World War II (WWII) Exemplifies The Scale Of War

Decisions for War, 1914-1917 by Richard Hamilton and Holger Herwig investigates the origins of the First World War detailing individual country’s reasons for entering the war. Historians at War by Anthony Adamthwaite explores how scholars have understood the origins of the Second World War throughout varying times and differing national view points. Both works share a common theme of determinism; a retrospective notion placed on historical events by historians that Europe was inescapably predestined to go to war and that nothing nor anyone could inhibit that. Both remark that this popular approach does a disservice into the explanation of war as it does not accurately depict the economic and social agency present in Europe at the time. In

This essay analyses the origins of the Second World War by briefly summarizing the events from 1919-1939. However, most emphasis is put on the amount of responsibility the Treaty of Versailles deserves for the outbreak of war. Other than analysing the Treaty of Versailles on its own, it also analyses the effects of the 1929 Wall Street Crash on the world, the rise of Fascism and Nazism, as well as the rise of Adolf Hitler, the failure of the League of Nations and the appeasement of the Fascist and Nazi regimes by Britain and France throughout the 1930s. Hence the Treaty of Versailles plays a

In the early 1900’s, the entirety of Europe was divided into various alliances and powers, most notably the Triple Alliance (Germany, Astro-Hungarian Empire, and Italy) and the Triple Entente (France, Russia, and the United Kingdom), which ultimately fell into a hellish firestorm of mustard gas and trench warfare in 1914 that left 18 million dead and Europe’s economies and production decimated manyfold (DBQ Project, Various – Document D). The destruction of the turn-of-the-century nations and Empires that slaughtered over people stems from a chronological progression of ambitious Imperialism, extreme Nationalism, and rapid Militarism.

Prior to the First World War, Europe was the world center of industry and capital. Massive death, destruction, and resentment after World War I left most countries unable to recover to a normal existence and damaged the world economy. The economic collapse and the political instability caused by World War I eventually led to the rise of fascism in Europe. Forceful dictators in Italy, Germany, and Japan took advantage of these problems to seize power by territorial expansion. These events caused a major repositioning of world power and influence. This paper traces a variety of significant factors and forces that contributed to the outbreak of World War II.

Changes were happening all over Europe between World War I and World War II, and the book Europe in the Era of Two World Wars highlights a lot of them. Volker Berghahn, the author, discusses how violence escalated all across Europe during this time frame. The book digs into the desires and upsets of countries like Germany, Britain, France, and Russia, during war times more than others I have read do. Economies of each country and the escalading violence are the main focuses of the book. In the following review of Berghahn’s work, Europe in the Era of Two World Wars, I will highlight why the author is qualified to write the book, and survey the strengths and weakness of the information he provided.

World War II officially racked the world from 1939 to 1944, but before any one nation actually declared war, Hitler was trying to take land. To respond with appeasement or collective security was debated by many as to which would avoid damage in the most efficient manner. Document 3, Document 4, and Document 6 show how collective security was definitely a more beneficial strategy than appeasement to respond to aggression.

The appeasement policy was not ideal for Europe. It proved to allow Hitler opportunities to gain control over most of Europe. Winston Churchill, a politician and army leader, stated that, “I have always held the view that the maintenance of peace depends upon the accumulation of deterrents against the aggressor, coupled with a sincere effort to redress grievances.”(Document B). Churchill believed that if France or Britain put in an effort to strategize and stop Germany, they would have prevented Germany from invading Czechoslovakia. Churchill also further states that, “... I ventured to … pledge that in conjunction with France and other powers they would guarantee the security of Czechoslovakia … and I still believe that if that course had been followed events would not have fallen to this disastrous state…”(Document B). This shows how Europe had many chance to stop Hitler by working together.

