I need help answering 3 questions: 1. Who was the Soviet Union's representative to the UN and what did he do that aided the UN's intervention into Korea? 2. What was passed by congress that authorized President Johnson to escalate the war in Vietnam? 3. What congressional legislation exists today that opposes such action by the Executive branch as a direct result of what happened in the Vietnam War? I appreciate anyone's help.
the gulf of tonkin resolution is what gave the pres the right to full out invade vietnam. It happened after the gulf of tonkin incident where a us ship was supposedly attacked. As for the rest....Google is God.
This isn't meant as an insult, it really is meant as serious help. By the way, those are good questions; I would favor prison sentences for American adults who can't instantly answer numbers 2 and 3 Here's a crash course in googling: -NEVER ever EVER do a google search using just one word. There's very little chance that it will be useful at all. -Use phrases inside quotes when you want to search for that EXACT phrase. -Commonly used words must be preceeded by a plus sign or google will ignore the word altogether (the word "how" for instance). -If you want to exclude results that contain a certain word, use a minus sign in front of that word. -Don't limit your google searches to the web- search USENET archives as well (google "usenet faq" in quotes at google for more info. -Read the Help section in google, it will give you tons of tricks for getting precise results. For instance, if you wanted to look up the word "heuristic," you could type the world "definition" followed immediately by a colon then a space then the word "heuristic" (no quotes on this one!) -Do more than a few searches, skimming the results before looking at any linked sites. Get an idea what words/phrases work best. -Use a heuristic approach. That is, be prepared to change the details of your search as you gain more info. Feed results back into the question and repeat. -Don't forget wikipedia. Though open to the public for revision, it's usually a good place to start for basic information, and I believe it's now larger than any other encyclpedia ever created. I probably do more than a hundred google searches per day, though the total could be a few hundred on some days. For scientific or technical information, the Internet is is still pretty much useless compared with what you'll find in a university library (peer-reviewed journals, etc.) Okay, rant over. Have a wonderful life under google, which is now recognized as the one true god ;-)
Just as a quick followup, here's some examples of more precise google searches: "soviet union" representative UN Korea "Soviet Union's representative" korea war "authorized President Johnson" Vietnam +how authorized "Vietnam War" legislation congress Vietnam aftermath "Vietnam War" legislation congress 1973 etc. Just examples. All of those found relevant results, and in those results you can look for better phrases to put in quotes, etc. Note the quotes; actually you can ignore case altogether, so far as I know. I'm sure there are better search terms to use, and trust me, as you do more searches, you'll get very good at it. I've occasionally had to search for obscure things, things that might take a dozen or more carefully-constructed searches to find. So anytime you fail to find something, assume first that 1) The information is out there on the Internet, and 2) That it will take many searches before you find out how to find it. For instance, think of a house you used to live in, and figure out how to find a photo of it online. Odds are very good that you'll find it, and odds are, a mere twenty or thirty searches won't get you there. Sorry for the long lecture, but I think someone might learn from this!
It would be good if google could somehow allow the searcher to look only in valid sources. Google is actually trying to come up with methods for doing this, but it's not an easy task. I did a search a while back about evolution. It hard to believe all the creationism sites that now flood google and that put forth useless information. It wasn't like this when the web first started up. Much of what was on the web back then was educational and academic. Many groups now just google bomb to get their own views on the web (like the one about searching 'miserable failure' that brings up links to Clinton, Bush, etc.)
Have you seen this? http://scholar.google.com/ A specialized Google search that ONLY searches scientific and technical literature and journal articles. Currently in beta testing, but it should help eliminate the more useless results that come up with a standard search. Still no match for a university library, but as close as your computer...
Thanks, Ellis. I was watching a lecture by someone who works at Google. He was at Washington University and talked about various methods Google has been researching for better search engines that filter out useless info. It's a tricky problem.
I tried searching 'human evolution' using that google site and no creationism sites came up for at least 5 pages. All looked like real science sites. Looks pretty good.
