Me ! during the holocaust, the world saw a major power committing unspeakable atrocities against its own population. did the international community have to try and stop this? if they have the power to end this suffering, is it their responsibility to try? what do you think? why or why not?

Explanation:

It's more complicated than the simple yes / no answer expected. Many people were horrified by the Holocaust, especially those who had first hand experience with the Nazi regime.

By 1942, the United States was just getting into the war; they were just revving up their response to Pearl. The American people were just getting used to the idea that they were involved whether they liked it or not.

England was all that was really left of the European Alliance and Russia was an uncertain friend at this point. What could be done? Denmark and Holland were conquered but they managed to get their Jews out of danger, and Norway and Sweden were willing enough recipients.

Italy, after the fall of Mussolini, was a model in attitude of how the resistance should take place. Italy did have its own antisemitic laws, but they refused to cooperate with a government that was going to kill her (Italy's ) citizens. The good thing was not only was the clergy involved, so was the Army. Both abhorred what the Germans were doing. So things were done is the point I'm making.

Not enough!

For the most part, Poland, the Ukraine, some of Russia all agreed either openly or silently with what Germany was doing. The allies and axis were already at war. Some people suggest that Auschwitz and Treblinka should be bombed. They had a point. But that would have made Britain and America just as guilty as Hitler and they would have had difficulty explaining why they did that.

Fast forward to recent conflicts like Iraq. Iraq is much worse off now than before Saddam was deposed. The root of this war was not democracy or anything noble. The root of this war was oil and influence in the middle east. Did anyone seriously oppose Iraq? I don't think so. Americans might have opposed it more if  the casualties had been higher.

Since I tend to be a liberal peace type, I think that the International community has a responsibility to stop murders based on hatred. But I see lots of reasons why my attitude has its flaws.

- three-quarters or two-thirds..

- "the constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the house of representatives and the senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures."

< 3