The previous assignments focused on domestic matters in U.S. history. This last assignment explores America’s international role in recent decades. By the mid-20th century, the United States had become the dominant force in international relations. Some have argued that the United States’ military functions as the world’s “police.” In this paper focus on the period from 1950 to the present. The American international “policing” role developed because of the Cold War, but now terrorists or any power having or trying to get weapons of mass destruction (WMD) are the potential targets of such a role. Examine the statements below and, drawing from provided sources, present a paper with specific examples and arguments to demonstrate the validity of your position. Your paper will use specific examples—two from the Cold War years and two from the decades since 1991.
NOTE: The word “policing” here has nothing to do with traditional law enforcement agencies. It is more about trying to manage parts of the globe—usually by use of military force or the threat of it. The aim of this management may be to maintain stability, remove threats of “rogue” forces or terrorists or weapons, prevent the expansion of autocratic rule, protect a fledgling democracy, etc.
Choose one of these position statements (make it the last sentence of your introductory paragraph):
THESIS STATEMENT 1: By examples from different decades since 1950, it is clear that the international policing role and strategy of the United States was once essential, but should now be discarded as ineffective and counterproductive.
THESIS STATEMENT 2: By examples from different decades since 1950, it is clear that the international policing role and strategy of the United States during the Cold War has become even more necessary in this period of terrorism and instability.
Plan to make that thesis statement the last sentence in your introductory paragraph. The general subject is America’s international “policing” role as a superpower for the last 70-plus years. You may moderate the wording slightly to fit more precisely the position you wish to take. This is NOT a simple statement of a topic; it is a statement of a position you are taking about that topic. p.s.—Valid arguments and “A” papers can be made with either thesis. So, you choose the one you think is the stronger position.
After giving general consideration to your readings and your research, select one of the positions above as your position—your thesis. (Sometimes after doing more thorough research, you might choose the reverse position. This happens with critical thinking and inquiry. Your final paper might end up taking a different position than you originally envisioned.) Organize your paper as follows, handling these issues:
Part 1: Introductory paragraph with thesis statement.
Part 2: FOUR EXAMPLES–To support your position, use four specific examples from different decades between 1950 and the present. However, two examples must be from the Cold War years (before 1991) and the other two examples must be from 1991 to the present.
Part 3: Explain why the opposing view is weak in comparison to yours. The opposing view is the thesis statement you did not choose.
Part 4: Legacy today and conclusion. Consider your life today: In what way does the history you have shown shape or impact issues in your workplace or desired profession? This might be easy if you work in cyber security, criminal justice, IT, etc. You can consider the legal impact of terrorism on the justice system, privacy issues, etc. Even a business must now plan accordingly. Every profession now must have security safeguards, plan what to do with data, etc
Length: The paper should be 500-to-750 words in length.
Research and References: You must use a MINIMUM of four quality academic sources; the Schultz textbook must be one of them. The others must come from the list provided on the instructions sheet, or they must be quality sources you find in the university’s online library. This is guided research, not Googling
Choose sources relevant to the topic and position you are taking:
G. H. W. Bush. March 6, 1991. Address before a Joint Session of the Congress on the Cessation of the Persian Gulf Conflict. http://college.cengage.com/history/wadsworth_9781133309888/unprotected/ps/bushnwo.html
S. Chace. Summer, 2015. The Cuban Missile Crisis: Leadership as Disturbance, Informed by History. http://libdatab.strayer.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=110092272&site=eds-live&scope=site
J. F. Dulles. Jan. 2, 1954. Secretary Dulles’ Strategy of Massive Retaliation. http://college.cengage.com/history/wadsworth_9781133309888/unprotected/ps/dulles.html
M. Klare. July 15, 2002. Endless Military Superiority. http://libdatab.strayer.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=6926412&site=eds-live&scope=site
T. McCrisken. April/May, 2013. Obama’s Drone War. http://libdatab.strayer.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=86689166&site=eds-live&scope=site
C. Paul. 2008. Marines on the Beach: The Politics of U.S. Military Intervention Decision Making. eBook. http://libdatab.strayer.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=275009&site=eds-live&scope=site
C. Powell. Feb. 6, 2003. Transcript of Powell’s UN Presentation. http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/05/sprj.irq.powell.transcript/
R. Reagan. March, 1983. Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Evangelicals. http://college.cengage.com/history/wadsworth_9781133309888/unprotected/ps/evilemp.html
Kevin M. Schultz. 2018. HIST: Volume 2: U.S. History since 1865. 5th ed.
S. M. Tarzi. Sept. 2014. The Folly of a Grand Strategy of Coercive Global Primacy: A Fresh Perspective on the Post-9/11 Bush Doctrine. http://libdatab.strayer.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=98323177&site=eds-live&scope=site