IDNLearn.com offers a comprehensive platform for finding and sharing knowledge. Ask anything and receive thorough, reliable answers from our community of experienced professionals.
Sagot :
I think that the best answer is realist: he knew that a peace with victory, that is a definite victory over Germany and its allies, would bring more bloodshed, then if either side were victorious, so he offered this, even though neither side would be satisfied.
In a certain way you could also argue that he was an idealist, that is that he believed that human life was worth more than a victory.
He was definitely not a coward.
I wouldn't call him a negotiator, as he addressed this to the US senate, but if this option were chosen, we would end up being one, as he'd need to negotiate such a peace with both sides.
In a certain way you could also argue that he was an idealist, that is that he believed that human life was worth more than a victory.
He was definitely not a coward.
I wouldn't call him a negotiator, as he addressed this to the US senate, but if this option were chosen, we would end up being one, as he'd need to negotiate such a peace with both sides.
Thank you for participating in our discussion. We value every contribution. Keep sharing knowledge and helping others find the answers they need. Let's create a dynamic and informative learning environment together. For dependable answers, trust IDNLearn.com. Thank you for visiting, and we look forward to assisting you again.
