Uniforms In School :: essays research papers

Uniforms In School Uniforms should definitely be used in school systems. Everything about it makes sense. Not everyone is going to be happy about it at first, but they will slowly but surely adjust. Uniforms free students of the stress on what to wear in the morning. I usually have that problem, as well as my brother. Uniforms also relieve the tension, or "break the ice", when new students come in, since they will be wearing the same thing. This will benefit both the new student and the class as a whole. The uniforms will build a sense of unity within the school. Instead of everyone as a separate "team", everyone will be in the same "team". This will benefit the whole school. Uniforms free students of the stress on what to wear in the morning. Many students, including myself, stand in front of their closets and just stare, trying to decide on what kind of shirt to wear as well as what kind of pants or shorts. The uniforms will speed up the morning "getting-up" process, thus reducing tardiness in school that I know is a problem in my first period class. The enforcement of uniforms will relieve the tension between the new students and the students that are already there. The uniforms will expedite the process of making new friends for the new student since the uniforms will help the new student feel a sense of "belonging". This helps the majority of the school becoming friends with each other. This obviously helps the class and also the school as a whole, as there will be less fights and controversy between students. Uniforms will build a sense of unity within the school. The students will feel they are a part of one whole team charging toward their ultimate goal: graduation and college. The sense of unity will bring more fans and support for sports events and help the school financially.

The Causes of the Cold War - Post-Revisionist :: American America History

Dwight D. Eisenhower once said, "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signified, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold but not clothed." There was never a war that this idea can be more correct applied to than the Cold War. According to noted author and Cold War historian Walter Lippman, the Cold War can be defined as a state of tension between states, which behave with great distrust and hostility towards each other, but do not resort to violence. The Cold War encompasses a period from the end of the Second World War (WWII), in 1945, to the fall of the Soviet Union, in 1989. It also encompassed the Korean and Vietnam Wars and other armed conflicts in the Middle East and Africa, that, essentially, were not wars for people but instead for territories and ideologies. "Nevertheless, like its predecessors, the Cold War has been a worldwide power contest in which one expanding power has threatened to make itself predominant, and in which other powers have banded together in a defensive coalition to frustrate it---as was the case before 1815, as was the case in 1914-1918 as was the case from 1939-1945" (Halle 9). From this power contest, the Cold War erupted. In April 1945, Russian forces that had been triumphant at Stalingrad had pushed the German forces back into Germany and American and British forces that had been victorious in their invasion of Normandy did the same; they met at the Elbe River in central Germany (Lukacs 17). Europe was separated into two independent halves, one Russian occupied and the other American; from this division, the Cold War emerged. "When a power vacuum separates great powers, as one did the United States and the Soviet Union at the end of World War II, they are unlikely to fill it without bumping up against and bruising each other" (Gaddis). This 'bumping' and 'bruising' caused the tensions and hostilities that surfaced in the years following WWII. There are three doctrines examining the origins of the Cold War: Orthodox, the belief that "the intransigence of Leninist ideology, the sinister dynamics of a totalitarian society, and the madness of Stalin" (McCauley 88) caused the Cold War; Revisionist, the id ea that "American policy offered the Russians no real choice...either acquiesce to American proposals or be confronted with American power or hostility" (McCauley 90) and thus, America caused the war; and the

