Reasons America should have not Declared War on Britain in 1812

source

The War of 1812 did not end with America taking Canada. It also did not end with the British retaking America. America took a great risk by declaring war on the British. The British were stronger than the Americans, had more war experience, and had more victories than losses under their belt. That is why America should have not gotten involved in international affairs at this point. The Americans were lacking severely in their army and naval forces. The Americans had 6,000 men in the standing army and 16 ships total to make up their navy. Then there was the British who had 250,000 men and 500 ships.
This was also a time when the British were extremely weak due to fighting Napoleon in France. If that was the British weak -- with numbers that far outnumbered the Americans -- why would we attack them and risk them gaining strength in the event of victory. Thus proving if America wished to go to war, it should have continued the Embargo it has on Britain to “buff up” or strengthen its army.

The economy in 1812 was not at its best. It fell in the west and south when the Embargo backfired on them.The Revolution was still being paid off, and America still faced debts. To fight a war which would cost us more, force taxes to raise, and stop trading because the fighting would be done along the coast would only cause the economy more harm than good. Americans living on the coast were now making money and providing a steady income, but that was only recent. To start fighting where Americans trade and are currently making the most gains would be unreasonable.

The War Hawks of the South and West say America had to fight for its honor, but is honor worth dying over. The British did disrespect our maritime trade, but so did France. The only reason we didn’t declaring war on France and Napoleon is because America promised to embargo the enemy of whoever said they would stop disrespecting us. There was also ways for America to get Britain out of their trading business peacefully. Honor and disrespect do not factor into why America should go war. The Americans also want Canada on their side.The British from Canada supplied the natives out West to help them fight the Americans there. Having Canada would give Americans more land and resources, rid the Americans of the British and cut off the natives from getting supplies from the British.  The natives had been raiding villages and settlements out West out of fear of being pushed farther south. Their leader Tecumseh was aligned with the British to get guns, and other supplies. The raids were often violent. The American settlers out in the West feared for their safety and their families, so they wanted Canada to guarantee that the British would no longer be interfering.  
Just cutting off one supply, though, would not have stopped the natives from raiding. Even with the weapons gone the natives would have most likely still raided the western settlements. It just would have been without guns. And without the British. If natives were the issue and the ones raiding then do not wage war on Britain and cut of the food. Go straight for the head the first time. It would save men, money, and time.

In conclusion the Americans should have waited to go to war in 1812, not let pride and honor cloud their judgement. They should have considered the economy before declaring war on Britain. And kept their focus on the problems with the native people. These same mistakes are still being made when America considers conflicts and wars.

For more information on the War of 1812 go to this website.

How Power wore John Fitzgerald Kennedy to Exhaustion

       The painting shows that power weighs a person down. The power will become too much for the person to bear and it will make the person in power rethink all their decisions.  The painting is painted in a way where the viewer will be able to clearly see how the responsibility that comes with the power weighs a person down.

The power is shown as burden by lack of any vibrant colors. The only colors are dull, brown, and fade into each other. The colors show that power suck the life out of the president. With the lack of color it tells you that power also lead to his exhaustion.
With the colors all being shades of the same color it says that power leads to the same life. The life after stepping down is bleak. Also the way that the painter has JFK stands speaks to power.

JFK is not looking at the viewer, sideways, or up at all. He instead is looking down at the ground. Looking at the ground instead of up or at something tells that power is something that taxes heavily on the person. When people cross their arms it is often taken as a defensive stance. By having JFK stand this way, the painter shows that without this power JFK feels unprotected and the power of the presidency gives a sense of protection.

JFK is painted older than he was at the time.  The painter wanted to show how power ages a person. The decisions he had to make were not always the easiest and therefore made him age in ways that were not ways people wanted to age. He become wiser and more experienced through his terms, but the job did literally age him as well.  

The lack of a background shows power as something that will take away your future. The future is bleak just like the background, and the background of the painting shows how little hope for the future there is once you no longer have power.  The painting is saying that the power is your future and your key for the future in most cases. It is saying without power the opportunities in the future are small and there are a lot of them. In conclusion through all these different parts of a painting there is a clear argument that power is harsh on the person physically, mentally, and emotionally.
For more art by Aaron Shikler visit this link. He did the painting of JFK.