SUN

Question: Pretend you are starting your own country. What kind of government would you have? what's important in government? --> I would have democratic government. All people should have equal rights regardless of gender, ethnicity, or social status. I would let people vote for elections and other things. Also, I'm going to educate people and emphasize education. I would make a central government, because central government is actually easy to control the whole country.

Question: What rights do you believe should be guaranteed by the government? --> Rights to vote and rights to express their ideas should be guaranteed, because all the humans are created equally, and people have ability to think and have their own ideas, therefore rights to express should be guaranteed

Question: What invention was the most significant? Which brought more effects? --> I think the railroads was the most significant invention and transportation during the time period when the industrial revolution emerged. Because the rail roads basically connected Southern region and Northern region which enabled people to move freely and keep contacting each other. Moreover, it led to the trade and transportation of goods which made the economy to grow larger and larger.

Hardships and Opportunities of immigrants opportunities: - buy lands - send money home - escape poverty and persecution - benevolent societies (education, health care, jobs) - joined religious groups: helped in cases of sicknesses

hardships: - low wages and poor working conditions - dirty jobs like cleaning - discriminations

Reasons for the declaration of war** The most compelling reasons among the 9 reasons were number 2 and number 4. The United States basically wanted to spread their political system which is democracy, and did not want communism nor dictatorship to spread. In order to make the world "democratic," it was their obligation to get rid of those dictators and other groups that would be harmful to democracy. Also long time later, Soviet Union and The United States have cold war--not a real war, but rather a serious situation--and the reason for their conflict was the political system. Soviet Union tried to spread communism, while the United States wanted to prevent and spread democracy. This shows how the States is obsessed with democracy and eager to make the world "democratic." Another reason was because it was good for business. As stated in the primary sources, the war "created 21,000 new American millionaires..." It would have created many jobs and many people have gotten jobs, and most importantly, they had the opportunity produce weapons and develop them and even sell them. So the most compelling ideas were business and democracy..
 * 111808

1. How does the Soviet Union view Nazi as? Do you no think you are another kind of Nazi? 2. How does capitalism benefit other Western European countries? 3. How does communism benefit other Eastern European countries? 4. How did Soviet aggression influence relations with the United States?

Containment was the policy made by the United States during the time period of cold war, preventing the spread of communism. U.S. basically used economic, diplomatic, and military strategies to block communism. Truman doctrine is made by the president, Harry Truman. It aided Greece and Turkey with economics and military, so Greece and Turkey could resist the soviet power. This was basically part of containment. Containment was also applied in the Korean war. In Korea, communism emerged and Kim IL-Sung had let the communist group, and China supported the communists. But the United States did not want Korea to become communists, so they started build the southern Korean army and sent the troops to South Korea. The general MacArthur led the war and launched many attacks. So communists and non-communists Koreans had a war and eventually it divided Korea into two different countries. This is an example of containment, because the United States prevented the spread of communism in Korea, so still the capitalism could prevail in Southern Korea. Also Vietnam is one of containment. In the 1970s, Vietnam was unstable because there were communists and capitalists. And people mostly supported communism. But U.S. army sent armies to get rid of these communists and it succeeded.
 * 1)Explain what containment theory and the Truman Doctrine are. Briefly summarize the Korean War. In detail explain how it is an example of containment. Choose one other event from the text book, briefly summarize it and explain how it is an example of containment.**

CIA intervened in Guatemala in 1954 and overthrew Jacob Arbenz (socialist) and arrested him, because the United States feared the spread of communism. Jacob Arbenz promoted the socialist land reform so he could distribute lands among the peasants. But this was basically against Capitalism, So CIA organized secretly military coup. Also one year before, in 1953, CIA intervened in Iran for similar reasons as Guatemala. The Suez Crisis began in 1956, when Egypt decided to nationalize the suez canal after the U.S. and Great Britain stopped funding. So Britain, France, and Israel started to attack Egypt. But Eisenhower basically forced Israel to stop attacking and promoted armistice. U.S. didn't act justly and according to its value. Eisenhower, he himself was against the military powers and momentum and he wanted to be elected again. So it was nothing to do with US' values. But CIA intervention in Guatemala and Iran was based on its values. Because the U.S. was so eager to stop the communism and even overthrew their leaders. I think Suez Crisis is handled better, because basically there was no wars nor much casualties, and the U.S. tried to maintain peace among them.
 * 1)Compare CIA intervention in Guatemala and Iran to Eisenhower's handling of the Suez Crisis? Did the US act justly and according to its values? What were the motivations in each case? Which one do you think was handled better and why?**

