Latin American Civil War Analysis

In the book The Last Colonial Massacre: Latin America in the Cold War, author Greg Grandin traces Guatemala’s evolutionary period from the late 19th century to the early 1980s. What he dubs as ‘the last colonial massacre,’ the Panzós Massacre of 1978 was the mass murder by the Guatamalan army of 35 Q’echi-Mayan men, women and children who had gathered in the town square demanding democractic representation, land reform and higher wages. Outrage over this massacre led many Guatemalan peasants to join the communist Guerilla Army of the Poor (EGP) which prompted violence and repression by the US backed right-wing government. Grandin’s thesis is that Cold War terror unleashed or excused by the United States, weakened the advancement of democracy

If you looked at a map of North America in the 1820's the countries would look a lot different. Mexico was as large as the United States, stretching from Guatemala in the south to Oregon in the north. The US was much smaller, but not for long. The Mexican War, or the "U.S. Invasion" (according to the Mexicans) started in 1846 and ended in 1848. In that short time the US gained a large chunk of territory including Texas and California and Mexico lost more than half of their land. Many Americans and Mexicans died fighting in the war but was this war justified ? I think that the Mexican war was not justified but provoked by the United States. The reasons why I think this is that Americans living in Texas violated the rules that Mexico had

Mexico and the United States were very different countries. The United States was protestant and really strong supporter of slaves. Meanwhile Mexico was Catholic and anti-slavery. Sure enough in 1846, the United States declared war on Mexico. This war caused an immense part of Mexico’s territory to get annexed. This was a controversial war that had supporters and critics, but the question still remains: Was the Mexican American war really justified? Of course not. This war was an excuse for the expansion of slavery, it was provoked by President Polk, and the annexation of Mexican territory was considered to be illegal.

Texas a beautiful piece of land...covered with blood stains of the soldiers. The Mexican American War, the fight over the disputed land around Texas and around California. Were the Americans actually justified for going to war with Mexico, meaning did they have a good reason to start the war? Mexico owned the land and protected it. The U.S. had no reason to go to war, well Texas did annex itself to the U.S., but California didn't. There are many more reasons why they are unjustified, America broke Mexican laws according to Mexico the Americans invaded, the U.S. started the war. The war lasted from 1846-1848, America thought the border was the Rio Grande river. While Mexico though, thought the border was the Nueces river. Texas though did annex

From the American Revolution to more modern wars like Vietnam and Iraq; wars have always been controversial subjects for Americans. One American war that had very apparent sides with strong opinions was the Mexican-American war. This war was started after James Polk was elected president in 1844. He wished to extend the American territory to the pacific ocean; congress also voted to annex Texas. Because of this, he decided to send troops to Texas and an envoy into Mexico, but this angered the Mexicans, so the envoy was asked to leave Mexico. Polk was angered by this treatment so on May 9, 1846, the war began. The united states were not justified in going to war with Mexico for multiple reasons, including that the

Albert Einstein, physics noble prize winner of 1921, once said "I am not only a pacifist but a militant pacifist. I am willing to fight for peace. Nothing will end war unless the people themselves decide not to go to war." This was basically what the United States was facing during the late 19th and early 20th century as it was presented with the decision to go to war in many occasions. For instance, having experienced an era of tremendous and lucrative industrialization, the United States soon found the need to look beyond its borders. With all the goods that had been produced during the Second Industrial Revolution, the United States had to act in accordance to what was most beneficial for the nation's economy. Thus, this resulted in

The samurai of Tokugawa Japan, the yangban of Choson Korea, and the gentry of Ming China were three very powerful and elite groups of East Asia. These groups consisted of high ranking government officials with judicial power and influence. Although the groups were located in the same region they had their similarities and differences in how they obtained power and how they used their power. Japanese samurai were military nobility who had almost as much power as the emperor, but were not the highest ranking officials whereas the yangban officials of Korea were the highest ranking rulers. The gentry of the Ming period of China were once high ranking rulers; however, the gentry were defined as retired Chinese bureaucrats. Socially, all

Wars and Revolutions happen all around the world. Every war and revolution started because of its own reasons. Some are to gain power, land or freedom. One revolution that stands out to me was the Mexican War of independence. It started in 1810 and ended 1821.

t compiled to cause the Civil War in the later years. Although there is the negative effect, the positive is also very big in that inventions like the Cotton Gin improved society and the economy.

The U.S. involvement with these countries began in 1951. Jacobo Árbenz was a military officer who used his military forces to suppress laborers and take what he wanted. Hearing about this the current U.S. President Eisenhower sent weapons to guerrilla groups in order to help over throw Árbenz. Fast-forward a few years and the Cuban revolution happens and results in Cuba becoming a communist government. Around this time many of the guerrilla groups started disappearing but still remained intact. Most people who have an opinion on the matter agree that supplying arms and providing aid to these extremist groups was the starting point to forming the current gangs in Central America. “We made policy decisions that put short-term prioritization of winning battles against insurgents and people we considered communists over the long-term stability of those countries, they are now living the results.” (Katel p.7). This quote sums up the idea the U.S had with their

The start of the Mexican American War started when the United States annexed Texas, we are told of the results and the clash of opinions between the politicians, but we are not informed about the military’s perspective of the battles they fought. The war how we see it today is different how the soldiers once saw it. Although we are told of the acquired land received from each battle that was won, there is no writing informing us of what the soldiers gave up in return for all this land.

The Cold War which took place from 1947 to 1989 had eventually altered the Latin America's relationship to the United States profoundly, as the region became a battleground between two different competing ideological systems which was capitalism and communism. Prior to the Cold War, both economic and geopolitical concerns had motivated United States policy toward Latin America. But, after the lowering of the Iron Curtain in Eastern Europe, George Kennan, the chief architect of American foreign policy towards the Soviet Union, advocated containment to stop the spreading of communism, not just in Europe, but including the countries all around the world. The result was a bipolar world featuring proxy wars fought throughout the Third World by alternates and clients of the two superpowers. Latin American nations are historically considered to be part of "our backyard," who were not permitted to remain neutral as Washington expected the Latin American countries to ally with the United States while the Soviet Union sought to gain access to what had been an American sphere of influence and after world war II many Latin American countries faced economic, social and political challenges.

The real situations that many Central Americans faced were either from backlash of communism resulting in U.S involvement or just straight up domination

Isn’t it crazy what Stacey had to experience her whole life? In my opinion, I believe that she was sexually abused by her father. I don’t see how someone could come up with the details she described and it not be true. She was young when it all started and thought it was the norm and once she realized something was wrong, her father convinced her that no one cared. I liked how you said, “. . .She realized that her father would never stop abusing her. . .”. That’s an interesting point because Stacey managed to be away from her father for a period of time and might have thought that when she returned it would have stopped because she hadn't been around. I’m not sure what the governor saw in Stacey’s case at the beginning that made

The foundation of the Supreme Court began with the earliest articles of the constitution. More specifically, Section II of Article III dictated that “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority…”(National Archives). This language laid out the legal precedent for which the Supreme Court could be built. Due to the intentionally vague nature, the founding fathers intended for the first Congressional Contingent to build the workings of the court. Inspirations for such a Federal legal system arose from several sources. Chiefly among these sources was British Common Law and the Magna Carta. The first Congress built the Supreme Court in its original form of six judges, and from there, the court evolved in the early 19th century and exerted its influence on the development of the United States of America.