How did president Adams avoid war?
141380
arguing against Hamilton that war should be a last resort to diplomacy. In this argument, the President won the nation the respect of its most powerful adversaries. Although Adams was fiercely criticized for signing the Alien and Sedition Acts, he never advocated their passage nor personally implemented them, and he pardoned the instigators of Fries's Rebellion. Seen in this light, Adams's legacy is one of reason, virtuous leadership, compassion, and a cautious but vigorous foreign policy. At the same time, Adams's stubborn independence left him politically isolated. He alienated his own cabinet, and his elite republicanism stood in stark contrast to the more egalitarian Jeffersonian democracy that was poised to assume power in the new century.
557849
there has to be war sometime. but i do not like it at all. i think that we can settle things with communication and agreement. i think that the war in iraq is because the president is not thinking about how to solve it without war. he says he is a christian but we do not believe in violence. \n                          -peace child
689241
First, he didn't lie. If you want to prove he lied, first list all the reasons he gave for going into Iraq, then show proof, from a valid news source that these were false, and that they were known to be false prior to the military action.\n\nOtherwise, why did the UN and Congress both authorize the use of force?\n\nAs for after he retires from office, at least he won't be some nasty asshole dictator-fellating terrorist-apologist lying sack of bitter manure like Carter or Clinton have been. Those 2 are intolerably loathsome for undermining America in the face of their enemies.
572347
The President is also the Commander-in-chief and can, as you put it, "make war". The Congress controls the purse strings and may or may not choose to fund it. Every President in the history of our country has always gone to Congress in order to "make war".
22917
The union blockaded the south to prevent them from obtaining supplies to carry on the war.  The south had virtually no factories, they were almost all up north.  The blockade strategy was very successful because by wars end the south was unable to not only feed itself but it was unable to arm itself sufficiently to wage war.
421498
Was a policy enacted by Woodrow Wilson in the World War 1 era.  It focused on national integrity, making moral decisions, and preserving peace instead of basing actions on material interests.  Was backed by William Jennings Bryant... and dealt mostly with negotiating peaceful treaties to waring nations.  \n\nInteresting enough, the policy does not work.  Wilson ended up interfering with more countries than Will Taft and Roosevelt, which is what he was coming out against.
958801
No military secrets if the President is not included.  Isuggest click on the internet:  Illuminati. \nsecrets are strewn there.
531084
You can't, because conflict is sometimes a positive force.  Look at the revolutionary war.
747087
In the old times it was  by fighting and killing the invaders.  Now if any nation wants to get  liberty and there is resistance, they have to try to move the world's opinion and make it clear of the situation that exists in the subdued country. By pacific ways is the only alternative today, which is better but almost impossible to obtain results  as long as there is no  real purpose to make a decision. The wise manipulation of  the public opinion that is possible today makes this proposition almost impossible \nThe invader will pretend to hear the affected nation but nothing will be done.The United Nations is not functional. It is organized in such a way that the power lies on a small group of large nations which protect their interests among them. The power of the weaker nations is nil.  They may only get honorary positions there.  As long as there is an economic or strategic interest on the other nation they will stay there and get the lion's share. They will try by all means to change the opinion in the subdued nation  by several ways including bringing in their people to displace the natives and making them feel inferior. In Alaska the proportion of non native able voters was overwhelming over the natives.  It does not matter whether the subdued country is friendly or not.  George Washington is a hero now but if the war against England would have been lost he would have been classified in a very offensive way.by the English and the local conservatives. He may have even suffered serious sanctions.
248359
how did sam adams promote the fear? or how did he end it/care for it.well the fact he jumped on their tea ship naked and dumped it all in the harbour could help. and the fact that he constantly was trying to push for freedom, and knew how to fight on their front.
753964
In 1823, in his his 7th annual State of the Union Address, President John Monroe stated that the U.S. no longer recognized the right of any European Power to colonize in the Americas.  He further stated that the U.S. would remain neutral in any conflict between European Powers, or between a European Power and it's colonies, unless the latter was in the Americas, in which case the U.S. would consider the war an attack on itself.  We started ignoring that one in WW1 and have never looked back, the Falklands Conflict between Britain and Argentina was a clear violation, we didn't bat an eye.  Given the technology available even as far back as WW2, that kind of isolationism simply isn't an option any more.  Be nice if it was, I agree, but it ain't.
154663
That there is only two options is wrong.  To take on the mantle of peace and always be the one who takes the first step away from aggression.  Further, to work to improve the lot of your people.  Better education, a more protective society, a better standard of living.  This approach will bring the world to support you for total independence.\n\nTaking the path of war will only earn you (and rightly so) rejection.
346272
He kept the ragged Continental army together. He avoided a direct encounter with the superior British army. He never had enough men or supplies. This was up until Yorktown.\nHe later presided over the Constitutional Convention. He knew enough to let others who understood finances and government much better than he do their work. By the force of his personality he kept antagonists like Jefferson & Hamilton at bay.
734324
Arrogant tyrants like George W. Bush see war as a means to increase their wealth and power.\n\nThe UN, a talk shop, has undoubtedly prevented wars. But it cannot prevent the actions of tyrants who consider themselves to be above the law and/or directed by God.
715841
funny that Rangel said it was a way to deter politicians from starting a war....wtf does that mean when we're in the middle of one
296293
The British tried catching him at the Battle of Lexington and Concord, but because Paul Revere and others warned him, the British did not catch him.\n\n"Samuel Adams was born in Boston, Massachusetts on September 27, 1722. He was a leader of the fight against British colonial rule, and a signer of the Declaration of Independence. Adams was a cousin of John Adams who became President of the United States.\n\nSamuel Adams graduated in 1743 from Harvard College with a Master of Arts degree. After college he entered private business, and throughout this period was an outspoken participant in Boston town meetings. When his business failed in 1764 Adams entered politics full-time, and was elected to the Massachusetts legislature. He lead the effort to establish a committee of correspondence that published a Declaration of Colonial Rights he had written.\n\nAdams was a vocal opponent of several laws passed by the British Parliament to raise revenue in the American Colonies, including the Tea Act which gave a British trading company a monopoly on the import of tea into the colonies. This opposition reached its peak on December 16, 1773 when a group of Bostonians dumped a British cargo of tea into Boston Harbor. This act of resistance is referred to as the Boston Tea Party.\n\nThe British Parliament responded to the "Boston Tea Party" by passing a set of laws referred to as the "Intolerable Acts." These laws included the closing of Boston Harbor and the restriction town meetings. Adams then urged a general boycott of British trade by the American Colonies.\n\nIn 1774 the Massachusetts legislature send Adams and four others as its representatives to the First Continental Congress. Adams served Massachusetts again at the Second Continental Congress where he was an advocate for independence and confederation for the American Colonies."
251732
HISTORY LESSON FOR TODAY.\nPAY ATTENTION NOW CHILDREN, GEORGE WASHINGTON WAS THE ONLY PRESIDENT TO GO INTO BATTLE, EVERY OTHER PRESIDENT SINCE, THEN ARE CHICKENS**T COWARDS. CLASS DISMISSED.\n(BOY WAS I GLAD I ATTENDED THAT CLASS).