War Party Arguments

H&H reject the cliché thesis of a “slide into war” as elites had the agency to declare war. War does not simply happen; there is a strict procedure of declarations that cannot materialize out of nowhere. Because people have agency they have the authority to decide on their future. In the sense of war, this means they have the choice to either participate or not. H&H argue that there was no inevitability of war since formal declarations would need to be drawn up by some individuals. For example, “Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia on 28 July 1914.” Commonly believed to have been inspired by the recent assassination H&H contend that the declaration of war was nevertheless “the end result of a careful, well thought out, and rational process.” Moreover, the assassination was not the only reason for war but rather an interest in a fragmentation of the Balkans. Whatever the case, this rational process dismisses a fatalism of war in Europe as Austria-Hungary ultimately chose to go to war. This process is mirrored in the other four major powers; Germany, Russia, France, and Great Britain demonstrating that they too had agency when declaring war.

Just war encourages peace for all people and indicates that even though it isn’t the best solution, it is still required. Everyone has the duty to stop a potentially fatal or unjust attack against someone else, even if it meant using violence against the attacker. Plus, all states have some important rights that must not be violated by either people or states, so when they’re violated or potentially getting violated, that state is entitled to defend itself through whatever means necessary. Also, the state that did the violating lost their privilege to not have their own rights violated through means of violence. Therefore, just war is ethically permissible.

not. The victor will not be asked, later on, whether we told the truth or not. In starting and

Through the book ‘Europe’s Last Summer’ David Fromkin tackles the issues of pre WWI Europe, and the surrounding political, economic, social, debacles that led paranoid countries to go to arms after nearly a full century of relative peace within the European continent. While Fromkin certainly points his fingers to all the nations of Europe his primary focus lies with Germany and Austria-Hungary. Though he continues to stress throughout much of the book that Kaiser Wilhelm II and Archduke Ferdinand were fervent keepers of the peace within their nations, the fault of the war ultimately could be laid at the feet of their two nations and their constant attempts at war-mongering. He claims the war could have been avoided for the moment, had all the nations of Europe wanted peace, but the two bad eggs of Europe drew them all into an unavoidable general war.

World War 2 was a massive war which engulfed the whole world from 1939 – 1935. There were 2 different sides in the war. These two sides were the Allies and the axis. At the start of the war, the Allies consisted of Great Britain and all of its colonies (such as Australia) and France. The Axis consisted of Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union. At the start of the war the axis powers were dominating. Germany used “Blitzkrieg” (Lighting war) tactics very successfully and overran many countries using it. But some major events occurred and turned the tide of the war to the favour of the Allies. However two of these major events are most often talked about to be the reason that the axis powers eventually lost. One of these events includes the Japanese attack on pearl harbour. This brought America into the war and onto the side of the Allies. The other of the two events was instigated by Germany itself. Germany decided to attack one of their allies. This ally was the Soviet Union. There is often a lot of debate about which of these events is greatest, that is to have had the biggest effect in the war. So the question has to be asked, was it the US entrance into the war that made the defeat of Germany inevitable, or it caused by the German attack of the Soviet Union. In my opinion it was not the US entrance to the war, but the German invasion of the Soviet Union that made the ultimate defeat of Germany inevitable. This is because they put

Many historians argue that the reason for Germany going to war was due to the aggressive behaviour of Germany in the build up to the war. Throughout this essay I will be addressing this issue looking at whether Germany was responsible for the outbreak of a general European war in August 1914. There are many factors which contribute to the outbreak of the war from a short-term trigger such as the assassination of Franz Ferdinand to the long-term annexation aims Germany implemented in the years building up to the war, the most important reason was Germany’s aggressive foreign policy, they had provided

A young generation was emerging within Serbia and Bosnia whose experience of national and social struggles had taught them the effectiveness of violence as a means to achieve goals (as seen in the Balkan Wars 1912-13). It was a generation that demanded action and sacrifice instead of words and political wisdom (Cirkovic 246). Russia repeatedly assured their Slav brethren that they only had to wait (MacKenzie 58). Serbian agitation against Austria-Hungary was increased and the more the Austro-Hungarians attempted to subvert it, the more violent and fanatical it became. The fearlessness that was born from the support of Russia led those seeking Slavic unity to assassinate Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the Heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, thereby triggering the cascade that began WWI.