Appeasement was arguably the only realistic option for British policy towards Germany between 1936 and 1938 when considering the fact that appeasement permitted Britain to rearm, thus preparing her more effectively for war, whilst also giving her the moral high ground. Nevertheless, for some “appeasement has become a dirty word, synonymous with weakness and defeatism in the face of naked aggression” since Britain’s policy of appeasement succumbed to Nazi aggression and failed to actually prevent war. Subsequently many historians argue that alternatives including a ‘Grand Alliance’ and military intervention in the Rhineland (1936) and Czechoslovakia (1938) would have been better options. However, when considering the several hindrances to these alternatives including political and public stance, financial difficulties and the depth of pacifist objection, it appears that appeasement was the only realistic option.

Allied victory in 1945 was not always inevitable. Richard Overy comments in Why the Allies Won that ‘no rational man in early 1942 would have guessed at the eventual outcome of the war’ . The key aspect for the Allies in winning the war was the defeat of Hitler’s Germany. Despite evidence suggesting allied victory was achieved through military might alone, this essay will argue that victory in 1945 was down to a multitude of factors and cannot be solely attributed to the use of military. Therefore, other important influences with changed a possible German victory into an inevitable Allied victory which will be discussed include the entry of the USA into the war with its huge population and industrial capacity. In addition, the failure of

For quite a number of reasons, World War II was largely inevitable. In this text, I will take into consideration some arguments that have been presented in the past in an attempt to demonstrate the inevitability of the Second World War. These arguments range from the creation of the Treaty of Versailles to the conditions imposed on Germany to nationalistic issues. Many historians consider German's invasion into Poland the official commencement date of the Second World War.

The final product of the Versailles Treaty’s terms was the humiliation of Germany and more importantly, its individuals. Supportingly, Document D reports that, “The Allied and Associated Governments affirm and Germany accepts the responsibility of Germany and her allies for causing all the loss and damage to which the Allied and Associated Governments and their nationals have been subjected as a consequence of the war imposed upon them by the aggression of Germany and her allies.” (Document D) As the Treaty enforces blame, it singles out Germany. This attempt to prevent war only fueled the fire, creating bitterness that would be a massive contribution to World War II. In agreement, Document D continues the theme, relaying that, “What they knew of the treaty was etched

Perhaps the greatest failure to fully grasp the true intentions of Hitler's regime was the signing of the Munich Pact. The Munich Pact or Munich Agreement was signed by the leaders of Germany, Italy, Britain, and France on September 30, 1938. The backdrop to the Munich Agreement is Adolf Hitler’s rise to power and Germany’s remilitarization. Hitler moved aggressively to jumpstart a foundering German economy and to jettison the constraints that had been imposed on the German military after World War I. European leaders nervously looked the other way as he ran roughshod over the security provisions of the Treaty of Versailles and reasserted German power in central Europe. One goal of Hitler’s policies was to create Lebensraum, or greater living

Leading up to the First World War (WWI) was a series of crises -- Serbian unification efforts, the Ten-Point Ultimatum from Austria to Serbia, the Kruger Telegram, the Dreadnought Race, the Moroccan Crises of 1905 and of 1911, the Balkan Wars, and the Bosnian Crisis -- that generated significant conflict and division among the countries of Europe, all of which seemed to lay the foundation for the start of WWI. With concern for its own power and security in a rapidly changing Europe, Germany set out to undermine the power of as well as the alliances between other European countries. In his book The Sleepwalkers: How Europe went to War in 1914, Christopher Clark points out that, while ‘not one of the great powers has escaped the

The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast how the world responded to Germany’s annexation of Czechoslovakia and the invasion of Poland. For this paper, I will describe the steps Britain and France took when Germany began to take over Czechoslovakia. I will also discuss what steps were taken when Poland was threatened. I will be explaining how the steps France, Britain, and Poland were similar and different. Lastly, I will discuss why I believe Britain and France reacted the way they did.

For some European powers at the time, The Munich Agreement and the Anglo-German Declaration was considered to have achieved a peace that was thought to be unconceivable. Unfortunately, the great claims of Neville Chamberlain did not come true. These agreements only delayed the inevitable between the great European powers and allowed Hitler to gather more territory with relative ease. This document between the powers of Germany, Italy, France, and the United Kingdom outlined the terms and conditions under which Germany would annex a large portion of Czechoslovakia. Throughout this text, the historical context and significance of the Munich Agreement will be analyzed.