Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Blowback analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Blowback analysis
The book, Blowback by Chalmers Johnson, is organized leading with the introduction, then the prologue, then the body of the book broken into ten chapters, then a section called further reading, then the notes, and lastly the index. It is not broken up into parts. This book is directed for a well-educated audience with a high-level vocabulary; if the reader does not have a high-level vocabulary, the book will be confusing, unless said reader has a dictionary at hand. The tone of Blowback is tense. This matches the subject of the book, which heeds a warning to Americans. Blowback is written as a revealing historical recount of America’s actions after the Cold War, especially those in East Asia and the Middle East. The author states the definition of blowback: “the unintended consequences of policies that were kept secret from the American people.” Johnson argues that the United States
However, undergraduate students 15 years post-9/11, may not be as inept to read this book without being prompted. The book is more suited for graduate students with a better understanding of world politics. Before reading this book, I had always wondered how Americans could justify all of their actions, when we are considered terrorists in other countries, because we have killed and raped their women and children. This book shed light on a new perspective that I had never fully considered: America will have unintended consequences for the actions of the American government and military. Due to never thinking of this perspective, I learned a lot from this book, but I may not be able to argue against the thesis as well as someone more educated in foreign policy. I would recommend Blowback to someone who has a higher education on foreign politics than myself, because it is an interesting book, if understood properly. I would not recommend it to someone like myself, only halfway through my first class in foreign
Killing Lincoln is a historic, non-fiction book co-written by Bill O’Reilly, a popular conservative TV show host and Martin Dugard, a well established author. Published by Henry Holt and Company on September 27, 2011, this piece of literature contains 336 pages with complete sources, and references. In addition, this book [insert award] for its literary impact on young adults. With this historical thriller, Bill O’Reilly and Martin Dugard seek to describe the antagonist, victim, and impact of one of the most devastating and historical event in American history.
It is somehow strange for today’s reader to find out that the situation with America’s foreign affairs hasn’t changed much. As some clever people have said, “The History book on the shelf is always repeating itself.” Even after nineteen years, Americans think of themselves as citizens of the strongest nation in the world. Even after the September the 11th. Even after Iraq. And Afghanistan.
The Cold War was a period of dark and melancholic times when the entire world lived in fear that the boiling pot may spill. The protectionist measures taken by Eisenhower kept the communists in check to suspend the progression of USSR’s radical ambitions and programs. From the suspenseful delirium from the Cold War, the United States often engaged in a dangerous policy of brinksmanship through the mid-1950s. Fortunately, these actions did not lead to a global nuclear disaster as both the US and USSR fully understood what the weapons of mass destruction were capable of.
Many Critics, and readers that have reviewed this novel have different opinions on the style of writing that James Bradley chose. Some raise the question “is Fly-Boys an anti-American book? So far from reading this book I could see why many would think that. It seems as if James Bradley is making a mockery of America. In fact all Bradley is doing here is explaining the truth of our government that he had figured out by intensive research grabbing a plethora of information from untapped government archives containing documents that no one would have ever imagined existed. He is also trying to show how the Japanese got brainwashed into the things they thought, did, and acted upon.
Isaacs J (2008). ‘Cold War: For Forty-five Years the World Held its Breath’. Published by Abacus, 2008.
Within this controversial topic, two authors provide their sides of the story to whom is to blame and/or responsible for the “Cold War.” Authors Arnold A. Offner and John Lewis Gaddis duck it out in this controversial situation as each individual lead the readers to believe a certain aspect by divulging certain persuading information. However, although both sides have given historical data as substance for their claim, it is nothing more than a single sided personal perception of that particular piece of information; thus, leaving much room for interpretations by the reader/s. Finding the ...
