'In the years 1790-1918, the French Wars set the pattern for the contribution made by the populace in subsequent wars.'
How far do you agree with this statement.
In the period 1790-1918 the populace made different contributions during wartime. The French Wars did set the pattern for the foundation of 'total war', yet this pattern was not realised until World War One (WWI) and the in-between wars largely excluded the populace in Britain.
Revision. Homework. Revision. Homework. Exams. Revision. Exams. This is literally going to be my life for the next six weeks leading up to the exam period starting on the 4th of June. Although sounding awful, the fact this post is called 'Life Update 2.0' implies there is more to life, which there is...
Carter entered his presidency at an unfortunate time for the US economy, with the ongoing oil crisis, the increasing of unemployment and inflation. Carter attempted to manage the economy through various Acts of Congress and procedures, but ultimately could not manage the economic problems he was facing.
The Boer War of 1899 to 1902 was one of many highs and lows for the British Army. The army attempted to fight in a colonial war, even when this was evidently not another colonial issue. Later in the war, the army developed and eventually won the war, but this didn't come without its hindrances however.
The constant debate over WWI generals continues, and no debate is more fierce than that of which surrounds Sir Douglas Haig. Haig became Commander-in-Chief of the B.E.F and the 'New Army' in 1915 after the failure at Loos by Sir John French. He became known as the 'butcher of the Somme' but arguably he had more strengths than weaknesses as a commander.
There are numerous theories that sound amazing, yet wretchedly fail in true practice situations. Communism is one of them. An astounding manifesto of equality and state and individuals joined together which in practice miserably fails, often because of the ascent of dictatorships that demolish everything Communism stands for.