
 exploit
 for
 their
 own
 ends
 our
 
natural
 abhorrence
 of
 war.
 These
 trouble?breeders
 have
 but
 one
 purpose.
 It
 is
 to
 
divide
 our
 people
 into
 hostile
 groups
 and
 to
 destroy
 our
 unity
 and
 shatter
 our
 will
 to
 
defend
 ourselves.
 
There
 are
 also
 American
 citizens,
 many
 of
 them
 in
 high
 places,
 who,
 unwittingly
 in
 
most
 cases,
 are
 aiding
 and
 abetting
 the
 work
 of
 these
 agents.
 I
 do
 not
 charge
 these
 
American
 citizens
 with
 being
 foreign
 agents.
 But
 I
 do
 charge
 them
 with
 doing
 exactly
 
the
 kind
 of
 work
 that
 the
 dictators
 want
 done
 in
 the
 United
 States.
 These
 people
 not
 
only
 believe
 that
 we
 can
 save
 our
 own
 skins
 by
 shutting
 our
 eyes
 to
 the
 fate
 of
 other
 
nations.
 Some
 of
 them
 go
 much
 further
 than
 that.
 They
 say
 that
 we
 can
 and
 should
 
become
 the
 friends
 and
 even
 the
 partners
 of
 the
 Axis
 powers.
 Some
 of
 them
 even
 
suggest
 that
 we
 should
 imitate
 the
 methods
 of
 the
 dictatorships.
 Americans
 never
 
can
 and
 never
 will
 do
 that.
 
The
 experience
 of
 the
 past
 two
 years
 has
 proven
 beyond
 doubt
 that
 no
 nation
 can
 

HIST
 1F95
 PRIMARY
 SOURCE
 ASSIGNMENT
 -­‐
 
  9
 
appease
 the
 Nazis.
 No
 man
 can
 tame
 a
 tiger
 into
 a
 kitten
 by
 stroking
 it.
 There
 can
 be
 
no
 appeasement
 with
 ruthlessness.
 There
 can
 be
 no
 reasoning
 with
 an
 incendiary
 
bomb.
 We
 know
 now
 that
 a
 nation
 can
 have
 peace
 with
 the
 Nazis
 only
 at
 the
 price
 of
 
total
 surrender.
 
 
 Even
 the
 people
 of
 Italy
 have
 been
 forced
 to
 become
 accomplices
 
of
 he
 Nazis;
 but
 at
 this
 moment
 they
 do
 not
 know
 how
 soon
 they
 will
 e
 embraced
 to
 
death
 by
 their
 allies.
 
The
 American
 appeasers
 ignore
 the
 warning
 to
 be
 found
 in
 the
 ate
 of
 Austria,
 
Czechoslovakia.,
 Poland,
 Norway,
 Belgium,
 the
 Netherlands,
 Denmark,
 and
 France.
 
They
 tell
 you
 that
 the
 Axis
 powers
 re
 going
 to
 win
 anyway;
 that
 all
 this
 bloodshed
 in
 
the
 world
 could
 be
 saved;
 and
 that
 the
 United
 States
 might
 just
 as
 well
 throw
 its
 
influence
 into
 the
 scale
 of
 a
 dictated
 peace,
 and
 get
 the
 best
 out
 of
 it
 that
 we
 can.
 
They
 call
 it
 a
 "negotiated
 peace".
 Nonsense!
 
 
Is
 it
 a
 negotiated
 peace
 if
 a
 gang
 of
 outlaws
 surrounds
 your
 community
 and
 on
 
threat
 of
 extermination
 makes
 you
 pay
 tribute
 to
 save
 your
 own
 skins?
 Such
 a
 
dictated
 peace
 would
 be
 no
 peace
 at
 all.
 It
 would
 be
 only
 another
 armistice,
 leading
 
to
 the
 most
 gigantic
 armament
 race
 and
 the
 most
 devastating
 trade
 wars
 in
 history.
 
