I come to you this evening to discuss the extremely important and rapidly changing circumstances in Southwest Asia. . . .
. . . Massive Soviet military forces have invaded the small, nonaligned, sovereign nation of Afghanistan, which had hitherto not been an occupied satellite of the Soviet Union.
Fifty thousand heavily armed Soviet troops have crossed the border and are now dispersed throughout Afghanistan, attempting to conquer the fiercely independent Muslim people of that country.
The Soviets claim, falsely, that they were invited into Afghanistan to help protect that country from some unnamed outside threat. But the President, who had been the leader of Afghanistan before the Soviet invasion, was assassinated – along with several members of his family – after the Soviets gained control of the capital city of Kabul. Only several days later was the new puppet leader even brought into Afghanistan by the Soviets.
This invasion is an extremely serious threat to peace because of the threat of further Soviet expansion into neighboring countries in Southwest Asia and also because such an aggressive military policy is unsettling to other peoples throughout the world.
This is a callous violation of international law and the United Nations Charter. It is a deliberate effort of a powerful atheistic government to subjugate an independent Islamic people.
We must recognize the strategic importance of Afghanistan to stability and peace. A Soviet-occupied Afghanistan threatens both Iran and Pakistan and is a steppingstone to possible control over much of the world’s oil supplies.
The United States wants all nations in the region to be free and to be independent. If the Soviets are encouraged in this invasion by eventual success, and if they maintain their dominance over Afghanistan and then extend their control to adjacent countries, the stable, strategic, and peaceful balance of the entire world will be changed. This would threaten the security of all nations including, of course, the United States, our allies, and our friends.
Therefore, the world simply cannot stand by and permit the Soviet Union to commit this act with impunity. Fifty nations have petitioned the United Nations Security Council to condemn the Soviet Union and to demand the immediate withdrawal of all Soviet troops from Afghanistan.
. . . [N]either the United States nor any other nation which is committed to world peace and stability can continue to do business as usual with the Soviet Union.
I have already recalled the United States Ambassador from Moscow back to Washington. He’s working with me and with my other senior advisers in an immediate and comprehensive evaluation of the whole range of our relations with the Soviet Union.
The successful negotiation of the SALT II treaty1 has been a major goal and a major achievement of this administration, and we Americans, the people of the Soviet Union, and indeed the entire world will benefit from the successful control of strategic nuclear weapons through the implementation of this carefully negotiated treaty.
However, because of the Soviet aggression, I have asked the United States Senate to defer further consideration of the SALT II treaty so that the Congress and I can assess Soviet actions and intentions and devote our primary attention to the legislative and other measures required to respond to this crisis. As circumstances change in the future, we will, of course, keep the ratification of SALT II under active review in consultation with the leaders of the Senate.
The Soviets must understand our deep concern. We will delay opening of any new American or Soviet consular facilities, and most of the cultural and economic exchanges currently under consideration will be deferred. Trade with the Soviet Union will be severely restricted. . . .
Along with other countries, we will provide military equipment, food, and other assistance to help Pakistan defend its independence and its national security against the seriously increased threat it now faces from the north. The United States also stands ready to help other nations in the region in similar ways.
Neither our allies nor our potential adversaries should have the slightest doubt about our willingness, our determination, and our capacity to take the measures I have outlined tonight. I have consulted with leaders of the Congress, and I am confident they will support legislation that may be required to carry out these measures.
History teaches, perhaps, very few clear lessons. But surely one such lesson learned by the world at great cost is that aggression, unopposed, becomes a contagious disease. . . .
C. Japanese feudalism lasted much longer than the European system
Explanation:
The Japanese feudal system lasted until the 19th century. It ended with the fall of the shogunate regime that had been going on since the early 17th century. The new historical era is the Meiji Era, in which Japan quickly modernized and industrialized, adopting Western models. In Europe, feudalism existed roughly until the 15th century.
B) a German immigrant searching for religious freedom and tolerance
Explanation:
The Middle Colonies were the ones that were the most tolerant when it came to religion and ethnicity. They were something in between the New England and the South colonies. Because these colonies was tolerant to different groups of people, a German immigrant would most definitely seek to move into some of them in order to find religious freedom and tolerance. The South was much strict when ti come to religion and tradition, while the New England colonies were dominated by Puritans.
<span>France and Great Britain were able to produce more ships than Germany.
this give both of these nations an advantage against Germany during the world war. But despite able to produce more ships and guns with cheaper price, the quality of the weapons and vehicles are considerably lower compared to Germany (the france and British army often ditched their own weapon in order to get weapons made by the Germans.</span>
The death of Lenin affected the political environment in the Soviet Union through the leading to the power struggle between Stalin and Trotsky.
Correct Answer : Option C
Explanation:
During the assassination attempt over the Lenin, it made him incapable of any activity sticking to the wheelchair. Even during his lifetime of active phases, he always thought of as who would succeed him, and he always felt that Stalin is more powerful than he himself, and with this much amount of power Stalin becomes vulnerable and in a sort an incapable successor.
The death caused the struggle of power between the right wing of Stalin to conflict with left wing of Trotsky. Trotsky, provoked in the public and party for his position but he failed. at the end, Trotsky was expelled out from the Soviet Union.
