Which analyzes why some historians believe that the federal civil defense administration used propaganda to reduce the general public concerned about nuclear warfare?
1. Historians believe that the FCDA generated reports that underestimated the missile gap to put Americans mind at ease regarding a nuclear attack
2. Historians believe that the FCDAs warning system established a false sense of security to eliminate citizens concerns about a nuclear attack
3. Historians believe that the FCDA exaggerated false claims that the government had taken measures to eliminate the threat of nuclear attack
4. Historians believe that the FCDA used civil defense measures as a psychological tool to convince civilians that preventative measures could be taken
2?
the answer is 4 I just took the test homies mission academy rise up!
It's not 2 so I would think that it's 4
It's not a select all question @reed but thanks for trying.
I was funna like, but the likes are at seven. and lol factz^^
To analyze why some historians believe that the Federal Civil Defense Administration (FCDA) used propaganda to reduce the general public's concerns about nuclear warfare, we can examine the options provided.
Option 2: Historians believe that the FCDA's warning system established a false sense of security to eliminate citizens' concerns about a nuclear attack.
This option suggests that the FCDA purposely created a perception of safety and security through their warning system to downplay the fears and concerns of the public regarding a potential nuclear attack. The idea behind this propaganda strategy is to make people feel less threatened and therefore reduce their anxiety or worry.
To determine if this option is correct, historians might investigate various sources, such as official documents, government communications, or public statements made by FCDA officials during that time period. They may also examine firsthand accounts or testimonies from individuals who were involved or impacted by the FCDA's activities.
By conducting research and analyzing these sources, historians can gather evidence to support or challenge this hypothesis and form a more informed conclusion. It is important to note that historians may have varying interpretations and perspectives on historical events, so multiple viewpoints should be considered.