Jump to content

IS this question okay?


dmswll8543

Recommended Posts

To what extent was Churchill responsible for the bombing of Dresden?

Is this question okay?

If that question doesn't work, are these questions okay?

- What was the significance of Dresden?

- What was the significance of bombing of Dresden?

OR what do you think of this one?

- To what extent was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki justified?

Could you help me to phrase the question better?

Also, can I choose primary sources for evaluation?

Please help, thanks

(btw whats up with me and the bombings? :b)

Edited by dmswll8543
Link to post
Share on other sites

To what extent was Churchill responsible for the bombing of Dresden?

I guess this could work. I don't know much about the Dresden bombing.

If that question doesn't work, are these questions okay?

- What was the significance of Dresden?

- What was the significance of bombing of Dresden?

It would be: what was the significance of the bombing of Dresden. but honestly, I like the previous question the best, about Churchill, because it allows for some controversy.

OR what do you think of this one?

- To what extent was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki justified?

Could you help me to phrase the question better?

Umm, no, because you would need to define "justified". Justified to you could be something completely different to someone else, depending on mindsets, cultures, etc. Justified is too abstract a word to use for a historical investigation, in my opinion.

Also, can I choose primary sources for evaluation?

I did, and my teacher didn't have a problem with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add some points,

Your first question could work, however you will find while going through sources you have to distiguish between Churchill's policies and British government policy. You will find a lot of books going heavily into politics which isn't nice if you don't want it.

The 'What was the significance of Dresden?' could actually work if you state in relation to what. ie what was the significance of (the bombing of) Dreseden in ....?

The Hiroshima and Nagasaki question is more of an EE topic where you have the words and time to play around with ethics and morales. Not suitable for a History IA (despite it being rich in historiography). However, if you find some really good military historians who discuss logistics rather than ethics that might be a good starting point as they will discuss 'neccesity' and 'cost' and could approach it from a military point of view rather than a political.

It is recommended that your two sources are diffrent either in perpective or in nature. So two sources, primary or secondary, pro-nation A or pro-nation B, orthodox historian and post-revisionist historian, are all good combinations

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...