Premodern Religion

Paul Lambert Hum 251 Professor Horten 9 / 26 / 2012 The Facade of Pre-Modern Religion During the pre-modern age there was perhaps no larger an aspect of everyday life than religion. Today’s day and age is a stark contrast, as religion has for the most part taken a backseat in importance. From the pre-modern age to now, religion has changed completely. Pre-modern religion held political power locally, and all across Europe. Today religion holds a mostly spiritual power for the truly devout.This essay will discover the role and importance that religion played in the pre-modern age, and how it permeated the lives of those living in it. In pre-modern times there wasn’t a diverse society like the one we currently live in. In the pre-modern age everybody had their own role in the community. In this feudal society, there was very little opportunity for advancement. Because of the lack of education at this time people only had a few skills, which they would put to use to make a living. Most people were farmers who worked the land most of their lives to provide food for their village, and family.There were others that had specialty skills, who may have been a blacksmith, or a shoe maker; but what they all had in common was that they were all hard workers, who had hard lives. In a pre-modern village the noble family, or the wealthiest families, would have presided over the village. These nobles would have essentially ruled over the villages and made sure things ran smoothly. About the only chance of becoming something other than a craftsman, or farmer, was to be born into one of these noble families.If you were privileged you could become a knight, but many of these people would become clergy. These clergy were one of the biggest aspects of the pre-modern society. Each village had a church, and that church was the main center of community life. The priests or clergymen were at the center of this as well. The clergy played the role of intermediary to God. Th ese men were also some of the only educated people around, although their education may have been still somewhat limited. In addition to the church, the clergy would have run the monastery.Monasteries were multifaceted facilities where the sick in the community could be cared for, the poor fed, and where monks would have studied, and also made copies of books. Clergy would have been at the head of religious ceremonies, as we saw in â€Å"The Return of Martin Guerre,† where at his marriage the priest performs the actual marriage ceremony; along with blessing of the bride and groom so that they may be fertile and produce many children. The largest role that clergy would have played though would have been as the spiritual leader of the community.One of the biggest differences between religion in pre-modern times and today was the public nature of personal religious faith. Today our own personal religious beliefs are usually kept to yourself, unless you are talking with someone c lose to you, or are having a theological discussion. In pre-modern life everyone was religious, and your religious beliefs were a public matter. At a time when the mass public is so vastly uneducated, the need for counsel with clergy was in high demand.As we read in the book â€Å"Year of Wonders,† the local clergyman, Michael Mompellion, from the beginning of the book, because of his role of clergy, is always being asked for help. In the beginning of the book Anna has to work hard to keep Miss Bradford from bursting into the rectory to seek out the counsel of the Rector, Mompellion. Until the end of the book when we see Mompellion’s true colors show through, he does seem like a very good, level headed, leader for the community.Although his actual holiness may have been more of an act, due to some of his strange actions throughout the book; it seems that the village may not have made it through the plague without his leadership, both spiritual and actual. Michael Mompe llion is the one who first suggests that the village must quarantine themselves to prevent the spread of the plague to other villages. He is the one who stands up to the wealthy Bradford family, warning them of the potential for spreading the plague if they leave the village.In this confrontation Mompellion is shown to have the best interests of not only the village, but others surrounding by stating â€Å"but think of those you are putting at risk†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (110). This is in stark contrast to Colonel Bradford whose family is looked up to in the village doesn’t take the responsibility of staying and setting an example for the rest of them. Colonel Bradford clearly states his main concern, â€Å"The colonel replied coldly. â€Å"I am merely doing what any man of means and sense must do: safeguarding what is mine. †(110).Mompellion is also shown to give tremendous spiritual leadership. Mompellion in his sermon to the village; embraces the plague, as a test from God . He implores the village to view the plague in the same way. Mompellion states that the plague has brought God nearer to the village than ever before, and perhaps as close as he will ever come in all of their lives. Mompellion tests their faith in God here, and even though most of the villagers stay, their behavior afterwards is less than holy. Throughout the book Anna and Elinor Mompellion tend to the needs of the villagers.The two help with births, and when villagers begin to fall ill, they tend to them until death; and Michael Mompellion tends to their spiritual needs. Michael Mompellion is never cast in the holiest of holies light from the beginning. In the first interaction we see him in he tells Miss Bradford to go to hell. Mompellion also takes advantage of vulnerable Anna towards the end of the book after his wife is murdered, and sleeps with her. Mompellion is seen taking advantage of his position in the community; even what relatively small power he does have, which is ve ry small compared to the Catholic Church of the time.The Catholic Church played probably the biggest role in religion in the pre-modern age. At the head of this church was the Pope. In the Catholic Church the Pope acted as a king. Cardinals came second in the hierarchy. The power of the Catholic Church saturated the pre-modern day. Although Europe was still made up of many different countries, the Catholic Church essentially over powered the political will of any one country. The Pope especially had an almost unlimited power both politically and religiously. The role of the Pope was to act as an intermediary to God on earth.This led to the uneducated pre-modern people of the time to blindly follow most if not all commands that came from the Pope. In addition to having the power of a king, the Pope pursued power and wealth as if he were one. Over time the Catholic Church amassed land and wealth. The Pope was anything but holy by taking advantage of his perceived power of intermediary to God. The Catholic Church furthered their power over the pre-modern people by perpetuating a view of God as a brutal enforcer, who dealt out punishment for sin with very little mercy.The church emphasized fearing God. This kept the people obeying the rule of the church, and the Pope. This rule continued for the most part until the reformation. At this time large gothic cathedrals began to be built. These churches were very tall, with thick stone walls, and large stained glass windows. The cathedrals were designed to give the pre-modern people a sense of the presence of God inside, and a sense of the power and majesty of the Catholic Church by the sheer size on the outside.Religion played a major role in the lives of pre-modern people in Europe. For whatever reason it may have been; fear of the Catholic Church, or excommunication, a desire to fit in, or just plain old true belief. I believe it was a little bit of all of those factors. But the role of religion in pre-modern life di d have several key functions for those clergy in power. It allowed them to be an inspiration to the people they overlooked. In the case of Michael Mompellion, he was the one who kept the cool head in the face of impending danger.That religious power was also easy to take advantage of, and led to the search for more wealth, land, and political power. By using the people’s belief that the Pope was really chosen by God as his voice on earth, the Catholic Church was able to hide behind their religious office, and make people think they were doing good, when in fact it was only a facade. Works Cited Vigne, Daniel, dir. Le Retour de Martin Guerre. 1982. Film. 11 Sep 2012. Brooks, Geraldine. Year of Wonders. New York: Viking Penguin, 2001. Print. Horten, Gerd. â€Å"Pre-Modern Age . † Concordia University, Portland. 9/5-14/2012. Lecture.

