Skip to main content

How did Stalin, Churchill, and Truman contribute to the development of the cold war?

Towards the end of World War II, Stalin was already putting in place measures for a communist takeover. On the other hand, Churchill sought the survival of the British Empire and the territory’s supremacy. The United States under Roosevelt and later Truman was focused on economic supremacy and the establishment of global institutions to foster world peace. Supremacy struggles between the three strong groups led to conflicts emanating from underhanded deals among the powers.


After the war, Stalin strengthened the Soviet Union’s foothold in Eastern and Central Europe. The United States and Western powers secured Western Europe. The United States later bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but Truman prevented Soviet forays in Japan. The situation deteriorated when the Stalin and Truman administrations prepared for a supremacy war due to what seemed to be an expansionist agenda. In addition, Churchill’s “Iron Curtain” speech supported an Anglo-American coalition to face the Soviets. Grandstanding by the different leaders eventually led to the Cold War.


Stalin was stronger at the outset with control of Eastern and Central Europe. However, the Containment policy and the Truman Doctrine eventually forced an end to the war.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more