Amrican Imperialism..

                                                 American Imperialism
                                                    By: Kelsea Placey




    The American invasion of the Philippines was an unfair equation between two countries in 1899. It was actually American imperialist egotism towards a small country like the Philippines. From the Philippines point of view, it's a war for independence. Even though they just got out from Spain, they still didn't have full independence due to American imperialism towards this country.
    The reasons for American expansion and imperialism were relatively clear in the public area. The primary concern of the US has been and continues to be, business. Being one of the few countries largely founded by corporations, the United States continues its heritage and views. When the US doesn't take care of the needs of specific businessmen, companies, and industries it takes into account of the American business climate, and it recognizes how it can facilitate a larger business market, and popularity. These are some main reasons behind the invasion.
    Hardships between the Filipinos and the American soldiers on the islands were there because of the conflicting movements for independence and colonization. There were many Hostilities during this time, and they started on February 4, 1899. An American soldier shot a Filipino who was crossing a bridge, and just from that taking place, they say that it was the cause of the war.
    The war ended up lasting for about three years, and it was a very brutal war. It left hostilities continuing for years after that, until the establishment of the civilian government colonial government of governor William Howard Taft. After all of this happened, everyone looked at this war as one of the wars that would be forgotten by the U.S. Millitary. So basically, in conclusion, America is Imperialistic with the facade of being humanitarian. The government has claimed to care for the better of humanity, and the government has claimed to try to educate people and to bring them to Jesus Christ. However, when the government did these things through the force of arms, and through beatings and rapings that is deffinetly not a source of humanitarism. The have tried to put their ideas to other nations, because they think they have the best way. Also, that their way is the only possible right way.

1. Were Southern politicians more or ...

1. Were Southern politicians more or less likely to own slaves than other white Southerners?

Ans-I agree with this fact.Politicians, many of them wealthy and slave-owners, were used as the example or model for the Southern population, when in fact the average Southerner lived day to day and could not afford to purchase another human being for $500-$1,500.

2. Were higher level politicians more likely to own slaves than other politicians?

Ans-Higher level politicians actually owned highest number of slaves then other white southerners.Here is a fact about government officials who owns slaves.About 53% County government officials, 68% State legislators and 83% Delegates to secession conventions had slaves,so the data revealed that higher level politicians had more slaves.

3. What do these facts suggest to you about the nature of the Southern political system?

It represents actually slavery based political system which emphasized lower motivation towards humanity and unequal society structure. According to Cooper(author of The South and the Politics of Slavery: 1828-1856) to prosper in the South, a political party needed to present itself as a champion of Southern honor and protector of Southern interests, especially slavery.

4. How uniform were the proportion of slaves in the population and the proportion of whites owning slave across the South?

In few southern states like South Carolina and Georgia, the proportion of the slaves relative to the total population is pretty high but also in some states they still remains relatively low. This same this applies to owning slaves in white families.

5. Was there a relationship between the number of slaves in a state's population and whether and when it seceded from the Union?

There is some relation between the state population and the slaves which does differ from union to initial states to secede.

6. What material advantages did the North possess on the eve of the Civil War?

When we analyze the datas from the chart we can see that the north had all kinds of advantages than the south. The North had a larger proportion of infrastructure, financial, population, and financial resources.

7. Do you think material advantages are decisive in the outcome of wars? Why or why not?

it's clear that the northeast had the most resources towards the war, so it was crystal clear that north is going to win the battle.

8. Why did troop strength peak in 1863?

There is not enough data to answer this question.

9. Do you think that the differences in troop strength were responsible for the war's outcome?   

Of course it's a big factor because its what determines the winning side.

10. How does the cost of the Civil War--in casualties and expense--compare to the cost of other American wars?

The Civil war is deffinately one of the most costly and bloody wars which did cost lots of lives all over the country.

11. Why do you think that the Civil War was so lethal?

Because the number of people that lost, were from both sides. One side was fighting for their way of life, and their freedom, which is why they were fighting so hard.

12. What was the radical Republican program for reconstructing the Union?

Ans- Free school, free church, and free community events to develop a great community for the future. Also to give anyone whose estate was worth up to 10,000 dollars two acres of farm land in quanity.