The Muse Of A Nurse In 1916 –

It was going to be an ordinary afternoon, the 7th of July 191 6_ Ever since It was declared that war had begun on the 28th of July, the whole country had been busting and screaming at the thought of the combat. Most men were Jumping at the idea of volunteering, bragging about their strength and how it will all end by Christmas. I would have liked to have thought that, but I simply didnt have the luxury. My father was 47; too old to be enlisted. He was married anyway, so he couldn't.The war had been on-going for little less than 2 years. A letter came through the post this morning addressed to me, but I had neglected to read It, as I had to be at the local hospital to tend to some accidents that had occurred on the railway. By the time I got back, I was itching to read it. I had to do chores first, however, before I could even look at the letter. Ironing, feeding the chickens and pigs, pulling up the potatoes, checking Jimmy hasnt grazed his knees alling out of the tree and then clean ing out the hay in the stables.It took about three hours, which was infuriating. To top it all off, Jimmy insisted on getting yet another demonstration on how to climb the oak tree. He's only 9, bless him, and he Just cant seem to get the hang of keeping the strength in his arms and wrists. â€Å"Jimmy, I don't really want to do this right now†¦ † I told him, trying to pry him off my hip. He was about half my size, since he's 9 and I'm 23.

Ethics Case Study

Jerry McCall is an office assistant for Dr. William’s. Jerry has received training as both a medical assistant and Licensed practical nurses (LPN). During the time the receptionist is out to lunch Jerry is covering for her. Jerry is faced with a common problem in the health care field today. Jerry has been asked to call in a refill for Valium to a pharmacy for a patient. This paper will address why Jerry is not qualified to refill any prescription medication. If Jerry is protected if a lawsuit is filled.Jerry’s decision is a tough one, legal and ethical issues and advice will be provided for Jerry’s use. Jerry has received training as a medical assistant and a LPN and has gained knowledge about prescription drugs. Jerry knows that with his training he is not allowed to refill a prescription medication. Jerry knows that Valium is an addictive drug. Jerry is not allowed to refill this prescription because he is not a medical doctor, dentist, or a psychologist.Jerry has training for a LPN and knows that no matter what type of medication a patient is asking him to refill he is not allowed to. If there are no more refills on the prescription bottle the only thing Jerry can do in this position is to schedule the patient for an appointment with the physician. The patient is asking for a refill for Valium but could also ask for a refill for high blood pressure medication. If the patient has to call because he or she is out of refills on the prescription bottle needs to renew the prescription which can only be done by a medical doctor.The doctrine of respondent superior is defined that the employer is liable for the employee’s actions (Farlex, INC, 2011). If a lawsuit is filled Jerry may possibly be protected. The reading did not state if Jerry carried his own malpractice insurance or just relayed on his employer’s insurance. If Jerry does have his own malpractice insurance he would know that his insurance will pay an attorney to repre sent him before the Board of Nursing (Mackay, 2006). Jerry could have a lawsuit filed on him if he does refill the Valium and possible even if he does not refill it.Knowing more about the choice Jerry made and what type of malpractice insurance he carried would help to answer the question (if a lawsuit is filed would Jerry be protected? ). For anyone in Jerry’s shoes it is hard to take advice and feel that the outcome would be for the best interest of the organization. Jerry needs to understand that he could lose his job and nursing license. Jerry should explain to the patient that he is not allowed to refill prescription medication and he should explain to the patient that he is also that the aware of the situation that he is flying out of town.Jerry should tell the patient that by making sure that he or she was prepared for travels ahead of time. After Jerry gets off the phone with the patient, he should go see Dr. Williams and explain to Dr. Williams what happened between the patient and himself. In conclusion if more health care professionals put into practice the concept of non-maleficence which is embodied by the phrase, to â€Å"first, do no harm,† or in the Latin, phrase â€Å"primum non nocere (McGraw Hill Science and Technology Dictionary2011). If more health care facilities considered non-maleficence to be the main or primary consideration (â€Å"to done harm†) taking in consideration that it is more important to protect all patients for their safety and wellbeing