War is a scandalous topic where peoples’ views differ as to what war is. Some people see it as pure evil and wicked while others think that it is brave and noble of what soldiers do. Looking at poems which had been written by people affected by war help show the messages which are portrayed. The two sets of poems which show different views of war as well as some similarities are “the Charge of the Light Brigade” by Alfred Lord Tennyson, “To Lucasta, on Going to the Wars” by Richard Lovelace and “Dulce Et Decorum Est” by Wilfred Owen, “The Song of the Mud” by Mary Borden. Both these poets use linguistic devices to convince the reader of their view of what the war is. Tennyson and Lovelace show how war is worthy

The huge national investment in military helped the countries to prepare for the war. In actuality, all the countries had known that the war was unavoidable. (Doc 9) French writer Emile Zola thinks that “The world can live only by eating and being eaten. And it is only the warlike nations that have prospered; a nation dies when it disarms.” (Doc 2) Countries made meticulous plan to defend themselves by increasing militarism. The expenditures of the great powers on armaments of the European countries increased dramatically. (Doc 10) However, the political leaders did not make efforts to prevent the war. Instead, they increased the mobilization of their armies for war. (Doc 11) Countries were aware of that the world war must bring out, the only thing was a trigger, the assassination of Ferdinand. The relationship between Austria-Hungary and Serbia was terrible before the assassination. In the ultimatum sent to Serbia on July 23, 1914, Austria-Hungary condemned the movement against the Monarchy and asked for collarboration against these subversions. (Doc 8) However, the tensions became uncontrollable when on July 28, Ferdinand was assassinated by a a nationalist Serbian young

This essay will examine all nine readings. There will also be insight given to why the United States entered World War I, and whether or not the reasons were persuasive. Other things will also be discussed, including: what America’s war aims were, and how Wilson’s goals were unrealistic, misleading, overly idealistic and moralistic. The fact that Wilson expected too much of international law and international organization. Also, why Wilson’s goals were not achieved. That the national interest is what should guide American diplomacy. There was also a lot of questions of loyalty and civil liberties that were raised by the war.

Lastly in article five, we voted to pass motions one and five. We voted to pass those two as we believed Germany, Russia and Serbia were the causes of WWI. We believed this as the assassination of Duke Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary started a chain of events which created the war. As Serbia was blamed for this assassination it caused

The article stated, “a man who declared it would make no sense to go to war with Serbia… never have asked a multi-front conflict without a cast-iron guarantee of support from Germany.” (add citation)

The assassination gave Austria-Hungary a good reason to form a plan against Serbia, but Austria-Hungary first got Germany’s promise to support them in any action they took against Serbia. Then Austria-Hungary sent Serbia a list of demands on July 23. Serbia accepted most of the demands and offered to have the rest settled by an international conference. Austria-Hungary rejected the offer and declared war on Serbia on July 28 1914("World War I History." ).

The Austro-Hungarians did their best to manipulate the situation to result in a war that would allow them to cause loss like the loss they felt. Although provocation on the part of Austro-Hungarians was intentional, countries should and usually will do all they can to prevent war, as the cost (loss of life, damage both physical and economic) almost always outweighs the benefits of any war. The Austro-Hungarians and the Serbians, along with the major powers that joined in the conflict following the initial spark of war, absolutely failed at discouraging aggressive military action and armed conflict. This failure to deter surely contributed to the crisis of 1914 and subsequently World War I. Additionally, the Austro-Hungarians also believed that they would make a quick, decisive victory over Serbia and that the war would be short. This “short war illusion” on the part of the Austro Hungarians most certainly led to a, longer, less organized, and more devastating conflict for none of the involved parties were adequately prepared to fight a longer battle. These failures in combination are what facilitated a full-blown war and widespread devastation throughout Europe and

The July Crisis was composed of a list of ultimatums sent by Austria-Hungary to Serbia upon the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand. These ultimatums include “the banning of Serbian publications responsible for anti-Austrian propaganda, the removal of anti-Austrian individuals from Serbian military, government, and civil service, the removal of Serbian teachers and curriculum that had promoted or incited anti-Austrian feeling, the outlawing and disbanding the Serbian nationalist group Narodna Odbrana, a crackdown on cross-border arms trading and the removal or corrupt