13. What were the goals of the radical Republican program?

To prohibit slavery, define national citizenship, add rights to hold public office, and prohibit denial to vote based on race, color, or previous servitude.

14. Why was the program unacceptable to President Andrew Johnson?

   These program voted by president because his mindset wasn't radicaly.

15. Why do you think the North failed to follow through with policies that would have secured the rights and economic status of the freedmen?

   Because they were scared to know what would happen once they gave up their "help" of the slaves and to have blacks as equals to themselves.

16. What were the major political and social achievements of Reconstruction?

Many people knew that equal rights to all was the best thing to do, the right thing. Even still, many people were uneasy about the slaves being equal and this caused a major controversy.

After fighting with Spain in Cuba in ...

    After fighting with Spain in Cuba in 1899, USA wanted to show their power towards the world. As their mission, they attacked phillipinos, even though they didn't want to take phillipine. Also, the phillipine nation struggled with Spain for a very long time. After getting their freedom from Spain, they wouldn't want to give away their independence to the USA, so sometimes it is called the Phillipine war of Independence.


    American notions of race and civilization greatly influenced U.S. support for the Philippine-American War that took place from February 1899 to July 1902. Their was another intension to go into the phillipine war to educate phillipine nation. However, after years of isolationist foreign policies, they coupled with the threat of growing European powers, and it had created a widespread anxiety among Americans into the 1890s.  Historians do argue because the USA wanted to prove their political leadership, and their leadership towards other nations.


    Imperialism, defined by The Dictionary of Human Geography, is "The creation and maintenance of an unequal economic, cultural and territorial relationship, usually between states and often in the form of an empire, based on domination and subordination."  However, after judging the USA,  it can be seen that the USA wanted to take this country or rule this country by removing the Philippine's own administration system. Also, not to tolerate civilian people, and last through massive destruction. Not only from that sense, but it is believed that every one will agree that you cannot destroy a nation just to prove that you are powerful.


    They way that Ameican troops treated the Phillipines was excrutiating. At the time of the phillipine war, there were many stories that could have been told that were not friendly. A Very famous writer, named Mark Twain, told on the American invasion war of Philippine that the Americans have pacified thousands of the islanders and buried them. They destroyed their fields, burned their villages, and turned their widows and orphans out-of-doors.


    The USA have acquired property in the three hundred concubines and other slaves of our business partner, the Sultan of Sulu, and hoisted American protecting flag over that swag. And so, by these Providences of God -- and the phrase is the government's, not general peoples' USA was and is  a World Power.From his frustration about the situation over there from Mark Twain really forced us to think about the mass destruction happened in Philippines by soldiers of USA.

So at last it's proved that USA went to unfair conflict in Philipinnes where they started a dark history for poor filipinos.So from here we all should take lesson that how to take control and deal with them with respect so that there shouldn't be any masscare like happened in Philippine.

1. Use evidence to describe the econ...

Civil War


1.  Use evidence to describe the economic impact of casino ownership and gambling on Native American tribes.

    That might surprise Americans who have consumed countless cheery feature stories about Indians making big bucks on casino gambling. Some tribes -- like the Mashantucket Pequots of Connecticut, who own Foxwoods, the country's largest casino -- have indeed gotten very rich. But less than a quarter of America's 557 Indian tribes own casinos, and only 48 tribes earn more than $10 million a year on gaming.



2.  What is the most significant problem of trying to understand the condition of the modern Native American population?

Because there were so many people. It is impossible to generalize about 2 million people who belong to more than 500 different tribes, each with its own history, each living in different circumstance. It was hard because everyone has a different past, and had different experiences, so in conclusion it would be wrong for people to say things about Native Americans as a whole, because they are all different, in so many ways.



3.  In what ways are Native Americans a unique minority group in the United States?  Do these reasons seem justified today, or should Native Americans be considered as a "regular" minority group (like African Americans, Asian Americans, women, etc.)?