instead of enthusiastic practitioners being more prone to using treatments that they believe will do the most good, without first conducting an adequately evaluation on the patient to ensure they do no harm to the patient (McGraw Hill Science and Technology Dictionary2011).A great deal of has been done to patients as a result of inadequate evaluations. Therefore, it would be more important to do no harm to a patient than it would to do good so, my advice to Jerry woul d be to tell the patient that he cannot call in the prescription and assure the patient that he will let the physician know of the patient’s needs and the physician can take care of them as soon as possible (McGraw Hill Science and Technology Dictionary2011). Ethics Case Study Jerry McCall is an office assistant for Dr. William’s. Jerry has received training as both a medical assistant and Licensed practical nurses (LPN). During the time the receptionist is out to lunch Jerry is covering for her. Jerry is faced with a common problem in the health care field today. Jerry has been asked to call in a refill for Valium to a pharmacy for a patient. This paper will address why Jerry is not qualified to refill any prescription medication. If Jerry is protected if a lawsuit is filled.Jerry’s decision is a tough one, legal and ethical issues and advice will be provided for Jerry’s use. Jerry has received training as a medical assistant and a LPN and has gained knowledge about prescription drugs. Jerry knows that with his training he is not allowed to refill a prescription medication. Jerry knows that Valium is an addictive drug. Jerry is not allowed to refill this prescription because he is not a medical doctor, dentist, or a psychologist.Jerry has training for a LPN and knows that no matter what type of medication a patient is asking him to refill he is not allowed to. If there are no more refills on the prescription bottle the only thing Jerry can do in this position is to schedule the patient for an appointment with the physician. The patient is asking for a refill for Valium but could also ask for a refill for high blood pressure medication. If the patient has to call because he or she is out of refills on the prescription bottle needs to renew the prescription which can only be done by a medical doctor.The doctrine of respondent superior is defined that the employer is liable for the employee’s actions (Farlex, INC, 2011). If a lawsuit is filled Jerry may possibly be protected. The reading did not state if Jerry carried his own malpractice insurance or just relayed on his employer’s insurance. If Jerry does have his own malpractice insurance he would know that his insurance will pay an attorney to repre sent him before the Board of Nursing (Mackay, 2006). Jerry could have a lawsuit filed on him if he does refill the Valium and possible even if he does not refill it.Knowing more about the choice Jerry made and what type of malpractice insurance he carried would help to answer the question (if a lawsuit is filed would Jerry be protected? ). For anyone in Jerry’s shoes it is hard to take advice and feel that the outcome would be for the best interest of the organization. Jerry needs to understand that he could lose his job and nursing license. Jerry should explain to the patient that he is not allowed to refill prescription medication and he should explain to the patient that he is also that the aware of the situation that he is flying out of town.Jerry should tell the patient that by making sure that he or she was prepared for travels ahead of time. After Jerry gets off the phone with the patient, he should go see Dr. Williams and explain to Dr. Williams what happened between the patient and himself. In conclusion if more health care professionals put into practice the concept of non-maleficence which is embodied by the phrase, to â€Å"first, do no harm,† or in the Latin, phrase â€Å"primum non nocere (McGraw Hill Science and Technology Dictionary2011). If more health care facilities considered non-maleficence to be the main or primary consideration (â€Å"to done harm†) taking in consideration that it is more important to protect all patients for their safety and wellbeing instead of enthusiastic practitioners being more prone to using treatments that they believe will do the most good, without first conducting an adequately evaluation on the patient to ensure they do no harm to the patient (McGraw Hill Science and Technology Dictionary2011).A great deal of has been done to patients as a result of inadequate evaluations. Therefore, it would be more important to do no harm to a patient than it would to do good so, my advice to Jerry woul d be to tell the patient that he cannot call in the prescription and assure the patient that he will let the physician know of the patient’s needs and the physician can take care of them as soon as possible (McGraw Hill Science and Technology Dictionary2011).

