U.S's War on Terror and Ww2 Comparison
Marcos Galan 3/26/11
Historys250
The view on World War 2 and the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan
Wars have always brought an abundant amount of hate, sorrow, death; no matter how great is the reasoning and the obligation. Despite of all those horrible things, war have always exists like if it were part of human nature. However, when it come to comparing different wars on different time and locations, some at least seems to have more logical sense and significance when compare to others. Particularly the wars involved with United States, wars such as the fight for independence and from oppression from the British, world war one due to the German submarine attack on one of the American cargo ship, and the civil war due to separation of the north and southern states. All of these were a necessity and rational for the most part.
Unlike those wars, the Vietnam, and the Philippines wars had many controversial issues, and it also seemed much less sensible to other nations. Although for the whole point of the discussion, only two wars involved with the United States would be specifically compared and contrast: the Second World War after Pearl Harbor by the Japanese invasion and the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan after the terrorist attack on the pentagon and the world trade center. For most of the comparison some questions would be answered such as how did the United States government enforce and justified for the involvement and actions in the wars? How do nation development proponents and ideal politicians justify the policy in Iraq and Afghanistan? And last but not least, what similarities and differences do past and current individual critics, and support share?
To begin with, the war on terror has been a war occurring mainly since the invasion of the terrorist on September 11, 2001. 3 hijacked planes managed to attack the United States targets: one on the pentagon, and two at the world trade center towers in New
Historys250
The view on World War 2 and the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan
Wars have always brought an abundant amount of hate, sorrow, death; no matter how great is the reasoning and the obligation. Despite of all those horrible things, war have always exists like if it were part of human nature. However, when it come to comparing different wars on different time and locations, some at least seems to have more logical sense and significance when compare to others. Particularly the wars involved with United States, wars such as the fight for independence and from oppression from the British, world war one due to the German submarine attack on one of the American cargo ship, and the civil war due to separation of the north and southern states. All of these were a necessity and rational for the most part.
Unlike those wars, the Vietnam, and the Philippines wars had many controversial issues, and it also seemed much less sensible to other nations. Although for the whole point of the discussion, only two wars involved with the United States would be specifically compared and contrast: the Second World War after Pearl Harbor by the Japanese invasion and the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan after the terrorist attack on the pentagon and the world trade center. For most of the comparison some questions would be answered such as how did the United States government enforce and justified for the involvement and actions in the wars? How do nation development proponents and ideal politicians justify the policy in Iraq and Afghanistan? And last but not least, what similarities and differences do past and current individual critics, and support share?
To begin with, the war on terror has been a war occurring mainly since the invasion of the terrorist on September 11, 2001. 3 hijacked planes managed to attack the United States targets: one on the pentagon, and two at the world trade center towers in New