As such, they constitute the only minority group in America that has signed peace treaties with the U.S. government, the only ethnic group with a government agency -- the Bureau of Indian Affairs -- specifically devoted to its well-being. Native Americans are the oldest tribal people that are her in the United States. I do believe that they should be justified as a regular minority group, even though it's not a proper way to describe this great tribal group, I do think it is the right thing to do.

4.  Please find 4 specific examples of the sorts of events generalized in this paragraph.  For each specific example, include a hyperlink to a website explaining the specific event, and a summary of that event.







     1.American Indians are the poorest people in the United States. http://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/ExclusiveCommentary.aspx?id=0fe5c04e-fdbf-4718-980c-0373ba823da7

     2.Foxwoods, the country's largest casino
http://buffalopost.net/?tag=foxwoods-resort-casino

    3.It is impossible to generalize about 2 million people who belong to more than 500 different tribes, each with its own history, each living in different circumstances
http://www.native-languages.org/languages.htm

    4. "Any objective observer would say that our treatment of Native Americans is a national disgrace."

http://www.emayzine.com/lectures/indian.htm



5.  What is meant by the phrase 'diseases of the poor'?  What is the relationship between economics and health implied by that phrase? 

This phrase showed the current condition of native Indian Americans.The economical condition of native Americans are not too good, and also not only that, but they have to go through various discrimination and hatred. When it's a situation dealing with the health of Native American Indians, it comes down to it where they are far more able to succumb to diseases associated with the poor -- four times as likely to die of alcoholism, three times as likely to die of tuberculosis, and nearly twice as likely to die of diabetes.








6.  Is John McCain correct in his assessment of the treatment of Native Americans?                                                          Why?

I do think that John McCain is correct when he says "Any objective observer would say that our treatment of Native Americans is a national disgrace." The United States government never really treated them in a honorable manner, and as of today, they are going through the worst economical and political time that they have never experienced.




    7.  Please define each of the following terms in the context of                                 Native American policy:
    
   

• removal-he it is understood that Indian removal from time to time from their places and new facilities.
  
• allotment-The allotment system turned out to be a monumental disaster for the Indians. In addition to losing their "surplus" tribal land, many Native American families also lost their allotted land despite the government's 24-year period of trusteeship.
• termination-Indian termination was the policy of the United States from the mid-1940s to the mid-1960s.The belief was that Native Americans would be better off if assimilated as individuals into mainstream American society.
• relocation-After 1830 United States government struggled to force relocation of the southeastern nations Native American.
  
• assimilation-Military defeat, cultural pressure, confinement on reservations, forced cultural assimilation, outlawing of native languages and culture, forced sterilizations, termination policies of the 1950s, and 1960s, and slavery have had deleterious effects on Native Americans' mental and physical health.
• self determination-Native American self determination refers to the series of social movements, legislation, and beliefs that support the ability of the tribes of Native Americans in the USA to have a greater level of self-governance and decision making in affairs that affect their own people.

    

8.  Finally, give a paragraph summary on what self determination means, and why it either is, or is not, the appropriate policy for Native American people with respect to the Federal government.

Ans-Native American self determination refers to the series of social movements, legislation, and beliefs that support the ability of the tribes of native Americans in the USA to have a greater level of self-governance and decision making in affairs that affect their own people. Self-Determination's primary goal was and still is to reverse the paternalistic policies enacted upon Native American tribes since the creation of the tribal system and to enact and enforce new legislation that enables Native Americans to control their own affairs And i agree with this system because it should help Native tribes to lead a modern government administrative pathway.

History of Softball

History of Softball
By: Kelsea Placey

                                     