And
 in
 these
 contests
 the
 Americas
 would
 offer
 the
 only
 real
 resistance
 to
 the
 Axis
 
powers.
 With
 all
 their
 vaunted
 efficiency
 and
 parade
 of
 pious
 purpose
 in
 his
 war,
 
there
 are
 still
 in
 their
 background
 the
 concentration
 camp
 and
 the
 servants
 of
 God
 
in
 chains.
 
The
 history
 of
 recent
 years
 proves
 that
 shootings
 and
 chains
 and
 concentration
 
camps
 are
 not
 simply
 the
 transient
 tools
 but
 the
 very
 altars
 of
 modern
 dictatorships.
 
They
 may
 talk
 of
 a
 "new
 order"
 in
 he
 world,
 but
 what
 they
 have
 in
 mind
 is
 but
 a
 
revival
 of
 the
 oldest
 end
 the
 worst
 tyranny.
 In
 that
 there
 is
 no
 liberty,
 no
 religion,
 no
 
hope.
 The
 proposed
 "new
 order"
 is
 the
 very
 opposite
 of
 a
 United
 States
 if
 Europe
 or
 
a
 United
 States
 of
 Asia.
 It
 is
 not
 a
 government
 based
 upon
 the
 consent
 of
 the
 
governed.
 It
 is
 not
 a
 union
 of
 ordinary,
 self?respecting
 men
 and
 women
 to
 protect
 
themselves
 and
 their
 freedom
 and
 their
 dignity
 from
 oppression.
 It
 is
 an
 unholy
 
alliance
 of
 power
 and
 pelf
 to
 dominate
 and
 enslave
 the
 human
 race.
 
The
 British
 people
 are
 conducting
 an
 active
 war
 against
 this
 unholy
 alliance.
 Our
 
own
 future
 security
 is
 greatly
 dependent
 on
 the
 outcome
 of
 that
 fight.
 Our
 ability
 to
 
"keep
 out
 of
 war"
 is
 going
 to
 be
 affected
 by
 that
 outcome.
 Thinking
 in
 terms
 of
 today
 
and
 tomorrow,
 I
 make
 the
 direct
 statement
 to
 the
 American
 people
 that
 there
 is
 far
 
less
 chance
 of
 the
 United
 States
 getting
 into
 war
 if
 we
 do
 all
 we
 can
 now
 to
 support
 
the
 nations
 defending
 themselves
 against
 attack
 by
 the
 Axis
 than
 if
 we
 acquiesce
 in
 
their
 defeat,
 submit
 tamely
 to
 an
 Axis
 victory,
 and
 wait
 our
 turn
 to
 be
 the
 object
 of
 
attack
 in
 another
 war
 later
 on.
 
 
 
If
 we
 are
 to
 be
 completely
 honest
 with
 ourselves,
 we
 must
 admit
 there
 is
 risk
 in
 any
 
course
 we
 may
 take.
 But
 I
 deeply
 believe
 that
 the
 great
 majority
 of
 our
 people
 agree
 

HIST
 1F95
 PRIMARY
 SOURCE
 ASSIGNMENT
 -­‐
 
  10
 
that
 the
 course
 that
 I
 advocate
 involves
 the
 least
 risk
 now
 and
 the
 greatest
 hope
 for
 
world
 peace
 in
 the
 future.
 
The
 people
 of
 Europe
 who
 are
 defending
 themselves
 do
 not
 ask
 us
 to
 do
 their
 
fighting.
 They
 ask
 us
 for
 the
 implements
 of
 war,
 the
 planes,
 the
 tanks,
 the
 guns,
 the
 
freighters,
 which
 will
 enable
 them
 to
 fight
 for
 their
 liberty
 and
 our
 security.
 
Emphatically
 we
 must
 get
 these
 weapons
 to
 them
 in
 sufficient
 volume
 and
 quickly
 
enough,
 so
 that
 we
 and
 our
 children
 will
 be
 saved
 the
 agony
 and
 suffering
 of
 war
 
which
 others
 have
 had
 to
 endure.
 
