Use these controls to find questions to answer
The use of terror as a technique has always been a part of warfare and governance, but 'terrorism' itself has always been viewed as a particular small group form of conflict by itself.
The deliberate use of terror has always been a part of warfare, usually to undermine one party's will to fight. For example, up until the end of the Napoleonic Wars in Europe, a city that refused to surrender upon demand might be sacked and looted if soldiers had to go through the horrors of an assault. (For instance, look up the siege of Badajoz by the British in 1813). Over the last 200 years, behaviour like this as increasingly become viewed as a war crime.
Terror has also been a tool of governmance to atomize opposition to a dictatorial government. Prime examples include Stalin's Great Terror of the 1930s, or Nazi Germany's "Night and Fog" decree. A democratic government that engages in this puts its authority and institutions in serious jeopardy.
Terrorism as a small group form of warfare has been difficult to define but:
1) Governments and military forces are recognizable and -- often -- ultimately accountable for the use of terror. Terrorists themselves remain clandestine, hidden, and often answers to no identifiable political authority.
2) While militaries and (usually) governments have a recognizable material purpose to their use of violence to instill terror, the targets of terrorist groups are often symbolic and unpredictable. The old maxims of "kill one, frighten ten thousand" and the notion of "Guerilla Theatre" apply.
3) Terrorism is inerently ideological, often to a cause or purpose that most of the targetted population rejects. It can intersect with a militant protest campaign, with organized crime, be a part of a revolutionary process, and one occasion be an instrument of a government against exiled political dissidents.
Terrorism has been directed against many societies and nations. For instance the Salafist Islamic creed that gave rise to al Qaeda killed thousands of Westerners, and hundreds of thousands of Muslims throughout the Arab World. Many nations around the world have experienced deadly terrorism from domestic sources.
The American President during the Civil War
Abraham Lincoln was president of the USA from 1861 until his assassination in 1865. He is one of the most praised and yet controversial American presidents( and figures) in US History if not the most. He has received a tremendous amount of praise for the abolition of slavery(13th amendment) with which the Civil War resulted. He was also the first republican president.
Though not himself a proponent of abolition, the efforts he showed to maintain the Union after Southern Secession ended in the abolition of slavery. His opponents have stated that slavery could have been abolished without a Civil War(just like in Great Britain or France), that it would have much less costly both in lives and money and they quote his own words that his purpose was to "save the Union at all costs". He showed in private letters and in his inauguration adress that he did not oppose slavery in any sense.
Moreover, the first emancipation proclamation only freed slaves who lived in the Confederacy, Kentucky and West Virginia were not part of it and slavery thus remained legal there. The Morill Tarrif is often pointed at by revisionist Historians as the real cause of the Civil War. This new form of protectionism would thrust 80% of the tax burden on the South though it represented roughly 30% of the population(about 9 milllion people including 4 million slaves).
Tariffs had been a key element of discord between the South and the North for decades before the Civil War. The North was indeed industrial and needed protection from European competition(notably British) whereas the South relied on agricultural exports and advocated Free trade.
Lincoln was also blamed for his violation of the Bill of Rights and the suppression of Freedom of Speech( he was the only American president that had people imprisoned for political reasons) and his contempt of states' rights.
Europe in 1910 was heavily influenced by the Treaty of Vienna (1815) after the Napoleonic Wars. In 1924 Europe was influenced by the Treaty of Versailles and other treaties.
Credit Emerson Kent World Maps Online.
The recent changes before World War 1 were in the Balkans. See 1910 Map. After World War one 3 Empires collapsed and smaller countries existed in the remains.
Credit: World Maps Online
Big changes were.
The Austo-Hungarian Empire was broken up. Yugoslavia exists, Czechoslovakia exist. Austria exists separate from Hungary.
The Russian Empire collapsed. Poland exists separate from Russia. The Baltic States of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania exist separate from Russia.
The Ottoman Empire also collapsed. Turkey established itself by 1924 after a War of Independence.
The Portuguese had a colony in Brazil. The local indigenous people refused to work on the plantations for the Portuguese. The Portuguese did not want to do the hard manual labor in the hot humid climate. Not only was the work unpleasant many Portuguese died not being well adapted to hard labor in that difficult climate.
