<p>Okay. Now the main problem is the fact that you only gave war examples, to support the idea that certain events in war motivates change.</p>
<p>But do you really think war is what motivates change in general? Other people have said that necessity or a feeling of threat or uncertainty motivates change. </p>
<p>In the first body paragraph, you said that Truman needed to try to change the United States's policy of neutrality in order to boost morale. So here it was the necessity to boost morale (which was very much needed at the time) that led to change.</p>
<p>Do you see how I think that your second example was weak (the one about post traumatic stress disorder)? </p>
<p>Now it seems like what you're trying to say is that necessity motivates change and that change can be forced upon people. That change can be forced upon people (in the form of a mental condition, for example) does not explain what motivates change. You could say that your examples are taken in the context of war. Think about it like this: it wasn't the events of war that caused change. It was, in the first case, the need to boost morale that caused change.</p>