So during the cold war, the U.S. proposed open skies policy and send reconnaissance flights over to the Soviet Union because the U.S. did not trust the Soviets. But the Soviet Union never agreed on this. The United States government started sending spies and CIA led it. But in 1960, U-2 spy planes' captain Gary Power was shot down by the Soviet Union and was imprisoned. But later on, he was sent back to the states again. This worsened the U.S. - Soviet relationships. Some predicted that if U-2 incident did not happen, cold war would have ended earlier.
 * 2) What was the significance of the Gary Powers incident on page 850?**

What were the economic or political reasons for the U.S. going to war against Iraq in the early 1990s (Gulf War)?
 * Research Topic**

It is never justifiable to treat people differently based on race, religion, gender, handicaps. Because people have rights to do whatever they want unless it harms other people and violate the social rules. Because human beings are born to have rights. They have rights to believe in religion they want, and they can't do anything about their skin color. It's not they decided their skin colors when they are born. So people should be treated equally no matter what their race, religion, gender, and handicaps are.
 * Is it ever justifiable to treat people differently based on race, religion, gender, handicaps, etc? Think about all situation.**


 * Journal: Read quote on page 929. What does this tell you about the risks and resistance Black activists faced in working to get the vote. Is it worth it? What would you do in this situation?**

This tells us about Black activists faced discrimination and moreover they had possibilities to be banished. They couldn't even meet their relatives in public because white people might harm their relatives. Also he risked his opportunity to get a job ever in Mississippi. I do not think it is worth it. Because what is the benefit of votes? You don't get money, food, nor shelter. But activists protested to get the vote and they risked their lives including families and jobs. If I was in this situation, I would not participate in Black activists movement, because it would affect my life.

- How does the US justify escalation? The US justifies escalation by saying that they maintain international security and peace in Southeast Asia. Protect people's freedom in Vietnam and surrounding countries because Vietnam influences other countries in Southeast Asia.

-What are the stated US goals? The stated US goals are 1) prevent further aggressions, 2) peace.

-What does it authorize the President to do? It authorizes the President to take all necessary means to repel any armed attack.

-Does the resolution have a firm expiration date? The resolution expires when the president thinks that peace is assured in the region.

The Volunteer W. D. Ehrhart was basically influenced by John F. Kennedy. He remembered what JFK said "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." So even if he was accepted to the colleges, he decided to postpone it and then serve for his country. Therefore, he participated in the Vietnam war.

April 14th __Vietcong Program__ This document is written by the South Vietnam government, because the document shows that they are trying to overthrow Ngo Dinh Diem and establish national democratic government. Moreover, they would allow the evacuees from the North. eliminate all the U.S. influences and be independent establish a national democratic coalition government pursue sovereignty • what important information does the doc give you It shows how they are not friendly to the United States. • explain significance of the document: consider the effects it may have had • explain what the doc adds to the understanding of the War Attitude towards the US is basically hostility. They would abolish the military bases of the United States, they would get rid of the monopoly of US (wouldn't allow US to control them) and they would eliminate the cultural enslavement. Goals don't seem wrong: they are trying to make independent, peaceful country without any intervention. But the part where it said they would overthrow Ngo Dinh Diem doesn't seem right. There is no country they could resist these goals, because Vietnam has its own rights to govern themselves, and they have the rights of sovereignty.
 * who wrote the doc**
 * •summarize main points**
 * - What is the attitude towards the US in this document?**
 * - do you see anything "wrong " in this document? Meaning do the goals seem just?**
 * - who or what country do you think has the right to resist these goals, if anyone?**