Let
 not
 defeatists
 tell
 us
 that
 it
 is
 too
 late.
 It
 will
 never
 be
 earlier.
 Tomorrow
 will
 be
 
later
 than
 today.
 
Certain
 facts
 are
 self-­‐evident.
 
In
 a
 military
 sense
 Great
 Britain
 and
 the
 British
 Empire
 are
 today
 the
 spearhead
 of
 
resistance
 to
 world
 conquest.
 They
 are
 putting
 up
 a
 fight
 which
 will
 live
 forever
 in
 
the
 story
 of
 human
 gallantry.
 
There
 is
 no
 demand
 for
 sending
 an
 American
 Expeditionary
 Force
 outside
 our
 own
 
borders.
 There
 is
 no
 intention
 by
 any
 member
 of
 your
 Government
 to
 send
 such
 a
 
force.
 You
 can,
 therefore,
 nail
 any
 talk
 about
 sending
 armies
 to
 Europe
 as
 deliberate
 
untruth.
 Our
 national
 policy
 is
 not
 directed
 toward
 war.
 Its
 sole
 purpose
 is
 to
 keep
 
war
 away
 from
 our
 country
 and
 our
 people.
 
Democracy's
 fight
 against
 world
 conquest
 is
 being
 greatly
 aided,
 and
 must
 be
 more
 
greatly
 aided,
 by
 the
 rearmament
 of
 the
 United
 States
 and
 by
 sending
 every
 ounce
 
and
 every
 ton
 of
 munitions
 and
 supplies
 that
 we
 can
 possibly
 spare
 to
 help
 the
 
defenders
 who
 are
 in
 the
 front
 lines.
 It
 is
 no
 more
 unneutral
 for
 us
 to
 do
 that
 than
 it
 
is
 for
 Sweden,
 Russia,
 and
 other
 nations
 near
 Germany
 to
 send
 steel
 and
 ore
 and
 oil
 
and
 other
 war
 materials
 into
 Germany
 every
 day.
 We
 are
 planning
 our
 own
 defense
 
with
 the
 utmost
 urgency;
 and
 in
 its
 vast
 scale
 we
 must
 integrate
 the
 war
 needs
 of
 
Britain
 and
 the
 other
 free
 nations
 resisting
 aggression.
 This
 is
 not
 a
 matter
 of
 
sentiment
 or
 of
 controversial
 personal
 opinion.
 It
 is
 a
 matter
 of
 realistic
 military
 
policy,
 based
 on
 the
 advice
 of
 our
 military
 experts
 who
 are
 in
 close
 touch
 with
 
existing
 warfare.
 These
 military
 and
 naval
 experts
 and
 the
 members
 of
 the
 Congress
 
and
 the
 administration
 have
 a
 single?minded
 purpose-­‐the
 defense
 of
 the
 United
 
States.
 
This
 Nation
 is
 making
 a
 great
 effort
 to
 produce
 everything
 that
 is
 necessary
 in
 this
 
emergency-­‐and
 with
 all
 possible
 speed.
 This
 great
 effort
 requires
 great
 sacrifice.
 
 I
 
would
 ask
 no
 one
 to
 defend
 a
 democracy
 which
 in
 turn
 would
 not
 defend
 everyone
 
in
 the
 Nation
 against
 want
 and
 privation.
 The
 strength
 of
 this
 Nation
 shall
 not
 be
 
diluted
 by
 the
 failure
 of
 the
 Government
 to
 protect
 the
 economic
 well-­‐being
 of
 all
 
citizens.
 If
 our
 capacity
 to
 produce
 is
 limited
 by
 machines,
 it
 must
 ever
 be
 

HIST
 1F95
 PRIMARY
 SOURCE
 ASSIGNMENT
 -­‐
 
  11
 
remembered
 that
 these
 machines
 are
 operated
 by
 the
 skill
 and
 the
 stamina
 of
 the
 
workers.
 
