1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Ede4ka [16]
3 years ago
9

Defend or oppose Eisenhower's use of the cia for covert operations during the cold war

History
2 answers:
marshall27 [118]3 years ago
8 0

In the context of the Cold War, the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency), created in 1947 from the new National Security Act sanctioned that same year, became a key piece of American anti-communist policy. As different authors point out, a sort of parallel state structure was articulated - a State within another State, with a large, separate and partially concealed budget, endowed with enormous powers and resources for the deployment of military activity without congressional control. If before the Eisenhower administration the so-called "covert activities" of the CIA were increasing ("the budget for covert operations had grown, from 4.7 million in 1949, to 82 million in 1952, the personnel involved in 302 to 2,812 with an additional 'staff per contract' of 3,142 overseas "), with his government they further increased their scale, with the CIA headed by Allen Dulles. In March 1954 the scope of what were considered "covert operations" was expanded: "propaganda, political action, economic warfare, flight measures, evasion and evacuation, subversion against hostile states or groups that include assistance to resistance movements, guerrilla and liberation groups; support for vernacular and anti-communist elements in the threatened countries of the free world; deceptive plans and operations, and all compatible activities that are necessary to achieve the purposes of this directive".

During the Eisenhower administration various covert actions were carried out by the CIA, highlighting the overthrow in August 1953 of the Iranian left-wing prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddeq, who had nationalized Iranian oil on March 20, 1951, and the establishment of a dictatorship by Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi with the support of the United States; the overthrow in June 1954 of the government of Jacobo Arbenz Guzman in Guatemala; the coup d'état in South Vietnam in April 1955 and the establishment of the dictatorship of Ngo Dinh Diem; and the attempted coup in Indonesia in 1958. The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 was also discreetly supported, although without any direct involvement in a country that was a member of the Warsaw Pact.

The policies of covert actions carried out during the Eisenhower administration were positive and necessary, since we must remember that the country was immersed in the Cold War, so the threat of communism was latent and effective. Then, any action designed to weaken it should be carried out.

Anastasy [175]3 years ago
7 0
I will defend. The threat of nuclear war was very real during the Cold War. No expense could be spared in preventing this.
You might be interested in
Why did germany attack the soviet union
Zanzabum
For Power and Territory - <span> Hitler regarded </span>communism<span> as Jewish </span>Bolshevism<span>. Hitler believed as part of his racial fantasies that communism had been invented by the Jews as part of a plan to take over the world. Consequently it was inevitable that he would invade Russia.</span>
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
During colonial times outside of New England, education was 
riadik2000 [5.3K]
A
Particularly in the southern colonies, education tended to be reserved for the gentry and upper-class people (plantation owners mainly). Slaves were not educated; in fact, it was illegal to teach slaves to read or write. This stemmed from the fact that a large portion of education involved the Bible, slaves who read the Bible could be expected to convert to Christianity, and Christians are forbidden to enslave one another by their religion. Significant social and economic inequality persisted in the South well into the 20th century. 
4 0
3 years ago
Great Britain and France avoided a take over by fascist by
maks197457 [2]

Answer:

Great Britain and France avoid a take over by fascists' by restricting freedom of speech.

Explanation:

Fascism is a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc. , and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.  

How Britain and France avoided fascist revolution inside their own country during rise of fascism in Italy and Germany?

What made Mussolini’s Fascism, and Lenin’s Communism too, was a specific and unique situation, never to be repeated in later history: namely, the presence of enormous masses of disaffected veterans, with recent experience of war at a very high technical level of skill, and angry about the condition of their country. (And of enormous amounts of weapons.) Fascism was not made by speeches or by money, but by tens of thousands of men gathering in armed bands to beat up enemies. And that being the case, what happened to the similar masses of veterans who came home to France, Britain, and America too, after 1918?

Well, France was exhausted. She had fought with her full strength from day one, whereas Britain had taken time to deploy its whole strength, and America and Italy had only entered the war much later. For five years, every man who could be spared had been at the Front. Her losses were larger in proportion than those of any other great power. And on the positive side, France, like Britain and America, was prosperous. The veterans went home to a country that was comparatively able to receive them, give them a place to be, and not foster any dangerous mass disaffection. This is of course relatively speaking. There will have been anger enough, irritation enough, even some disaffection. But the only real case of violence from below due to disaffection was the riot in Paris that followed the Stavisky affair in early 1934, and that, compared to what took place daily in other countries, was a very bad play of a riot.

ON the other hand, both America and Britain experienced situations that had more than a taste of Fascism, but that failed to develop into freedom-destroying movements. In America, Fascism could have come from above. The last few years of the Wilson administration were horrendous: the Red Scare fanaticized large strata of the population, and the hatred came from the top, from Wilson and his terrible AG Palmer. (Palmer was a Quaker. So was Richard Nixon. Is there a reason why Quakers in politics should prove particularly dangerous?) Hate and fear of “reds” was also the driving force of Italian Fascism; and Wilson and Palmer mobilized it in ways and with goals that Mussolini would have understood. Had Wilson not suffered his famous collapse, he might have been a real danger: he intended to run for a third term in office. And the nationwide spread of the new KKK, well beyond the bounds of the old South, shows that he might have found a pool of willing stormtroopers. Altogether, I think America dodged a bullet the size of a Gatling shot when Wilson collapsed in office.

Britain’s own Blackshirt moment took place in Ireland. Sociologically, culturally, psychologically, the Blacks and Tans were the Blackshirts of Britain - masses of disaffected veterans sent into the streets to harass and terrify political enemies, bullies in non-standard uniforms with a loose relationship with the authorities. Only, their relationship with public opinion developed in an exactly opposite direction. Whereas Italy’s majority, horrified by Socialist violence at home and by Communist brutality abroad, tended increasingly to excuse the Blackshirts and wink at their violence, in Britain - possibly because of the influence of the American media, which were largely against British rule in Ireland - the paramilitary force found itself increasingly isolated from the country’s mainstream, and eventually their evil reputation became an asset to their own enemies and contributed to British acceptance of Irish independence.

Thanks,
Eddie

5 0
1 year ago
What was the main reason for the shortage of priests in Virginia in the 1600s?
natka813 [3]
They did not want to travel long distances.
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which word refers to a promise to pay back money invested in the american revolutionary war effort?
Digiron [165]
I believe your answer is A
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • What was the purpose of the Mayflower Compact?
    8·1 answer
  • after the 1976 riots in Soweto, Desmond Tutu supported an economic boycott of his country. The economic boycott was designed to?
    15·1 answer
  • What grade was the person who made the current us flag?
    9·1 answer
  • Why did He<br> nryk Ross likely bury some of the photos he took in the war
    8·1 answer
  • Why did japan launch a surprise attack against the united states​
    7·1 answer
  • Which is an example of a public good?
    7·1 answer
  • What types of services do tribal governments provide?
    7·1 answer
  • Which achievement was the most important for the Minoans and Phoenicians?
    13·1 answer
  • help me!!!! i only have 80 points left because my points keep being wasted bc nobody answer my question or i will just get it an
    5·1 answer
  • G
    13·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!