What does it tell you about the costs of the war?and how did it affect the public opinions (you)?** It tells that the costs of the war was severe, because the army had developed weapons that could destruct the whole nation. The armies had air crafts and ships that contained missiles. There was a picture of wounded African American and it tells us that diverse races including Hispanics and blacks died too. Not only soldiers but it indicates that there are many civilians and children who were affected by the war and injured. Public opinions might have been changed and people might have got mad, because the war was killing innocent children and civilians. It might have made people feel bad or angry without going to Vietnam and just by looking at the pictures.
 * April 15th

May 12th We can keep authority figures honest by sometimes checking them, and if they do something wrong, we should impeach the authority figure and impose strict punishments. Not only punishments, but also the congress can legislate new laws so the authority figures could stay honest. Laws such as jailing, or taking away the properties could prevent them from lobbying or bribing.
 * How can you keep authority figures honest? What do you do if an authority figure in your life abusing their power?**

Justice Black and Douglas: I adhere to the view that the Government's case against the //Washington Post// should have been dismissed and that the injunction against the //New York Times// should have been vacated without oral argument when the cases were first presented to this Court. I believe that every moment's continuance of the injunctions against these newspapers amounts to a flagrant, indefensible, and continuing violation of the First Amendment.
 * The government trying to ban the exposure of the events is violating the first amendment which endows all people freedom of speech. Therefore, the government should not try to oppress the press.**

Journal Topic Free press is important in a democracy because according to democracy, everyone has equal rights and everyone has freedom (including freedom of speech). Therefore, a free press could convey accurate information to the citizens or people in democracy. I think sometimes authority figures control the press by bribes. However, mostly the press is so eager to dig the truth of the authority figures. So if authority figures do something wrong, the press would try to investigate. Therefore, the press could be either beneficial or harmful to the authority figures. Thus, authority figures would be honest and cautious in order to prevent the exposure of personal lives or scandals. No. There should be no restrictions on what newspapers can print, because according to the First Amendment, all people have freedom of speech. Restricting the freedom of speech is basically violating the First Amendment. The press can print anything unless it causes chaos or writes what is not true. Newspapers should be able to report without revealing their sources, because if they reveal the source or person who told them the truth. Other people will be curious and the person who provided the sources would be in troubles. Also the newspapers should protect the witness who provided the sources.
 * How important is a free press in a democracy?**
 * What do you think the relationship is between the press and authority figures? Think about Watergate and the Washington Post, also the reading we did in class.**
 * Should there be any restrictions on what newspapers can print?**
 * Should newspapers be able to report without revealing their sources? Why or why not? Is this important?**

May 14th In the beginning, Nixon pretended as if he doesn't know anything. Moreover, he even said he is not a crook. However, when the journalists from the Washington post tried to investigate and when they finally found out the truth of scandals, he finally decided to resign. Nixon resigned because all the secrets or scandals had been exposed and there was no other way to cover it again.

May 18th What is feminism? Feminism is an ideology where women can finally achieve what is rightfully theirs. Therefore, creating social, economical, and gender equality.

May 27th __Republicans vs. Democrats__ Republicans kind of value individualism. So they oppose unions and nationalized institutions. However, Democrats value unity and therefore support the idea of one big federal government. Article #1 Republican party supports low taxation, free market, strict judicial system, pro-life, and border control. Therefore they value individualism and sometimes not united. They oppose unions and nationalized organizations. However, Democrats are inclusive. They are more nationalized and they pursue one big federal government. Not only national, but also they are international. They tend to have relationships with other foreign countries. They support multi-nation institutions Article #2 Republicans' beliefs are based on results. However, Democrats are rather radical and progressive. Article #3 Republicans are not against gun controls and some controversial issues, however Democrats are more conservative. Article #4 Republicans were not that surprised because they predicted. On the other hand, Democrat said their loss of election was heartbreaking. Article #5 Republican says Republicans should have the party's idea rather than individual thoughts, and Democrat says they need to be careful: don't have scandals, respectful manners needed. The thing that surprised me is that even though both of the senates were grown up in the same place, they totally have different point of view. Also it surprised me that republicans support gun possession. They both fit into the typical party member, because their thoughts are basically that of the parties'. For example, Republicans are more open and Democrats are conservative on controversial issues.
 * What conclusions can you draw about Republicans and Democrats?**
 * Give a one paragraph summary for each.**
 * Describe one thing about these interviews that surprised you.**
 * How does each interviewee fit and Not fit into the typical party member?**