Book Review Why We Don’t Listen Essay

James C. Peterson, author of Why Don’t We Listen Better? Communicating & Connecting in Relationships, through trial and error learned the value of communication balancing in which he found that the counselor must listen awhile, talk until the other person stops hearing and then listen until the person calms enough to hear again. (Peterson, 2007 Pg. 5) This concept is enlarged into a process in which Peterson calls the flat-brain syndrome. The purpose of the writing of this book according to Peterson was to assist couples in gaining the communication skills needed to improve their relationship. In this book Peterson says to make personal connection with people communication skills need to involve the stomach, which puts our feelings into words, the heart which makes clear that we are putting our own feelings into words and the head which puts our thoughts into words. (Peterson, 2007 Pg. 16) Peterson says that he uses the flat-brain syndrome to understand the problem of failed communication. Peterson explains â€Å"communication is the lubrication designed to keep our functions of stomach, heart, and head working separately and together† (Peterson 2007, Pg. 6). The gifted Peterson also takes the concept of the flat brain syndrome a step further by relating to the reader what happens when our systems (stomach, heart and head) get out of whack. (Peterson 2007, Pg. 23) In this scenario Peterson uses these parts to show what happens to communication, for example stomach overloads, hearts might turn bricklike, brains can go flat, and hearing is altered. These things of course alter the way we hear and feel. These things then set us up to fall into the flat-brain syndrome. Peterson 2007 35-48) In part two Peterson explains the â€Å"talker-listener† process or what he refers to as TLC which exhibits his feelings about the whole counseling process. Part three explains the techniques Peterson uses in listening and the traps one can fall into in the process. The process used by Peterson in this book relates things that he has tested and that work for the counselor. In closing Peterson makes clear that to â€Å"put wheels on your technique,† the counselor must exhibit warmth, genuineness and empathy. Why Don’t We Listen Better?  Communicating & Connecting in Relationships is a book written from the human counselor perspective. Peterson uses examples of everyday objects to relate positive plans for the counselor to put into action to achieve really positive results. Where many writers fail at connecting with their readers, Peterson brings a high level of understanding and process explanation simply by being down to earth in his communication. The whole goal of the book seemed to be to make a progressive and positive change in the process the non-professional counselor could use to aid and assist his counselee. From reading the title of the book one might think that listening is the key to the whole process but Peterson adds to the process by incorporating the qualities that pastor counselors should strive to achieve. Those qualities are caring for the counselee, genuine concern for them and the desire to point them at the real counselor. Reflection In reflecting upon the teachings of Dr. Peterson in Why Don’t We Listen Better? Communicating & Connecting in Relationships, I am reminded of a conversation I had with my middle son and his wife just recently. In particular this book has taught me that I need to listen better and that my boys and their wives are not children anymore. I serve as a missionary to the Navajo in Thoreau, NM. The area is desolate, dry, high and poor. My wife and I had provided a house for our son and daughter-in-law on the property of the church but the time came when they decided they needed to be in a big town where they could both work and do the things young people do. For my wife and I it was a terrible time. We love our kids and we have always been very close. My son tried to explain to me that he needed to find a good job and there were none in Thoreau and that they wanted to be independent. As I look back I realize how bad I was at listening to people that I love. I said it will cost you more than here and I am not going to support you so you can live in Albuquerque. As I think back I realize that I should have listened much better. All the things I told him came true and they came to me for help over and over. Some would say â€Å"well then why do you think that the listening thing was so important? The answer is a beautiful one†¦just the other day I offered to help him work on his car and he said to me â€Å"That’s O. K. dad I have saved up the money to get a mechanic. † Small thing to others I would say but to me he was showing me that he really had grown up. Investigation I must say that I enjoyed reading Why Don’t We Listen Better? Communicating & Connecting in Relationships. The book helped me to look at several realities about my life as well as my feelings compared to my reactions. I learned that the best way to have a positive relationship is to communicate. For many years the most important thing I feel that I have learned is the art of communication. Peterson has written theories that are effective and have been proven over time. Peterson has given himself to the problem of effective communication, to assisting others and to repairing and building relationships. The book was so easy to understand that I felt like I knew a lot about what Peterson was saying but I learned lots of new things as well. The talker-listener card strategy and the flat-brain theory are things that I will use in the future. It has been hard for me to listen attentively when the communication involves my kids especially when emotions are high but according to the flat-brain theory this is an area that I can work to improve upon. Peterson gives an excellent explanation about how the talker-listener card can work for me and my sons when issues like the one described above come about. Peterson has developed his processes from experiences he has had as a pastoral counselor. Why Don’t We Listen Better? Communicating & Connecting in Relationships has taught me to be a better listener and how to speak only when the counselee is actively listening to me. This is really a great book for those that want to learn to communicate with others better and to connect with the other party. Application As mentioned before I found this book to be very useful not only in my relationships with my family but also in dealing with the Navajo people in general. One of the things peculiar to many of the Navajo people is that they have specific ways of saying things that to the novice might not mean a whole lot but the talker-listener card methodology will help me in reaching out for their inner feelings, thoughts and desires. After reading this book I find many things that I can do to improve myself. When combined with the 7 Spiritual Gifts with 4 (DISC) Personality Types I have discovered some important information that will help me in my ministry. For example the spiritual gifts and behavioral blends specific to me are that my Primary Spiritual Gifts are Encouraging/Exhorting (58/60), Mercy (58/60) and Serving/Ministry/Helps (57/60). My behavioral blends say that what is expected of me is S/D but I am really C/S. My primary spiritual gifts were found to be: Encouraging / Exhorting, Mercy and Serving / Ministry / Helps. I plan to take the profile to heart mainly because some of the people that know me best have said that the profile was me exactly and I agree. I plan to use the suggested scripture to help me work on my weaknesses and to improve on my strengths. I have made a promise to myself and will ask God to help me to listen to what others have to say. I will incorporate a check system to improve my listening technique. I will actively try to listen to the problems of those seeking my advice. I will also attempt to share my thoughts and feelings without labeling, accusing or judging.