When a giant explosion ripped through Alfred P. Murrah federal building April 19,1995, killing 168 and wounding hundreds, the United States of America jumped to a conclusion we would all learn to regret. The initial response to the devastation was all focused of middle-eastern terrorists. “The West is under attack,”(Posner 89), reported the USA Today. Every news and television station had the latest expert on the middle east telling the nation that we were victims of jihad, holy war. It only took a few quick days to realize that we were wrong and the problem, the terrorist, was strictly domestic. But it was too late. The damage had been done. Because America jumped to conclusions then, America was later blind to see the impending attack of 9/11. The responsibility, however, is not to be placed on the America people. The public couldn’t stand to hear any talk of terrorism, so in turn the White House irresponsibly took a similar attitude. They concentrated on high public opinion and issues that were relevant to Americans everyday. The government didn’t want to deal with another public blunder like the one in Oklahoma City. A former FBI analyst recalls, “when I went to headquarters (Washington, D.C.) later that year no one was interested in hearing anything about Arab money connections unless it had something to do with funding domestic groups. We stumbled so badly on pinpointing the Middle East right off the bat on the Murrah bombing. No one wanted to get caught like that again,”(Posner 90). The result saw changes in the counter terrorism efforts; under funding, under manning, poor cooperation between agencies, half-hearted and incompetent agency official appointees and the list goes on. All of these decisions, made at the hands of the faint-hearted, opened the doors wide open, and practically begged for a terrorist attack. So who’s fault is it? The public’s for being
Gaddis, John Lewis. “We Now Know: Rethinking Cold War History.” Taking Sides: Clashing Views On Controversial Issues in United States History. Ed. Larry Madaras and James M. SoRelle. 14th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2011. 302-308.
This book is written from a perspective foreign to most Americans. Historically, American students are taught from a single perspective, that being the American perspective. This approach to history (the single perspective) dehumanizes the enemy and glorifies the Americans. We tend to forget that those on the opposing side are also human.
New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. Gregory, Ross. A. Cold War America: 1946 to 1990. New York, NY: Facts on File, 2003. McQuaid, Kim.
25.Griffin, David Ray The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé 2008, Olive Branch Press
The reader is put in the middle of a war of nerves and will between two men, one of which we have grown up to learn to hate. This only makes us even more emotional about the topic at hand. For a history book, it was surprisingly understandable and hard to put down. It enlightened me to the complex problems that existed in the most memorable three months this century.
Seven American presidents over the course of 44 years engaged the Soviet Union in cold war prior to Reagan’s election in 1980. They used policies such as containment and Détente to contain Soviet aggression and win the Cold War. Ronald Reagan came to power at the pinnacle of the Cold War, following, what he saw, as the failures of Détente. Reagan was a tireless cheerleader of American patriotism in a time when America had lost faith in its national institutions and its position on the world’s stage. An ardent anti-Communist, Reagan often invoked anti-Soviet rhetoric, calling them an “Evil Empire” and challenging Soviet leadership to “tear down” the Berlin Wall. More than any other American president, Ronald Reagan took saber-rattling to a whole new level. Many at the time of his administration viewed him as a warmonger; he restarted weapon system projects previously canceled, carried out a massive military buildup, and deployed American intermediate range nuclear missile in Western Europe. This paper will seek to answer the following question; how and why did Ronald Reagan’s views of the Soviet Union change from his early days in politics to his last day as president of the United States? By 1985, after Mikhail Gorbachev's rise to power in the Soviet Union, Ronald Reagan's anti-Communist views of the 1970s and early 1980s changed to focus on a new era of friendship and cooperation between the two superpowers. This change in rhetoric led to policies that resulted in Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty and the Strategic Arms Reduction Talks. Mikhail Gorbachev’s openness with the United States and America’s position of military strength were the most important factors in this change of policy. Reagan's distrust of the Soviet Union and...
(1993), The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations, Volume Four, America in the Age of Soviet Power, 1945 – 1991, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press · Froman, M.B. (1991) The Development of the Détente, Coming to Terms, London, Macmillan Academic and Professional LTD · Kent, J. and Young, J.W. (2004) International Relations Since 1945, Oxford, Oxford University Press · www.oed.com (Oxford English Dictionary online)
The New Cold War. Great Britain: Bloomsbury Publishing. Weber, Smith, Allan, Collins, Morgan and Entshami. 2002. Foreign Policy in a Transformed World. United Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited.