Saturday, February 22, 2020

Nanking massacre Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Nanking massacre - Essay Example by historians to be one of the most shocking, ghastly, and revolting massacres perpetrated by Japanese soldiers in the course of the Second Sino-Japanese War. Even though Japan had been gnawing away at Northeastern China for years, beginning with the culmination of the Russo-Japanese War in the early 20th century and centered primarily in Manchuria, the second war between Japan and China, also called the War of Japanese Resistance, is widely known to have begun after the 1937 Marco Polo Bridge Incident. This event resulted in the eruption of total war between Japan and China. In China, Japan, the United States and the rest of the world, possibly no wartime barbarism committed by the Japanese against the Chinese people is more known far and wide than the Rape of Nanking. Nevertheless, whatever the importance of sheer recognition of the name, the memorial and history of the Nanjing massacre are deeply complicated. The significance and implication of the Nanking massacre have constantly evolved over time. Furthermore, the line dividing illegal violent acts against civilians and war crimes against combatant was unclear. Still, since 1937, scholars in the U.S., Japan, and China have struggled with the Nanking massacre, and, in every nation, over time, new interpretations are introduced. Not totally unforeseen, the known significance and implications of the Nanjing massacre have evolved according to the changing domestic and global political context of the period. The Pacific War and the Sino-Japanese War, from 1937 to 1945, influenced the memory and history of Nanking across the globe. The cold war, the Chinese civil war, and Japan’s downfall, from 1945 to 1971, brought about continuous modifications of the interpretation of the Nanjing massacre in China, Japan, and the U.S. From 1971 to 1989, the Japanese and American acknowledgment of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the Vietnam War, and the debate over Japan’s history textbooks brought about additional

Thursday, February 6, 2020

Reflection essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 3

Reflection - Essay Example The State presented the second charge on grounds that it was in general public interest that Bell be kept behind bars. The State supported their information that Bell had been convicted of First degree robbery, Third degree robbery, and possession of narcotics with the intent of selling them (STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. ARNOLD BELL, 2011). The State also presented information that Bell was released on supervision from Court when he was charged with the murder of Fumiati. So, the trial court heard the case for the second charge â€Å"whether the history of Bell conducted was of nature that he should be kept behind bars for an extended period† (STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. ARNOLD BELL, 2011). The trial court decided that it would be of best interest that Bell be kept behind bars for an extended period under 53a-35a. Bell appealed to this decision of the court claiming that it had violated his basic constitutional rights and that it was under the jury to decide whether to prolong the sentence rather than the trial court. The court agreed to Bell’s claim that it was indeed unconstitutional and remanded the second part of the case for a new hearing. The remand trial was unsuccessful as the jury failed to come up to a unanimous verdict, so a new trial was ordered. Bell asked for the second charge to be lifted on grounds that it was unconstitutional. On the new trial, both parties presented their justifications however, the jury concluded that there was sufficient evidence that Bell was guilty of crime and should serve a prolong sentence in view of public interest i.e. forty years imprisonment. The case’s decision on the first part i.e. the defendant was found guilty of murder and crime was justified as sufficient evidence was provided by the State on the matter. The trial court’s decision on the second part was indeed unconstitutional, and it needed the consent of the jury to prolong