Schizophrenia
contestada

[100 POINTS]
Read this excerpt from President Truman’s State of the Union address in 1951:

All free nations are exposed and all are in peril. Their only security lies in banding together. No one nation can find protection in a selfish search for a safe haven from the storm. The free nations do not have any aggressive purpose. We want only peace in the world--peace for all countries. No threat to the security of any nation is concealed in our plans and programs. We had hoped that the Soviet Union, with its security assured by the Charter of the United Nations, would be willing to live and let live. But I am sorry to say that has not been the case. The imperialism of the czars has been replaced by the even more ambitious, more crafty, and more menacing imperialism of the rulers of the Soviet Union. This new imperialism has powerful military forces. It is keeping millions of men under arms. It has a large air force and a strong submarine force. It has complete control of the men and equipment of its satellites. It has kept its subject peoples and its economy in a state of perpetual mobilization. The present rulers of the Soviet Union have shown that they are willing to use this power to destroy the free nations and win domination over the whole world. The Soviet imperialists have two ways of going about their destructive work. They use the method of subversion and internal revolution, and they use the method of external aggression. In preparation for either of these methods of attack, they stir up class strife and disorder. They encourage sabotage. They put out poisonous propaganda. They deliberately try to prevent economic improvement.

How did Truman’s attitude toward the Soviet Union change between 1946 and 1951?

Support your answer with at least one quotation from each excerpt.

Take your time!

Respuesta :

In his 1946 speech, Truman mentioned that the allied powers, including the Soviet Union, were unanimously working toward promoting peace and freedom of expression in the world. The following lines from the 1946 speech support this point:


Now you can give the other guy who answered brainliest:D

lilamedli8707

Answer:

Here's how I answered:

Truman became more aggressive towards the Soviet Union between 1946 and 1951. In the first excerpt he says, "In addition to these meetings, and, in accordance with the agreement at Yalta, the Foreign Ministers of Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and the United States conferred together in San Francisco last spring, in Potsdam in July, in London in September, and in Moscow in December. These meetings have been useful in promoting understanding and agreement among the three governments." He regarded the Soviet Union in an equal and respectful way. There is no hostility in the statement. However, in the second excerpt, he says, "The present rulers of the Soviet Union have shown that they are willing to use this power to destroy the free nations and win domination over the whole world." He regards the Soviet Union as destroyers who are ready to do anything to gain power over the world. He portrays the Soviets in an extremely negative light which fuels his aggression toward the Soviet Union. 

Explanation:

This is the exact edmentum answer as well:

In his 1946 speech, Truman mentioned that the allied powers, including the Soviet Union, were unanimously working toward promoting peace and freedom of expression in the world. The following lines from the 1946 speech support this point:

Early in 1945, at Yalta, the three major powers broadened and solidified this base of understanding. There fundamental decisions were reached concerning the occupation and control of Germany. There also a formula was arrived at for the interim government of the areas in Europe, which were rapidly being wrested, from Nazi control. This formula was based on the policy of the United States that people be permitted to choose their own form of government by their own freely expressed choice without interference from any foreign source.

However, in his 1951 speech, Truman seems to be thoroughly disappointed with the Soviet Union’s agenda to expand its territory. He openly criticizes the leaders of the Soviet Union for their expansionist policies. The following lines from the 1951 speech support this point:

We had hoped that the Soviet Union, with its security assured by the Charter of the United Nations, would be willing to live and let live. But, I am sorry to say that has not been the case. The imperialism of the czars has been replaced by the even more ambitious, more crafty, and more menacing imperialism of the rulers of the Soviet Union.

Use either one! Have a great day!

Otras preguntas