 
As
 the
 Government
 is
 determined
 to
 protect
 the
 rights
 of
 workers,
 so
 the
 Nation
 has
 
a
 right
 to
 expect
 that
 the
 men
 who
 man
 the
 machines
 will
 discharge
 their
 full
 
responsibilities
 to
 the
 urgent
 needs
 of
 defense.
 The
 worker
 possesses
 the
 same
 
human
 dignity
 and
 is
 entitled
 to
 the
 same
 security
 of
 position
 as
 the
 engineer
 or
 
manager
 or
 owner.
 For
 the
 workers
 provide
 the
 human
 power
 that
 turns
 out
 the
 
destroyers,
 the
 airplanes,
 and
 the
 tanks.
 
The
 Nation
 expects
 our
 defense
 industries
 to
 continue
 operation
 without
 
interruption
 by
 strikes
 or
 lock-­‐outs.
 It
 expects
 and
 insists
 that
 management
 and
 
workers
 will
 reconcile
 their
 differences
 by
 voluntary
 or
 legal
 means,
 to
 continue
 to
 
produce
 the
 supplies
 that
 are
 so
 sorely
 needed.
 And
 on
 the
 economic
 side
 of
 our
 
great
 defense
 program,
 we
 are,
 as
 you
 know,
 bending
 every
 effort
 to
 maintain
 
stability
 of
 prices
 and
 with
 that
 the
 stability
 of
 the
 cost
 of
 living.
 
Nine
 days
 ago
 I
 announced
 the
 setting
 up
 of
 a
 more
 effective
 organization
 to
 direct
 
our
 gigantic
 efforts
 to
 increase
 the
 production
 of
 munitions.
 The
 appropriation
 of
 
vast
 sums
 of
 money
 and
 a
 well-­‐coordinated
 executive
 direction
 of
 our
 defense
 
efforts
 are
 not
 in
 themselves
 enough.
 Guns,
 planes,
 and
 ships
 have
 to
 be
 built
 in
 the
 
factories
 and
 arsenals
 of
 America.
 They
 have
 to
 be
 produced
 by
 workers
 and
 
managers
 and
 engineers
 with
 the
 aid
 of
 machines,
 which
 in
 turn
 have
 to
 be
 built
 by
 
hundreds
 of
 thousands
 of
 workers
 throughout
 the
 land.
 In
 this
 great
 work
 there
 has
 
been
 splendid
 cooperation
 between
 the
 Government
 and
 industry
 and
 labor.
 
American
 industrial
 genius,
 unmatched
 throughout
 the
 world
 in
 the
 solution
 of
 
production
 problems,
 has
 been
 called
 upon
 to
 bring
 its
 resources
 and
 talents
 into
 
action.
 Manufacturers
 of
 watches,
 of
 farm
 implements,
 linotypes,
 cash
 registers,
 
automobiles,
 sewing
 machines,
 lawn
 mowers,
 and
 locomotives
 are
 now
 making
 
fuses,
 bomb-­‐packing
 crates,
 telescope
 mounts,
 shells,
 pistols,
 and
 tanks.
 
But
 all
 our
 present
 efforts
 are
 not
 enough.
 We
 must
 have
 more
 ships,
 more
 guns,
 
more
 planes-­‐more
 of
 everything.
 This
 can
 only
 be
 accomplished
 if
 we
 discard
 the
 
notion
 of
 "business
 as
 usual".
 This
 job
 cannot
 be
 done
 merely
 by
 superimposing
 on
 
the
 existing
 productive
 facilities
 the
 added
 requirements
 for
 defense.
 Our
 defense
 
efforts
 must
 not
 be
 blocked
 by
 those
 who
 fear
 the
 future
 consequences
 of
 surplus
 
plant
 capacity.
 The
 possible
 consequence
 of
 failure
 of
 our
 defense
 efforts
 now
 are
 
much
 more
 to
 be
 feared.
 After
 the
 present
 needs
 of
 our
 defense
 are
 past,
 a
 proper
 
handling
 of
 the
 country's
 peacetime
 needs
 will
 require
 all
 of
 the
 new
 productive
 
capacity-­‐if
 not
 more.
 No
 pessimistic
 policy
 about
 the
 future
 of
 America
 shall
 delay
 
the
 immediate
 expansion
 of
 those
 industries
 essential
 to
 defense.
 
