Intentions or Results?

I think intentions matter more than results. After all, good intentions are meant to produce good results. Without the proper intentions, the wanted results seem unlikely. The response of the world to Nazi genocide shows a case where certain intentions created other results that were indeed “good.” In the case of World War II, it’s not that the world response to Nazi aggression was wrong, or had bad intentions, it’s just that they reacted at a later time. The world went in with the intentions of putting a stop to Nazi aggression, and as a result stopped the genocide of World War II. So is the world worth of shame for not intervening earlier? After World War I, it makes sense why the world was staying out of foreign affairs, but I don’t think this justifies not acting in effort to stop inhumane atrocities.

In modern times, it’s easier to judge our acts by our intentions, because the results aren’t always fully played out. In the Middle East, for example, we brought in forces in an effort to set up democratic governments. Our intentions were right, but the wanted results seem intangible. Instead, we’ve caused the death of many soldiers and civilians.

"Motivating Students With Cash-For-Grades Incentive"

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/21/world/middleeast/21iht-educLede21.html?pagewanted=1&ref=education

Motivating students seems to be a common frustration among teachers. How exactly do you get a student who doesn't care about school to care about getting good grades? When I first saw this, I thought, "An A=$$$," and wondered where all that money would come from. Our country is making education cuts as it is, so how are we going to afford to PAY students? In the United States now students are rewarded with scholarships to college for good grades. This fails to cover all exceptional students however, and straight up cash payments have been proposed. Say there was an endless pool of cash, would this even work? Consider the following video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc  ...it says that money motivators don't work for cognitive thinking. Surprised?
Beyond that, I don't think it would be a good idea to motivate students with money incentives. It would really change the way society worked. Students are reliant on their parents financially, but if students started getting paid, could this reliance reverse?
It's true that students need more motivation these days, but money doesn't seem to be the answer.

Gilbert 80-98

Why did military planners always hope, and plan for, an immediate defeat when in reality that seems unrealistic?

Fay makes the argument that all European countries are equally responsible for war. Each nation had its own role in causing World War I, and the blame cannot be placed solely on Germany. Fischer on the other hand places the majority of the responsibility on Germany. It's difficult to place that much blame on Germany, however, because other countries were also at fault. Serbia, for example, knew about the plan behind the assassination of the Arch Duke, but didn't take action to stop it. This shows that Serbia wasn't against war causing actions. Russia and France came together to form an alliance, showing their preparation for war. Britain didn't take any preventative measures when it appeared as if war might break out. More European nations that just Germany are responsible for the war. Germany can be held a tad more responsible, though. Germany itself admitted to war causing actions, and prepared for war more than any other country. Germany's alliance with Austria-Hungary may have "dragged" them into the war, but if it weren't for previous actions by Germany, the war may not have started. Fay is correct in that a number of countries hold some responsibility in causing the war, but Germany is more responsible than any other nation.

Dodged a Bullet.

If Archduke Ferdinand weren't assassinated, would World War I have started?

~I think that the assassination caused the war by spreading war feelings to a large amount of people. It was an attention grabber, and stirred up a lot of emotion around the world. I don't think that quarreling over colonies alone would have caused the outbreak of World War I. Say Ferdinand had dodged the bullet, and the assassination didn't happen... it would be easy to say no, the war would not have started, but I think it would have been just a matter of time. I think some event would have had to happen that caused a similar uproar for the war to start, however.. a war of that caliber would not have started based on previous events alone.

Second Naval Law

The Second Naval Law was a policy of Germany to be equip to take on the Royal Navy. Germany built up its naval fleet to try to match that of Britain's. This became significant because Britain saw it as "an unjustified threat," and Britain, as well as France, was suddenly trying to trump Germany's new and improved naval fleet. Rivalries with Germany heightened as a result of the Second Naval Law. Germany showed itself as a threat to the rest of the world.

"Curiously Civilised War"

John Keegan argues that World War I was "a curiously civilised war" because no major material damage was done. No major cities were wiped out, and for the most part civilian land was left alone. I don't totally agree with Keegan's statement however, because so many human lives were lost. Keegan himself says that World War I "damaged civilization."  I'm not quite sure any war can be labeled as civilised... it seems to me civilised war is an oxymoron. Diplomacy, although it doesn't always 'work,' would be more fitting under the category of "civilised."

The Agagdir Crisis

War nearly broke out when a little German gunboat occupying ocean waters was followed up with bigger warships.Germany clearly showed that it was ready for war. France claimed that Germany didn't have the right for warships on the Atlantic, and Britain joined to support France in this claim.he British Atlantic fleet took a detour to the Moroccan coast, and war seemed imminent. Germany backed down however, and for the moment, war was avoided. The entire crisis seems a bit ridiculous... All of this commotion started by one gunboat. This crisis shows the brewing tensions between nations, and how ready for war the world really was. France and Britain's reaction to the German warships shows how alliances were a major contribution to the start of World War I.