Was the Treaty of Versailles Fair?

Was the treaty of Versailles fair? The treaty of Versailles was signed in 1919 after the World War one. It was actually a punishment of Germany to start the war and forced it to accept all the blame. The involved requirements were seen to be very harsh. Many arguments were made on the treaty, and the most common question was that whether the treaty of Versailles fair. In my opinion, I am quite agreeing with the decision. Firstly, there is no fair in warfare. Defeat powers should obey the victors’ orders unconditionally, no excuse, and no complaint, just accepting the lost.Secondly, the treaty of Versailles was made by the â€Å" Big Three†, they were Woodrow Wilson from America, Lloyd George from Britain and Clemenceau from French. The terms in the treaty were put up by those three ideas. Their different attitudes and opinions were restricting the others. Nobody would be completely satisfied and also no one could make it extremely harsh or kind. Thirdly, relating the co st of the war. This is also the most important point of my view. In World War 1, numbers of villages and towns were destroyed.The economy and industry in Europe collapsed. From every nation who took part in there barely was a family who hadn't lost a member, nearly 35 million casualties, including a large amount of death of innocent people. How could Germany and her allies pay for this? The treaty of Versailles was deserved. In the treaty, Germany was asked to pay a huge amount of reparations, up to 6600 millions. Some people thought it was very unreasonable. At the time, it was impossible for Germany, but it was not given a time limit.Germany can rebuild the economy step by step till finally being able to pay off the compensation payment. Germen were also very angry about the arrangement of the territories. As a defeated country, there was no doubt Germany need to give back all the colonies, and be planed just as it did to the other country before. In conclusion, I think the Treaty of Versailles was fair enough. The aim of it was to weaken the German power and ensure there was no any more war, nevertheless Germany regained the power in 20 years, rebuilt the industry and military.Germany recovered very fast from the lost. However, they did not cherisher the achievement, launched another worldwide war, which was larger and more disastrous instead. the fact strong proved that the treaty had pushed Germany too hard, otherwise they should not be able to start the war. Moreover, compared to the treaties they made to Russia, the treaty of Brest-Litvosk, which was much more horrible, and the huge cost of the World War 1, Germany was fairly lucky.