I
 want
 to
 make
 it
 clear
 that
 it
 is
 the
 purpose
 of
 the
 Nation
 to
 build
 now
 with
 all
 
possible
 speed
 every
 machine
 and
 arsenal
 and
 factory
 that
 we
 need
 to
 manufacture
 

HIST
 1F95
 PRIMARY
 SOURCE
 ASSIGNMENT
 -­‐
 
  12
 
our
 defense
 material.
 We
 have
 the
 men
 the
 skill,
 the
 wealth,
 and
 above
 all,
 the
 will.
 I
 
am
 confident
 that
 if
 and
 when
 production
 of
 consumer
 or
 luxury
 goods
 in
 certain
 
industries
 requires
 the
 use
 of
 machines
 and
 raw
 materials
 essential
 for
 defense
 
purposes,
 then
 such
 production
 must
 yield
 to
 our
 primary
 and
 compelling
 purpose.
 
So
 I
 appeal
 to
 the
 owners
 of
 plants,
 to
 the
 managers,
 to
 the
 workers,
 to
 our
 own
 
Government
 employees,
 to
 put
 every
 ounce
 of
 effort
 into
 producing
 these
 munitions
 
swiftly
 and
 without
 stint.
 And
 with
 this
 appeal
 I
 give
 you
 the
 pledge
 that
 all
 of
 us
 
who
 are
 officers
 of
 you
 Government
 will
 devote
 ourselves
 to
 the
 same
 
whole?hearted
 extent
 to
 the
 great
 task
 which
 lies
 ahead.
 As
 planes
 and
 ships
 and
 
guns
 and
 shells
 are
 produced,
 your
 Government,
 with
 its
 defense
 experts,
 can
 then
 
determine
 how
 best
 to
 us
 them
 to
 defend
 this
 hemisphere.
 The
 decision
 as
 to
 how
 
much
 shall
 be
 sent
 abroad
 and
 how
 much
 shall
 remain
 at
 home
 must
 be
 made
 on
 the
 
basis
 of
 our
 over-­‐all
 military
 necessities.
 
We
 must
 be
 the
 great
 arsenal
 of
 democracy.
 For
 us
 this
 is
 an
 emergency
 as
 serious
 
as
 war
 itself.
 We
 must
 apply
 ourselves
 to
 our
 task
 with
 the
 same
 resolution,
 the
 
same
 sense
 of
 urgency,
 the
 same
 spirit
 of
 patriotism
 and
 sacrifice,
 as
 we
 would
 show
 
were
 we
 at
 war.
 
We
 have
 furnished
 the
 British
 great
 material
 support
 and
 we
 will
 furnish
 far
 more
 in
 
the
 future.
 There
 will
 be
 no
 "bottlenecks"
 in
 our
 determination
 to
 aid
 Great
 Britain.
 
No
 dictator,
 no
 combination
 of
 dictators,
 will
 weaken
 that
 determination
 by
 threats
 
of
 how
 they
 will
 construe
 that
 determination.
 The
 British
 have
 received
 invaluable
 
military
 support
 from
 the
 heroic
 Greek
 Army
 and
 from
 the
 forces
 of
 all
 the
 
governments
 in
 exile.
 Their
 strength
 is
 growing.
 It
 is
 the
 strength
 of
 men
 an
 women
 
who
 value
 their
 freedom
 more
 highly
 than
 they
 value
 the:
 lives.
 
 I
 believe
 that
 the
 
Axis
 powers
 are
 not
 going
 to
 win
 this
 war.
 I
 base
 that
 belief
 on
 the
 latest
 and
 best
 
information.
 
We
 have
 no
 excuse
 for
 defeatism.
 We
 have
 every
 good
 reason
 for
 hope-­‐hope
 for
 
peace,
 hope
 for
 the
 defense
 of
 our
 civilization
 and
 for
 the
 building
 of
 a
 better
 
civilization
 in
 the
 future.
 I
 have
 the
 profound
 conviction
 that
 the
 American
 people
 
are
 now
 determined
 to
 put
 forth
 a
 mightier
 effort
 than
 they
 have
 ever
 yet
 made
 to
 
increase
 our
 production
 of
 all
 the
 implements
 of
 defense,
 to
 meet
 the
 threat
 to
 our
 
democratic
 faith.
 