The Portuguese had explored Africa and had colonies and outposts all along the coast of Africa. The Portuguese were able to use their influence and contacts in Africa to buy slaves from the warring African tribes and Islamic traders. There was a long standing slave trade between the African and Islamic Empires. The Portuguese were able to use their superior wealth and military might to buy into this trade.
The slaves purchased for very little in Africa were worth a fortune in Latin America. The plantations in Latin America needed laborers. The slave trade bringing Africans to Latin America supplied the needed laborers.
There was an uneasy alliance between Hungary and the Axis powers because Hungary's economy was bad.
Hungary sided with Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany during the war. In the early years of the 1930's (Hitler took power in 1933) Hungary relied on Germany for trade and to help pull them out of a depression that Hungary was currently in.
Hungarian politics turned significantly nationalistic in the 1930's, just like Germany and Italy. They also instituted policies that were similar to ones that Germany had installed. One main theme of these new policies was irredentism. Irredentism is the ideology that a group of people are seeking to reclaim land that was quote-unquote "lost" through history. Germany had also put forth these laws.
Turn to early 1940's and Germany had invaded Poland and under pressure from Nazi Germany, Hungary formally joined the Axis Powers. Hungary was most noted in helping in the invasion of Yugoslavia and the USSR.
But Hungary was still wary of getting fully involved. While they were fighting Soviets, the Hungarian Gov't secretly signed a armistice agreement between the US and UK. Hitler would soon discover this and order German troops to occupy Hungary in 1944. At this point in time, Soviet troops began to near Hungary and so Hungary's leader Miklós Horthy signed another armistice with the USSR, which led to German troops kidnapping Horthy's son, threatening to kill him of he didn't revoke the armistice, which then led to Horthy revoking the armistice. Horthy was then thrown from power and a fascist leader named Ferenc Szálasi took over.
The following year, 1945, Soviet troops invaded Hungary and defeated the coalition of German and Hungarian troops. Szálasi fled and was captured by American troops in the town of Mattsee. He was put on trial and sentenced to death for high treason and war crimes. He was hanged on March 12, 1946.
After Horthy was thrown out of power, he was held under house arrest in a Bavarian castle by SS officers until the end of the war. After he was liberated by American troops, he was rearrested and interrogated about his German contacts. He was not charged with any crime. He was then reunited with his son. Also the American soldiers protected him from the Russian troops, as the Russians were furious with Horthy about the 1942 massacre of Serbian and Jewish civilians under Horthy. He was protected though and eventually made his way to Portugal, where he lived out the rest of his life.
Observing the Maritime Laws of War requires a warship to halt and inspect merchant vessels before taking action; submarines are very vulnerable if they do this.
Most of a submarine's protection comes from remaining submerged; a surfaced submarine gives away its position and is very vulnerable to gun fire. They are also small and cramped vessels. Using a submarine to board and inspect merchant shipping during war is almost impossible. Accordingly, submarines usually don't bother.
In both World Wars, belligerents placed each other under blockade and used submarines as primary instruments of enforcing this.
Neutral ships are allowed to carry some cargoes into the ports of belligerent nations, and to conduct normal trade through war zones, but it is very hard to be accurately identified through a periscope lens and submariners are trained to be hunters. So... 'Torpedo los!'
In WW-1, American neutrality was severely challenged by U-Boat sinkings, although these alone were not enough to bring America into the war.
In WW-2, the U-Boats were notoriously careless, particularly off South America and a spate of sinkings in 1942 enraged Brazil and brought them into the war on the Allied side (Brazil made some significant contributions to the Allied War effort). Sinkings of coastal vessels, ferries, and major fishing vessels also drew Mexico to the Allied cause.
The U-Boats weren't alone in this. The Royal Navy torpedoed several Swedish ships. US submarines even sank American ships 'temporarliy' transferred to Soviet registration to carry Lend-Lease products to the USSR --the Russians were 'neutral' in the Pacific War until August 1945 and these ships had to pass through Japanese waters.
Use these controls to find questions to answer