ANY PLAGIARISM GOING FORWARD WILL RESULT IN AN AUTOMATIC FAILING GRADE WITH NO OPTION FOR REVISIONS.
- "Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939." How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
- "Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents." How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
- Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
- "Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy - expansion in the East." Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
- How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
William Reis
ReplyDeleteMs.Noce
IB History
11/20/13
1. “Hitler alone caused the second world war in 1939” How far do you agree with this statement? why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
In my opinion i think, not only Hitler was the cause for World War Two, i think the Treaty of versailles was also something that made Hitler cause the war. The Treaty of Versailles was the treaty which placed all the blame of Germany for causing World War One. From my perspective i don’t think the treaty was a very fair one, which was by putting all the responsibility on Germans back for causing the war and on top of that for making Germany pay for all the damage they caused on other nations which costed them over 30 billions of dollars making Germany renew their economy entirely.. When Hitler was in command of Germany, he wanted Germany to gain all the power they used to have. They wanted the power back because the Treaty of Versailles took major power away from Germany. Hitler wanted to expand the power again and get back on the top. But according to A.J.P Taylor in his book “The origins of the Second World War” published in 1961, he claims that Hitler’s goal wasn’t to cause World War two, he claims that it was all an accident and that his mission was to get Germany back up on his feet with power, at last he claimed that Hitler’s mission was to cause a small war with Poland. So at the end I would not blame Hitler for causing World War Two, but blame Treaty of Versailles dues to its unfairness
2. “Hitler’s foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the results of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit weakness of his opponent.” How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
From my perspective i think between 1935 and 1939 Hitler actually accomplished a couple of achievements. On the other side Hitler’s did accomplished the goals he was looking forward to but he decides to invade Poland. The very first thing that Hitler wanted to focus on was to get Germany’s military power back on, he did this by removing himself away from the World Disarmament conference and League of Nations which were the two main sources on keeping Germany’s military base weak but just because Hitler did this, it did not mean he wanted revenge on nations again, he stated that he just wanted peace. How did Hitler managed to gain all the military power back when Germany signed the Treaty of Versailles which demanded major power taken away from Germany? In 1935 Hitler’s justification for getting the power back was that the British released that its air force would gain more power and that France had extended the enrollment from 12 months to 18 months. What did Hitler do about this? He stated that he was going to host a “peace army” to 36 different divisions which was made up with no more than 600 thousands soldier. Also the League of Nations was completely useless against Germany. One last thing that also was one of his accomplishments was the Anglo-German Naval Agreement in June 1935 which made the British sign an agreement to limit Germany’s navy by over 30 percent with the strength of Britain’s navy. In conclusion, Hitlers accomplished more than just the achievements stated about, but in my opinion i think these are the most important ones and it seemed like a very diplomatic move against its adversary.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long term plans for war.
ReplyDeleteThe evidence that i would claim that Hitler was intending on causing the World War two was that Hitler wanted Germany to gain Military power back which he eventually managed to make it true in 1935
where he expanded his army once again with a little over than 600 thousand soldiers and over 30 division. From other nation’s perspective they seemed to think that Hitler wanted to gain power back to cause major war because Germany took themselves out of the League of Nations and the World Disarmament Conference. On the other hands Hitler was not intending on breaking out major war, the military he hosted was a “peacetime-army” which by the word peace you can already expect what he meant. Eventually Hitler demanded the army to invade Poland and eventually this led to WW2, but Hitler claimed that he was only focusing on taking over Poland and not cause war between nations world wide.
4. “Hitler had one simple overriding in foreign policy- expansion in the East.” Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
I will have to agree with this statement because Hitler did override the foreign policy by attempting to expand in land. He wanted to annex some land of Czechoslovakia and Poland also some parts of Austria. This wasn’t all, he was looking foward to taking in the Ural Montains which belonged to the Russians, he wanted to take all these lands because the population number in Germany was very large and space for beings were just decreasing and decreasing.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the second world war.
i think appeasement had a major part on being responsible for causing the second world war because France and Britain was very loose towards Germany, letting Germany build up their power back again. Also in 1936 the Anglo-French decides to violate West Germany which was a little message from France which demanded a lesson to Hitler. Also as i stated before, Germany was trying to take over Poland, and Britain and France were on Poland’s side but France and Britain claimed it was complicated on defense tactics session. So in conclusion war i 1939 was declared by the Britain and France and NOT Germany. France and Britain didn’t take their time on making this decision but on the other side France and Britain had the same view like Germany which was that all 3 nation wished to expand their power also British and France Government were ruled under a national self interest.