    Softball is my favorite game and in this term's local history project I am going to show the history of softball. The history of softball is by far the clearest of all documented sports related histories. There is a lot of history about softball, and one that everyone should know is that it developed as a younger version of baseball, but people are always asking “Who invented softball?” Although one man came up with a version of the game in 1887, another modified the game in 1895. A young Chicago gentleman, George Hancock, is considered the inventor of the game. Hancock told the group that they should play a ball game. He shaped a boxing glove into a ball and tied it. Then, he mapped out the infield diamond to fit the inside the gym. A man from Yale grabbed a stick/broom handle to use as a bat. A boating club, a boxing glove and a football game were the key parts in the very first game of softball, which was first invented on Thanksgiving day in Chicago in 1887, and it all happened at Yale University. A man in the fans from Yale then hit the boxing glove with a broom handle, and in conclusion it resulted in an indoor baseball game. Throughout time this game became very popular, and developed into a winter sport in Chicago. By 1889, a winter program for baseball was formed, and when the seasons passed and the weather became warmer, softball was taken outside to the real field. It is odd to say that softball history originated indoors and was developed by men. The original game was loosely based on a shortened version of baseball with a smaller field and a larger ball. Thankfully just about everything with softball has changed today. Softball can be played by men, but it is thought of as a woman's sport. It is particillary played in the United States, and is a very popular sport today. The first women's softball team was formed in 1895 at Chicago's West Division High School. The basic equipment that was used was a huge 17-inch ball and a stick-like bat. No gloves were worn, and the catcher didn't even have to wear a mask. The ball was very soft, compared to the balls that softball players use today. The distance between bases was greatly reduced from baseball, being only 27 feet apart. Also, the pitcher was about 22 feet from home plate, and today it is 43 feet. Sandbags served as bases, and  players were allowed to slide into them and push them along in the slide. In today's softball game, the bags are rubber, and you can slide, but there are chances of getting hurt. The bases are into the ground, and don't come out very easily. The game involved nine players, with two shortstops,  and right, and only two outfielders, left and right. It is recommended that there is a first baseman, a second baseman, shortstop, third baseman, a pitcher, catcher, a left fielder, right fielder, and a center fielder in today's game. A lot has changed in the game of softball since 1887. After talking with coach J.D, I've realized that there are many things that have changed since 1887. There are ways that pitchers were pitching back then, where today they would be illegal, and the pitcher would have to step out of the game. He says that softball has become a very serious sport in the past 10 years, and it has become more of a woman sport, rather than a men sport. On the field, things have changed also. For example, the pitchers mound has became farther away from home plate, for a couple of good reasons. Girls today are becoming more active than they used to be, so they moved it farther away so that the girls would have more of a challenge, instead of having everything be easy for them. Softball is becoming more unique as the years go by, and from what we see, softball players are happy with the changes that have been made.


    

    

Jfk Murder

I was crying, because Jfk was a really good leader, he did many things for our country, and it shocked me that some terrorists killed him. After all of this happened, i was very upset, and like myself, the whole country was upset, and disturbed by what happened. Everyone could see how serious the situation was, people were changing there ways because of what they saw.

Untitled

Cuban Misille crisis

The Descision to Use Atomic Weapons

    The Decision to Use Atomic Weapons
from

A People's War?
Howard Zinn

         Still, the vast bulk of the American population was mobilized, in the army, and in civilian life, to fight the war, and the atmosphere of war enveloped more and more Americans. Public opinion polls show large majorities of soldiers favoring the draft for the postwar period.I agree with this thing that at the time of war,most or some times every people of every war nation take part in war through direct or indirect way.
  -kelsea placey 3/4/10 1:18 PM Hatred against the enemy, against the Japanese particularly, became widespread. Racism was clearly at work It happened at this crucial time. -kelsea placey 3/4/10 1:23 PM Time magazine, reporting the battle of Iwo Jima, said: "The ordinary unreasoning Jap is ignorant. Perhaps he is human. Nothing .. . indicates it." ....      
        The bombing of Japanese cities continued the strategy of saturation bombing to destroy civilian morale; one nighttime fire-bombing of Tokyo took 80,000 lives. Bombing to japanese was one of the best strategies at world war II. -kelsea placey 3/4/10 1:25 PM  And then, on August 6, 1945, came the lone American plane in the sky over Hiroshima, dropping the first atomic bomb, leaving perhaps 100,000 Japanese dead, and tens of thousands more slowly dying from radiation poisoning. Twelve U.S. navy fliers in the Hiroshima city jail were killed in the bombing, a fact that the U.S. government has never officially acknowledged, according to historian Martin Sherwin (A World Destroyed).Sometimes for big accomplishments we need to sacrifice minority. -kelsea placey 3/4/10 1:27 PM Three days later, a second atomic bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki, with perhaps 50,000 killed.
       The justification for these atrocities was that this would end the war quickly, making unnecessary an invasion of Japan. Such an invasion would cost a huge number of lives, the government said-a million, according to Secretary of State Byrnes; half a million, Truman claimed was the figure given him by General George Marshall. (When the papers of the Manhattan Project-the project to build the atom bomb In world war II the US tried to fight at the whole time with atomic bombs and all of the mass destruction weapons. -kelsea placey 3/4/10 1:29 PM  were released years later, they showed that Marshall urged a warning to the Japanese about the bomb, so people could be removed and only military targets hit.) These estimates of invasion losses were not realistic, and seem to have been pulled out of the air to justify bombings which, as their effects became known, horrified more and more people. Japan, by August 1945, was in desperate shape and ready to surrender. New York Times military analyst Hanson Baldwin wrote, shortly after the war:

