Causes of World War Two

Taylor, wrote in The Origins of the Second World War that other countries should have become involved by armed force in 1933, to overthrow Hitler when he had come to power and was supported by a large majority of the German people. Taylor thought that if more countries became involved with this issue, Czechoslovakia would have been secure. He also believed the German people were the only ones who could turn Hitler out because they were the ones that put him in power. He stated that “the ‘appeasers’ feared that the defeat of Germany would be followed by a Russian domination over much of Europe” (Document 8) which many people did not want. By using appeasement, they only allowed Hitler to become stronger and feel more powerful by giving him what he

Firstly, the main driving force behind Hitler’s expansionist policies is his personal ambition. Hitler’s vengeance towards Treaty

One other factor in World War II is the war guilt due to the Treaty of Versailles. In the Treaty of Versailles it states “ Germany accepts responsibility… for causing all the loss and damage” (Doc D). Germany was humiliated, not because they caused World War II but because they were called out on it, an “atrocious injustice”. “Hitler restored a sense of pride, rewarded a sense of self respect, forcing the world to look at Germany anew.” Hitler gave Germany a sense of pride the Treaty of Versailles took away, giving Germany a sense of power that they

In this essay I research studied and explained how three different reasons and people that are involved in causing World War 2. I explained the reasons on why Woodrow, George Clemenceau and Lloyd what the peace treaty that leads to war. I also mentioned how fascism was involved with starting WW2, and by driven by his sense of aggressive nationalism he gained power. I explained how evil Hitler was involved in causing World War 2, the plans he had and the fear of socialism was going to be stop by a strong

Germany was now desperately seeking a strong leader that would rescue their country. The domestic crisis was the source of their anguish and Hitler who called for self determination and the abolition of the Treaty of Versailles appealed to the people. According to the revisionist views “The depression also helped to destroy German democracy and contributed to Hitler’s rise to power, and it was his dictatorship which brought war”. The rise of the Nazis cannot therefore be blamed solely on the reparations, the Weimar Republic and the Wall Street Crash both independent factors from the consequences of WWI highly contributed to the rise of the Nazis.

Many dispute over the causes of World War II(WWII). Whether the causes were the same from World War I(WWI), or if there were new causes entirely is not known for sure, but evidence exists to support either premise. The nationalism, imperialism, militarism and alliances that caused WWI are the most likely to have caused WWII, because most were not resolved in the Treaty of Versailles which ended WWI. These causes remained constant throughout the interwar years with the motivation of Hitler, who gave the people a group to blame them on. Prior to the Second World War, the Treaty of Versailles ended WWI and immediate fighting, but did not address some underlying causes of the war, enabling the problems to fester, which aided Hitler in perusing

On June 28th 1919, in the Versailles Palace of France, the treaty of Versailles officially ended World war one. The signers of this treaty implemented certain restrictions on Germany that were to guarantee Germany would never start another world war. This begs the question, “what did the end of one war have to do with the start of World War Two?”. The evidence shows that it was this treaty’s influence on Adolf Hitler that led to the Versailles Treaty’s ultimate failure and provoked the start of the next world war. Because of this treaty Adolf Hitler’s economic plan, proposed while he was seeking political election, was focused on rebuilding and reclaiming Germany. This went hand in hand with the nationalist ideas of the Nazi party.

By the late 1970s, two broad schools of historiographical thought about Hitler and Nazi Germany were taking shape. They were eventually described as ‘intentionalism’ and ‘structuralism’ or ‘functionalism’. Both offer explanations about the nature of political power, the extent of planning, the organisation of the Nazi regime and the role Hitler played in decision-making. In general intentionalists believe that powerful individuals affect historical development. What major leaders, e.g. Hitler, wanted is important as they were in a position to obtain what they wanted.

In order to fully understand the role the Treaty of Versailles played in the initial upcoming of Adolf Hitler, we must first delve into the reasoning behind German involvement in World War One. Since the late 1800s, Germany was intent on expanding its borders, by any means necessary. Otto von Bismarck, Chancellor of Germany, was obsessed with his desire to “create a German Empire out of the group of smaller German states” mainly under Austria-Hungary’s authority (Schmidt, 2006). In order to expel Austria as the primary influence over these smaller German states, war was inevitable. Subsequently following the war, also known as the Seven Weeks War, Bismarck extorted the small German states of “Schleswig, Holstein, Hanover, Hesse, Nassau, and Frankfurt, which created the North German Federation” (Schmidt, 2006). Even more importantly, Austria was successfully displaced as the major influence over those small German states. Bismarck’s next calculated move was to achieve the same unification in the southern parts of Germany.

backed out without much question! It was far too casual for it to be a

The policy of appeasement was widely pursued by Britain and France in the 1930s, when it referred to attempting to satisfy Germany's demands by negotiation and compromise, which would avoid war. However due to its failure the policy of appeasement, to a large extent was responsible for the outbreak of war in 1939. It is clear that if the Western Powers had retaliated against Hitler, war could have been avoided, it encouraged Hitler, Hitler could never be appeased, and that it prompted the Nazi-Soviet Pact. Despite large extent the policy of appeasement in the outbreak of war it is superseded by other factors such as the Treaty of Versailles.

The major cause of World War II was definitely the intense anger over the Versailles Treaty. Germany resented all aspects of the treaty, but what really ticked the Germans off was; French occupation of German cities, and the loss of vast territories which were in German hands for generations. Hitler would later re-conquer these lost territories, which

The causes of WWII are too numerous and complex to be generalized. The following is said to be one of the main causes.

The second World War can be considered “Hitler`s war” due to Adolf Hitlers responsibility and actions that caused the war. He had an enormous impact and role on many events such as secretly increasing the size fo the army,which made World War 2 possible. On the other hand, the failure of the League of Nations and defects in the Treaty of Versailles also triggered the outbreak of the war. It gave Hitler many oppurtunities to support his ambitions and policies. Hitlers Plan that could only be followed through with the help of mistakes such as the appeasement. It can also be argued that it was rather Germany than Hitler`s war as their reaction to World War 1.Many factors affected the outbreak

It was broadly considered that the Second World War began in 1939 because of Hitler’s plan for world domination; many historians validated this view at the time until A.J.P. Taylor published his book ‘Origins of the Second World War’ in 1961. A. J. P Taylor was the first historian to examine the war with a completely open mind, forcing people to view the origins not as a moral issue but as a political history. Taylor regards the start of the war as a blunder on both sides, stating that “Hitler had no clear-cut plan and instead was a supreme opportunist, taking advantages as they came.” From this Taylor suggests that neither