I will base my notes on the article "Violent video games: dogma, fear and pseudoscience" from the Sep-Oct 2009 edition of "Skeptical Inquirer", author C.J. Ferguson The author shows that the studies that correlate playing video games and violence are inconclusive or flawed. Arguments are given: 1) panic caused by media is not new, for example Greek plays, translations of the Bible, rock&roll, rap, comic books, movies etc.2) activists,such as David Grossman are fear-mongers because they push some kind of agenda An activist group which funds reports about video-gaming is NIMF(National Institute of Media and Family).3) most aggression studies are done in laboratories where people pop balloons, click on targets, etc. So there is no clear testing based on real life 4) even more, the aggression and violence are different notions, and not all aggression is harmful 5) some statistics studies are subject to biases such as: --"citation bias" where you cite only studies that support your conclusions --selection of your own tests that support a theory and ignoring those who don't. --calculations that underestimate medical effects 6) most school shooters play video games but this is something most teens do.
Moreover, males are more aggressive than women and they also tend to play more games. This doesn't imply a correlation. Males also grow beards, play more sports-this doesn't mean beards or sports cause violence.Dr.Phil speculated that the Virginia Tech shooter played violent games; it was found that the shooter didn't play games at all.
I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.