:
*(0) پہلی جنگ عظیم اور دوسری جنگ عظیم کے درمیان مندرجہ ذیل نکات کی بنیاد پر موازنہ کیجیے :
نرشار
پہلی جنگ عظیم
نکات
دوسری جنگ عظیم
(1)
دورانیہ (۶صہ )
شریک مما لک
اثرات - (سیاسی و معاشی)
(2) جنگ کے بعد قائم کی گئی عالمی تنظیمیں
Answers
what happens during war. The poem thus highlights the senselessness and wasteful tragedy of human conflict, and is specifically thought to have been inspired by the events of the Boer War in South Africa.
Read the full text of “The Man He Killed”
“The Man He Killed” Summary
"If only we'd met in some old pub, we would have sat down and shared many a beer!
"But I met him on the battlefield, each of us aiming at the other. We both took aim and fired, but he missed, while my shot killed him where he stood.
"I shot him dead because... well, because he was the enemy, that's all. He was the one I was supposed to shoot, obviously.
"Then again, he'd probably joined his army in similar circumstances to me, on a kind of whim. He was probably out of work at the time, just like I was. He'd probably had to sell his belongings—I can't think why else he would have enlisted.
"Yup, war is a very strange thing! You end up shooting someone who you'd get along well with in a bar—who you'd even give money if they needed it."
“The Man He Killed” Themes

The Senselessness of War
“The Man He Killed” is a dramatic monologue in which the speaker talks about the time he shot and killed a man during a war. Reflecting on the experience, the speaker notes how arbitrary it all seemed; rather than his enemy being someone totally different from the speaker, this other soldier was remarkably similar. Indeed, the speaker imagines he could easily have been friends with this man! The poem, then, argues that war is senseless, tragic, and brutal, and that it ignores the common humanity between people on different sides of a conflict.
The poem itself is told as if it is a conversation taking place in a pub (and the poem makes not one but two references to drinking establishments). The speaker talks unguardedly to the addressee, who could be a friend, the reader, or a combination of both. The poem builds a sense that the speaker is talking to the addressee in the same way he would have talked to the man he killed, had they met in a bar rather than on the battlefield.
The poem starts by posing an alternative reality—that is, what could have happened rather than what did. If, says the speaker, he and his “foe” had met near on “old ancient inn,” they would have drunk together (expressed in the friendly slang of “wet / Right many a nipperkin”). In other words, they would have gotten along well and easily found common ground. But unfortunately the real meeting of the two men was on a battlefield, where they stood “face to face” and shot at each other. (Luckily for the speaker, his bullet found the target and the other man’s missed.) The phrase “face to face” signals not only the physical closeness between the two at the time, but the similarity between them more generally. This highlights the tragedy of war, which pushes two men who have no reason to hate each other to fight to the death.
The speaker tries to offer the reason behind the killing, but all he can say is that “I shot him dead because— / Because he was my foe.” There’s no great animosity here, no true cause for vengeance, it was “Just so.” The other