RESPONSE PAPER

Response paper



Response Paper

Response to Historical Overview

Michael Klare mentions a new thirty year war in his article. He says that outlines of this new thirty years are akin to the earlier thirty years war of 1618 to 1648. There are a number of factors on the basis of which this new war is similar to the old thirty years war. First of all, in the perfect starting, Michael resembles this new war with the war of 1618 to 1648. The reason mentioned by Michael about how old thirty years war started and how it ended can show similarity between this new war and thirty years war. The main reason behind that old thirty years war was emerging nation states. This new war is also fought on the phenomenon of emerging nation state. The developed countries have fear that nations that possesses resource of oil may emerge in the near future. In order to impede their development, they are indulged in this war. The point according to which these two wars are not similar is that as mentioned by the Michael that this new war would be less bloodshed. As the old thirty years, war conventionally a typical war in which the army took part. This new war would be more politicized in nature. This war would more be fought in the conference rooms and on the discussion table (Marc, 2004).

Another way in which these two wars can be compared is the consequences of the war. As Michael rightly mentioned in his article, that this new war would result in a different world as it did in the old thirty years war. The old thirty years war resulted in the weakening of Spain. The looser of this war the looser of the war will be the weakening side whereas the winner would possesses the major and important resources of the world and ultimately would be the stronger side (Marc, 2004).

Response to Realism

The maxim “strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept”. This maxim can be witnessed and observed in the real world if we make an attempt to analyze the political situation that is currently prevalent in this world. In my opinion, this maxim is perfectly correct and suits the current situations. The attack of US on Afghanistan and the US invasion of Iraq suggest the practical implication of this maxim. In both the situations, Unite States is the one that is the strongest. United States has done what it wanted to do. In response to the actions of United States, Afghanistan and Iraq did not even show slight resistance. This happened because they knew that they are weaker than United States. That is why they decided to better accept what they were offered by United States. In the corresponding context, the position of United State can also be considered as weak in the short term if we analyze it in the context of the incident of ...