I want you to answer these six question using an easy and clear language . Based

I want you to answer these six question using an easy and clear language . Based on an understanding of the books and materials provided.
I hope that each question will be answered on two separate pages from the other questions, but write me an General introduction at the beginning so that I can use it in the exam. It does not exceed one paragraph about what was learned during the semester.
Because they are questions for the exam, it is unreasonable to answer by summarizing the books and writing the reference pages in these books because it is impossible to memorize each page. But when answering, it is possible to mention the book or the author and based on the understanding of the book or article. With regard to conferences, I have attached them in the file so that you can look at them and choose the second most important conference among them.
I chose the best person and paid a large amount to get a perfect job
The teacher wants to see what we have learned from the class. Have we reached the stage of understanding, so I want you to respond accordingly.
I have attached the syllabus for you to understand and take an overview of the syllabus, and on the fourth page are the questions to be answered. I hope the writing is easy and not complicated (because I do not speak English but Arabic). If it was written in a very scientific way, this raises doubts.
1. What was the second most successful of the international conferences studied in this course and why was it the second most successful compared to the other conferences studied?
2. Imagine that Taylor Owen was asked to write a critique of Dower’s book. What would he most likely have written and how would Dower most likely respond?
3. What two questions about the dynamics of international relations in the twentieth century, if answered clearly and adequately, would elicit the best and most comprehensive understanding of the subject? Justify your questions.
4. Imagine that you have been chosen to review Gallarotti’s article. What are its strengths and weaknesses?
5. You are networking at the International Studies Association meeting and mention that you love Bracken’s book. A colleague scoffs, criticizes his work, and offers suggestions for what amounts to a fundamental rewrite. You concede very few of the colleague’s points but get to thinking about how you would re-write the book. Three days later you send to a publisher a critique of Bracken’s book, an outline for an alternative approach to the subject matter, and a justification for the different approach. In detail, provide the critique, the outline of the alternative approach, and the justification for the alternative approach.
6. Imagine that you were present and taking notes when Fink and Manuel sat down for a long discussion of their works assigned here. Detail where they agreed and disagreed.