Lloyd George Contribution

The different interpretations I will discuss are John Terraine’s, Alan Clarke’s and Lloyd George’s. These views of Haig may have changed over time due to the political affiliation of the historian, the time period that the historian wrote in and general bias.

The year was 1940; the world’s second great World War was in full swing, with Britain and Germany at the forefront. The fall of Britain’s closest ally, France, stunned the British Empire and threw it into disarray. Through the chaos, Winston Churchill emerged. Churchill would be an inspiring leader who was able to rally the entire nation in times of hardship. Through his leadership, the “British Bulldog” would face the Axis powers and come out victorious, as well as become a public hero for the British people. Yet, immediately after the war, Churchill did not return to the prime minister seat because of a shocking defeat in his re-election, despite his immense reputation he gained from the war. Though lauded by the British population for his prowess as a wartime leader, Churchill’s conservative politics were out of touch with a population ready for post-war relief and led to his defeat in the 1945 election.

In 1975 the Oxford University Press published the first edition of The Great War and Modern Memory written by Paul Fussell. As Fussell states in the opening line, “this book is about the British experience on the Western Front from 1914 to 1918.” In this paper I will argue, that despite the numerous literary awards this book has won, it contains historical inaccuracies and shortcomings in relation to the accurate information provided that takes away from the prestige of the book. Despite the numerous negative aspects of the book, this paper will also briefly highlight the few positive areas of the book, therefore providing an in-depth analysis of the book.

Whitney, Craig R. “World War I Why It Still Matters.” New York Times Upfront 4 May 2009: 24-27. Print.

Few Americans are aware of the profound impact Alexander Hamilton had on our nation’s development with his creation of multiple, important institutions. Hamilton, a true Founding Father of our nation, is primarily accountable for the design and establishment of Federal institutions, especially for the financial system which helped form the states into a nation. These creations of his helped put this nation on its path toward an industrial economy. Hamilton wanted a manufacturing economy founded on financial principles. He played a key role in shaping President George Washington’s foreign policy based on American self-interest.

“Our first duty is to win, at any cost!” Sir Robert Borden played an important role as Canadian Prime Minister during World War I, and while he is to be praised, he also to be held accountable for his actions; especially in the passing of Bills through parliament. Sir Robert Borden had not a great vision but more so a motto to live up to (to strive for), a country to lead in a worldwide war, and decisions that if not taken in a certain light, would have disrupted the newly forming “peaceful” dominion into a divided house.

3. Why do you think the government promoted enlistment with the poster “On Which Side of the Window Are You?” Was there any correlation between elites and pacifism? Do you believe there was truth to the criticism of World War I by some that it was a “rich man’s war, poor man’s fight?” Please explain.

“George was born March 23rd, 1891 in Teddington, Middlesex, England” (cite). He was the youngest of four children with two older sisters and an older brother. As the son of a prestigious boat builder, the love and passion for building, as well

When George turned 11 his father passed away. After his father passed away, he went to live with his older step brother, Lawrence. Had George’s father lived for more years he would have attended a nice school in England. Instead he went to decent school near Fredericksburg and he had tutors to help him get through school.

This individual has made a huge impact in not just individual Americans in 1789, but the country as a whole, although I’ve not traditionally “met” this person per say, but if I were to have met him 226 years ago, I’d say it would be in Virginia, where this man was born and raised.

Political affairs of the new country influenced by literary propaganda declared select individuals to be superior leaders in times of unrest throughout the nation. George Washington, one of the most influential American leaders in history, united the nation with exemplary communication and persuasion techniques in order to prevent further revolt and disorder in his nation. His powerful demeanor allowed him to be extremely successful in his efforts to abolish unrest: “Washington wieling his personal authority to win over disgruntled members of the corps and made an impassioned appeal to ‘reason and virtue,’ crushed the revolt without firing a shot” (Keene, 134). His legacy as an impeccable president, derived from unimaginable accomplishments

To better understand the successes and failures of the 28th president of the United States, Woodrow Wilson, it is essential to define the image he portrayed to the American population during his presidency. Many Americans and historians will claim he was a man of impartiality and the one who led America into WWI. He had a very solid influence on Congress for the many domestic and foreign affair policies he endorsed. The goal is to illustrate how President Woodrow Wilson ran his presidency in the eyes of the American citizens. This will be done by examining the many facades that President Woodrow Wilson exhibited during his term as president. Upon researching the events of President Woodrow Wilson, it is clear that he was significant in moving our nation onward and supporting the American people in every which way possible.

After leading his fight against poverty, he also played a leading part in World War I. He became minister for munitions under Asquith’s war cabinet and afterwards secretary for war. Llyod George wasn’t on the same page with Asquith regarding the management of the war. In 1906 he replaced him as Prime Minister after showing his capacities to manage the war. Even though some people did not agree with his way of handling the situation, he took many decisions and actions that lead to the victory. The successful Prime Minister went to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 where he signed and negotiated the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. After this, Lloyd George’s political career started to shatter as his own party didn’t supported him. He resigned

In order to fully understand how Britain’s decision to go to war against Germany is best explained one must engage into the debate revolving around the question of the extent to which Britain and other countries were responsible for causing war. This helps explain the intention Britain had for war which is vital in understanding their decision making process to cause war in the first place. Some schools of thought have come to the conclusion that it was everybody or nobody- the continent “slithered over the brink into the boiling cauldron of war without any trace of apprehension or dismay.”1 That analysis will be considered in this essay as will the widespread thesis that it was Germany’s aggression which not only created the preconditions for war, but also triggered Britain into war with the political imbalance of power being created from the growing naval and colonial expansion of Germany. Other factors that help explain why Britain went to war against Germany

After the First World War (1914-1919), the world was faced with the questions - who was responsible and what was reason for the outbreak of the war. Ultimately it was agreed on the 28 June 1919 that “the Allied and Associated Governments affirm and Germany accepts the responsibility of Germany and her allies for causing all the loss and damage” from the First World War. However, there have been many other interpretations on whom and what was responsible for the war. On the one hand, some historians would agree with David Lloyd George’s notion of all “the nations slithered over the brink into the boiling cauldron of war”, however, on the contrary, others would agree with Fischer in arguing that Germany’s aggressive foreign policy was responsible for the First World War. Whether you agree with Lloyd George or Fischer, it is important to understand some of the other possible reasons for the outbreak of the First World War – including the growth of nationalism and imperialism, the alliances within Europe and the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Although this essay will argue that Germany’s aggressive foreign policy was responsible for the outbreak of the First World War, it will also illustrate why other historians have argued against that notion.