Studying for modern is like trying to dig a tunnel to China with nothing more than a spoon. You can spend hours and hours scraping away at the dirt but after a week, all you have left is a small crater in your front yard and a really dirty spoon which you will never use to eat with again. This is exactly my situation. I have sat here from 7pm to 11pm this Monday, trying to study as much as possible and I've barely scraped the surface of the freakin' topic. I was aiming to battle "Conflict in Indochina" as well as "Russia and the Soviet Union" today but alas, all I've been able to do is dot point the main events of Indochina and give myself a ginormous headache. I thought I was doing okay. Until I read the exemplary responses of past papers. You'd think I would've learnt not to do that from last time. But anyway, I realised that I only know the surface of things. I know the basic basic facts but I've got no quotes, no statistics and no actual references to back up what I'm saying.

For example, I say

"The Tet Offensive was a tactical failure for the Viet Cong but was successful in the fact that it caused American attitudes to change back home."

But then to get a band 6, I am supposed to say,

"The Tet Offensive of January - February 1968, which involved a combined forced of 70 000 to 80 000 Viet Cong soldiers invading 9 cities and 30 provincial capitals, was a tactical failure for the Viet Cong but was successful in the fact that it caused American attitudes to change back home."

Do you understand my dilemma right now? And it's not like I can suddenly remember a billion statistics and quotes before the trial next Monday. Plus, knowing my luck, even if I try to remember some stuff, mostly likely it will not end up in the test.

PLUS, the section doesn't involve any multiple choice or short answer questions. It's just two extended response, 25 mark questions. (You get to pick which one you want to do though). And if by chance, neither of those two options appeal to you, then well, YOU ARE SO SCREWED.