WORK CITED:
Reading Packet #13
Germairy Roman
ReplyDeleteMs. Noce
IB History 11
11/23/13
International Relations 1933-9
1. "Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939." How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
I don't agree with this atatement. I think Hitler alone did not cause the Second World War in 1939. He did execute the beginning of the war but he was driven to do that by The Treaty of Versailles. The treaty lead Hitler to causing the war. If the treaty never existed I don't think Hitler would've of caused the war. Hitler wanted to make Germany a great power, destroy the Treaty of Versailles, build up the army, recover lost territory and take in all German-speaking people. Hitler wanted to give Germany power again and to do that he had to take over territories and destroy the Treaty of Versailles. A historian named A.J.P. Taylor claimed in 1961 that he also agrees that Hitler didn't have any intentions to cause the Second World War in 1939 or for giving all the Germans Lebensraum (living space) and that if anything he was trying to prepare for a war only against Poland not a major war.
2. "Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents." How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
I agree with this view. Hitler was very strategic and had the skill to achieve success with foreign policy between 1935 and 1939. Hitler would go to any extent to get what he wanted. He wanted to collect all the Germans from Poland by peaceful means but failed. He then decided to invaded Poland because of this. In 1933, Germany was still militarily weak which caused Hitler to act with caution and trick his opponents. Telling other states that Germany was willing to disarm if other states did the Same to achieve peace was one of hitler's cunning tactics and a favorite of his. Britain thought Hitler wanted to make peace by signing a ten-year non-aggression pact with the poles which not everybody believed. It ruined France's entente which was depended on Poland. This signing also caused France and Russia to improve their relations because they were threatened by Nazi Germany.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
The evidence that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war was his desire to go to war solely with Poland and not create a major war involving international outbreak. Also Hitler wanted to gain power for his country and destroy the Treaty of Versailles because it was blaming his country for causing WWI. The evidence that Hitler did in fact have plans was his annexing of Austria and parts of Czechoslovakia and Poland because it possessed large German minorities. Hitler bringing all German-speaking people inside the Reich and giving them Lebensraunm by taking over territories because the German population was too large. By building up the army it seemed that Hitler did have long-term plans for war.
4. "Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy - expansion in the East." Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement. The reason I grew with this statement is because of how many Germans Hitler acquired for his army. he wanted to expand Germany's territory by annexing in order to give his army comfortable accommodations. He annexed Austria and parts of Czechoslovakia and Poland to expand the territory and take German minorities. The German population proved to be huge which was what lead to Hitler expanding Germany's territory in the East.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
Appeasement played a big part in the outbreak of the Second World War. Britain followed the policy of appeasement which was a horrible idea and sparked the war. By following this policy Britain avoided war with Germany and gave them what they demanded. Germany was able to strengthen their military with the time that was gained by not going to war with Britain. If Britain never avoided war and never gave the Germans what they demanded then Germany would've never gained power. Germany was given time to rebuild and as a result the outbreak of the Second World War happened.
Works Cited: Packet #13
William Portorreal
ReplyDeleteMs. Noce
IB History
1. “Hitler alone caused the second world war in 1939.” How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
I think that Hitler was the cause of the war because Germany had already accepted the consequences and every country was calmed. Hitler not only wanted to fix the German economy but he also wanted to get revenge on everyone else. For example Hitler had attacked Poland and invaded Czechoslovakia which had provoked war because other countries had felt threatened. Hitler had been made allies with Japan and Italy because Germany couldn’t take on Britain and France. At this point tensions had worsened.
2. “Hitler’s foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weakness of his opponents. “How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
I would say that it’s true that his tactical skills lead to success in his foreign policy. Hitler had been successful in destroying the treaty of Versailles and getting the German troops to become stronger and bigger. Hitler had also signed a 10 year pact with Poland stating neutrality between the two. Hitler took advantage and Germany made Austria its third Reich which was very huge. Hitler had also managed to get France and Britain detached from Germany, which is why I thought he was pretty successful.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
In my opinion Hitler’s only intentions were to get Germanys military strengthen and to get revenge. If Hitler’s intention was to start another war I think he would have messed with USA, RUSSIA, JAPAN ect…, but he only went after what had worsened Germany, for example Hitler tried recovering Germanys land from Poland, and Czechoslovakia. He destroyed the Versailles treaty, that’s why I think Hitler didn’t want to start another war but to just get revenge.
4. “Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy – expansion in the east.” Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
I disagree with this statement because I feel like Hitler just wanted to get revenge. If Hitler was to expand the east I think he would have made allies within the east and wouldn’t have looked for revenge in the first place.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
I would say that appeasement was a cause of ww2 but I wouldn’t say that they were to blame for ww2. It just made things worse and gave a huge advantage for Hitler and the Germans. The appeasement wasn’t a good idea but it was for Germany letting them get their army back up and running, which led to Hitler getting his revenge.
