Rewording a couple of Poli Sci Responses..
I’m trying to study for my Political Science course and I need some help to understand this question.
Please reword both responses.
I believe an appropriate liberation movement that is most commonly seen in April, is that of the Armenian people. April marks Armenian Genocide Remembrance month. For centuries, under the Ottoman Empire, Christian minorities, including Armenians and Greeks, were severely oppressed. In specific, from 1915 and onwards, Armenians faced mass murder, butchering, rape, slaughters, discrimination, and to complete, genocide. The Young Turks and succeeded by modern day Turkey is the oppressor until today. Over 1.5 Million Armenians were killed in this process of a systematic process to erase a race of the world. To not dive in too much to the history, it is crucial to noter the processes and coalitions the Armenians had to build to survive as the only Christian nation, completely surrounded my Muslim, anti-Christian nations. Armenia was a hub of education, scientific outbreaks, and new and modern advancements that resonated all over the world. Post-genocide, Armenia became a shriveled and dilapidated country prone and subject to falling under the reliance of other nation’s support. Armenia had to resonate its Christian ties with other European nation for a long time, before it was able to establish a strong diaspora. Through coalitions and Armenian lobbying organizations, many nations have recognized the Armenian Genocide and the mass atrocities committed by Turkey. These nations have also condemned denial of the Genocide. The Armenian liberation movement of the Genocide still exists today, because Turkey, the oppressor still firmly rejects the Armenian Genocide. Last year, after years of Turkish propaganda spreading and grip over American politics, the United States House of Representatives and Senate, both recognized the Armenian Genocide and rejected denial of it. I would suggest more international policy as such. We must do our best to recognize and accept all genocides, to prevent future ones from occurring. Just as the holocaust occurred, the genocides in Rwanda, so did that of the Armenians and Greeks. We must gain reparations for every single life that was taken too early from the Armenian population.
Historically war was fought with defense and deterrence strategies. States used to build forts to protect their people and soldiers, and almost all adult male citizens were dragged to war to fight. In addition, deterrence strategies used in the past such as massive destruction of cities and the death of many people caused many states to end war or not attack. In contemporary times war is fought more with defense strategies than deterrence; states focus on building up defense capabilities such as weaponry and military size. Moreover states with powerful militaries have lead small or weak states to acquire nonconventional methods to defense themselves. As stated in the textbook “as a consequence, the incentive to build up nonconventional capabilities has increased; the spread of WMD, insurgency, and terrorism is a direct result of the fact that most other states and groups have no hope of competing with the United States in terms of conventional weapons” ( D’Anieri 261). The majority of this nonconventional weapons if not all of them are acquired for the purpose of protection. Defense strategies are more prominent in contemporary times as opposed to a combination of defense and deterrence strategies that were used in the past.
Another difference between war in the past and war today is the increase in sensibility to casualties. Citizens of many nations will only support wars with low number of deaths, one of the main goals of leaders is to decrease the number of casualties of war. As stated in the textbook, “In many countries, the public will support military intervention abroad only as long as deaths remain very low. As casualties mount, policy makers and citizens alike question the use of force… which fights get fought and how they get fought are heavily influenced by the need to minimize battle deaths” (D’Anieri 264). Decreasing the number of casualties is not as hard as in the past because of the development of high-tech weapons. Technology has in many ways helped decrease collateral damage which declines civilian deaths. In essence the main difference between wars of the past and contemporary wars are the tactics used to achieve the desired goal, the major changes in strategies used in wars have been due to the use of technology that has made it easier to decrease the number of casualties.