As
 President
 of
 the
 United
 States
 I
 call
 for
 that
 national
 effort.
 I
 call
 for
 it
 in
 the
 name
 
of
 this
 Nation
 which
 we
 love
 and
 honor
 and
 which
 we
 are
 privileged
 and
 proud
 to
 
serve.
 I
 call
 upon
 our
 people
 with
 absolute
 confidence
 that
 our
 common
 cause
 will
 
greatly
 succeed.
 
Source:
 U.S.,
 Department
 of
 State,
 Publication
 1983,
 Peace
 and
 War:
 United
 States
 
Foreign
 Policy,
 1931-­1941
 (Washington,
 D.C.:
 U.S.,
 Government
 Printing
 Office,
 
1943),
 pp.
 598-­‐607
 

Cite This Document

Related Documents

  • Assignment Ethics

    ...[pic] ASSIGNMENT SUBMISSION AND ASSESSMENT _________________________________________________________________________ OUMM3203 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS (PLEASE EDIT WHERE NECESSARY-THIS IS ONLY SUGGESTIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT’S GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS) _________________________________________________________________________ INSTRUCTIONS TO S...

    Read More
  • Week 5 Assignments New

    ...PT1420 - Unit 5 Homework and Lab Assignment Unit 5 Assignment 1: Homework 1.) Design an if-then statement that assigns 20 to the variable y and assigns 40 to the variable z if the variable x is greater than 100. (Simple if statement) If x > 100 then Y=20 Z=40 End if 2.) Design an if-then statement that assigns 0 to the variable ...

    Read More
  • PT 1420 Assignment 3

    ... Short answers 5. What two things must you normally specify in a variable declaration? You must specify the variable type and an identifier. int n; // type - int, identifier - n 6. What value is stored in uninitialized variables? is a variable that is declared but is not set to a definite known value before it is used. Algorithm workbenc...

    Read More
  • 5 Written Assignment 5 Unit 5001V1 Revision 1

    ... Chartered Management Institute Approved Centre Level 5 Extended Diploma in Management and Leadership Written Assessment – 5 Unit 5001V1 Instruction Sheet Assignment: Unit 5001V1 – Personal development as a manager and leader Level: 5 Lecturer: ...

    Read More
  • Reading

    ...print but unfortunately aren’t able to comprehend what they are reading. To read I believe means to understand the meaning of words, so therefore it involves much more than pronouncing print. In Beyond Traditional Phonics, (BTP) Margaret Moustafa stated, “pronouncing print is not necessarily comprehending print” pg. 6. Unfortunately, the...

    Read More
  • Reading Fluency

    ...Reading fluency is defined as the ability to read smoothly and accurately, while using proper phrasing and expression (Bengeny,etal.,(2010). It is important that students add emphasis and make inferences while reading to process the meaning to the information being read. When practicing reading fluency it is important that students develop autom...

    Read More
  • Reading Is a Skill

    ...Reading is a necessary skill in your everyday life. We use it to discover new things; books, magazines and internet.  It requires the ability to read and understand what is read. It is fundamental to function in today’s society. If you don’t read well no matter who you are, you have a hard time in life. Reading is a vital skill in finding a...

    Read More
  • Reading Development

    ...know something about reading, writing, and literacy. In fact, our understanding of what literacy is varies widely. Jeanne Chall concluded in Learning to Read: the Great Debate (1983), that children get a better start in reading if they are taught phonics because they break the code that links what they hear with what they see in print. Harvard ...

    Read More

Discover the Best Free Essays on StudyMode

Conquer writer's block once and for all.

High Quality Essays

Our library contains thousands of carefully selected free research papers and essays.

Popular Topics

No matter the topic you're researching, chances are we have it covered.