The enemy, in a military sense, was in a hopeless strategic position by the time the Potsdam demand for unconditional surrender was made on July 26.
       Such then, was the situation when we wiped out Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
       Need we have done it? No one can, of course, be positive, but the answer is almost certainly negative.

       The United States Strategic Bombing Survey, set up by the War Department in 1944 to study the results of aerial attacks in the war, interviewed hundreds of Japanese civilian and military leaders after Japan surrendered, and reported just after the war:

Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.

       But could American leaders have known this in August 1945? The answer is, clearly, yes. The Japanese code had been broken, and Japan's messages were being intercepted. It was known the Japanese had instructed their ambassador in Moscow to work on peace negotiations with the Allies. Japanese leaders had begun talking of surrender a year before this, and the Emperor himself had begun to suggest, in June 1945, that alternatives to fighting to the end be considered. On July 13, Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo wired his ambassador in Moscow: "Unconditional surrender is the only obstacle to peace.. .." Martin Sherwin, after an exhaustive study of the relevant historical documents, concludes: "Having broken the Japanese code before the war, American Intelligence was able to-and did-relay this message to the President, but it had no effect whatever on efforts to bring the war to a conclusion."
       If only the Americans had not insisted on unconditional surrender- that is, if they were willing to accept one condition to the surrender, that the Emperor, a holy figure to the Japanese, remain in place-the Japanese would have agreed to stop the war.
       Why did the United States not take that small step to save both American and Japanese lives? Was it because too much money and effort had been invested in the atomic bomb not to drop it? General Leslie Groves, head of the Manhattan Project, described Truman as a man on a toboggan, the momentum too great to stop it. Or was it, as British scientist P. M. S. Blackett suggested (Fear, War, and the Bomb), that the United States was anxious to drop the bomb before the Russians entered the war against Japan?
       The Russians had secretly agreed (they were officially not at war with Japan) they would come into the war ninety days after the end of the European war. That turned out to be May 8, and so, on August 8, the Russians were due to declare war on Japan, But by then the big bomb had been dropped, and the next day a second one would be dropped on Nagasaki; the Japanese would surrender to the United States, not the Russians, and the United States would be the occupier of postwar Japan. In other words, Blackett says, the dropping of the bomb was "the first major operation of the cold diplomatic war with Russia.. .." Blackett is supported by American historian Gar Alperovitz (Atomic Diplomacy), who notes a diary entry for July 28, 1945, by Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal, describing Secretary of State James F. Byrnes as "most anxious to get the Japanese affair over with before the Russians got in." All of this is politics and the russian acted as if they were friends with the japanese. The Japan wasnt that kind of strong country to fight with the USA, so at any time they could lose so they were always scared. -kelsea placey 3/4/10 1:31 PM 
       Truman had said, "The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians." It was a preposterous statement. Those 100,000 killed in Hiroshima were almost all civilians. The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey said in its official report: "Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen as targets because of their concentration of activities and population."
       The dropping of the second bomb on Nagasaki seems to have been scheduled in advance, and no one has ever been able to explain why it was dropped. Was it because this was a plutonium bomb whereas the Hiroshima bomb was a uranium bomb? Were the dead and irradiated of Nagasaki victims of a scientific experiment? Martin Shenvin says that among the Nagasaki dead were probably American prisoners of war. He notes a message of July 31 from Headquarters, U.S. Army Strategic Air Forces, Guam, to the War Department:  Well if it's a real scientific experiment then japan was the best lab and japanese were the perfect-kelsea placey 3/4/10 1:34 PM 

Reports prisoner of war sources, not verified by photos, give location of Allied prisoner of war camp one mile north of center of city of Nagasaki. Does this influence the choice of this target for initial Centerboard operation? Request immediate reply.

The reply: "Targets previously assigned for Centerboard remain unchanged."
       True, the war then ended quickly. Italy had been defeated a year earlier. Germany had recently surrendered, From this statement we can understand that world war II was going to end soon. -kelsea placey 3/4/10 1:36 PM  crushed primarily by the armies of the Soviet Union on the Eastern Front, aided by the Allied armies on the West. Now Japan surrendered.

Ira Gilliand recalls his night on the...

Ira Gilliand recalls his night on the ridge. I agree with him because he is emotional.  -kelsea placey 3/2/10 2:06 PM 

It's tough to talk about this stuff.in my opinion memories of a war is nothing anybody is or should be proud about. its more something that you try to forget and leave behind, because its something really bad. -kelsea placey 3/2/10 2:06 PM  It's been fifty-eight years. It gives me the chills thinking about it.in my opinion memories of a war is nothing anybody is or should be proud about. its more something that you try to forget and leave behind, because its something really bad. -kelsea placey 3/2/10 2:07 PM 

The Japanese were trying to outflank usFrom my view of point if something happend with me and with my country then also i would be scared for this kind of situaion. -kelsea placey 3/2/10 2:07 PM  and looked like they were going to overrun our position. I remember their screams. They screamed a lot,screams are something which burn into your memory forever. especially if screams are the only thing keeping you from falling asleep, later you are only remembering their screams -kelsea placey 3/2/10 2:08 PM  especially when they were charging. It made you alert in a hurry even after being up for two days and you're ready to fall asleep.I will say it was emotionally challenge for american soldier to face their screaming which was blood colding,ifI was that kind of situation against teir screaming obiously it was going to scary for me.-kelsea placey 3/2/10 2:09 PM 

They kept charging, but that's where the grenades came in. We threw grenades all night long. I remember rolling the grenades down. We were up on the hill and they were below us. They kept feeding us boxes of grenades. I remember the sound of Plante's BAR. He kept it going all night long. A lot of guys spent a terrible night out there. In a war time it's a common story for soldiers. -kelsea placey 3/2/10 2:11 PM 

The 1st Parachute Battalion was with us. I remember one of the paratroopers got shot. The corpsman came over because of his cry for help, and he [the corpsman] got shot right through the heart.His name was Smith, so when I saw Smith go down, I grabbed him and carried him down the hill. I didn't think he was going to die. When I got him down to the first aid station, I saw one of our doctors cry.  We all know that doctor's are strong mentality compossed human but at those time even doctor's were emotionally broke up. -kelsea placey 3/2/10 2:12 PM  [chokes up] Old Smitty was my friend, a real nice guy, and I broke down also.

World War II

Cold War & Fear

People had many reasons why they should be scared back then (in Hungry). Some of the examples why would be because of chaos, going without food for days, poverty, and also desperation. In America, people are scared today because we now have nuclear bombs, and Russia does also. The biggest reason why people are afraid of these bombs is because you can be about 500 miles away and this bomb will still have the power to shatter a window and hurt you. Also, they are and have been afraid of Sputnik because it is the first satellite that was ever made. No one knows what it does or anything, and that's what makes it so difficult for people to think about.

3rd quarter local history

For this quarter, I am going to try to interview an old lady that I know if she is willing to be recorded, and if not, I will still be able to get pictures from her. I will be doing this probably next week sometime.

Civil Rights- Martin and Malcom

Okay, so im here to talk about the situation dealing with Martin Luther King Jr, and Malcom X. I believe that Martin is correct about how he feels, and how people should react to the situation. I totally agree with Martin Luther King because people shouldn't have to fight and be violent in order to get civil rights. Everyone deserves to make their own desision, and Malcom X doesn't really think that way.