Sources: packet 13
Erick Volquez
ReplyDeleteIB History
Ms.Noce
11/24/2013
International Relations 1933-9
1. I always heard that teamwork is needed to make a big impact on a specific goal which you have. Now when it comes to the term “Hitler alone caused the world war 2 alone in 1939” I can agree partially. Hitler began to almost secretly build up the army and weaponry in Germany so that Germany could surprise the nations around them. Now, even if he did this alone, he had Germany at his favor which is where I want to dive into. Without the Germans back-up he wasn’t going to fight against other nations by himself so by taking advantage of the great depression; he build Germanys confidence of being a militaristic powerful country and Germany listened and went to war. He alone prepared a plan to introduce to the Germans so that they could be at his side which is why the Nazi party went in favor and destruction began.
2. “Hitler’s foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the results of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents” is a statement that I can agree with. Hitler’s main ideas were to send in some type of what we can say mini-attack to actually see how strong or weak the opponent was. He didn’t have experience with World War 1 or any of the German failures like the schlieffen plan so he needed to create a new tactic. I can only agree to this extent because after sending in the “mini-attack” there was no telling of what was actually going to accure only from that information that was giving, he would prepare another attack but this time, massive. Hitler’s main plan was too build up Germany as a militaristic powerful nation that other nations can envy and see that a man came to pick up this nation from the ashes that were left from the previous war. This was already a huge accomplishment that added to his tactics. He preserved his words and almost secretly started to form the army that would rise to fight in WW2. I believe that between 1935 and 1939 were the years that he did the most secret work that ended up reflecting threw Germany and seemed as the way he wanted the nation to be looked at; as a powerful one.
3. The Evidence that was given to me about Hitler and the information researched divides into two parts, Hitler had clear long-term plans for the war and Hitler did not. Now, when it comes to looking into the statement that Hitler did have clear plans is based on a very inferential point of view because as we know, he did establish plans to attack and go forward to cause WW2 but how he didn’t was left “in the clouds” very unclear just his subjective thinking expressed by actions brought forward to be Objective. For the statement that there wasn’t a basic and strong plan on Hitler’s mind has more based info than theories. Hitler didn’t explain his plans by words but only executed them by actions. I can say that if he knew the expression “actions speak louder than words” he could have actually known that he did that. This statement shows that there is more evidence that Hitler didn’t have long term plans because he wasn’t a very talkative which lead to not secret attacks but strategized ones.
ReplyDelete4. the statement “Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy in the expansion in the East” is a statement that I can say it’s very true. He wanted to take charge of Austria and Czechoslovakia to add this territory to Germany and make a greater and bigger Germany so that they can expand not only their power but to domain these countries and their goods. Since the great depression was a huge issue, Hitler wanted to make sure that Germany had bread to eat and sustain itself but there was no other way in this man’s mind to get it by peace but only threw force. His expansion plan was single and on point. There wasn’t a need for him to leave Germany the way it was, he envisioned for Germany to grow and become strong which is why his foreign policy took place and Hitler took action upon expanding.
5. I believe that we can blame the appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War simply because of the first one and events that followed. Having a country like Germany that was already oppressed before WW1 even started, then losing the war and loosing territory, resources, money etc. just brought them down. Now having this man that only wanted to seek to have his country rule wasn’t anything new to Germany but he did accomplish them in his ways. Passing through the great depression was just a way to get the peoples trust even if it wasn’t meant to be on purpose but gave Hitler the image of a powerful humanly god who would save Germany from despair. This brought him to make tactics and declare WW2 which of course would alert the allies and officially begin the first attacks and everything that went on from there.
WORK CITED:
"World War Two - Causes." World War Two. History on the Net, 25 Feb. 2013. Web. 21 Nov. 2013.
"Nazi Objectives: War in 1939." Nazi Objectives: War in 1939. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Nov. 2013.
Packet #13
1. “Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939.” How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not?
ReplyDelete- I would not say Hitler alone caused World War 2. I would say he might have been a main influence to the cause of the war. I say this because Europe after World War 1 fell into a depression a few months to a year later. With the League of Nations being the ones responsible for the economy of Europe, you can tell they failed at that and is the reason they fell into a depression. So with the League of Nations being no good to prevent a World War after the 1920’s I can say that was a bit of an influence to why World War 2 came. Even though Hitler’s plans were to destroy the Versailles settlement against Germany and rebuild the army, I would say this could have caused another war alone because these were some of his aims in foreign policy. Hitler was successful in many ways for his aims in foreign policy such as breaching Versailles in 1935. So you can tell Hitler had a huge impact in Europe and was a major influence to the start of World War 2, but I wouldn’t say Hitler alone was the cause of the Second World War.
2. “Hitler’s foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skill and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents.” How far would you agree with this view?
- I can agree with this this view to a certain extent. Yes I would say Hitler’s success in foreign policy were results of his own tactical skill and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents but I would also say it’s his opponents fault for letting him take advantage of them. By me saying that most of you would disagree and probably say something like your only proving the point that it was Hitler’s own skill which led to his success with foreign policy. Look here, what I meant by “it’s his opponents fault for letting him take advantage of them” was because Britain and France where believing in something called appeasements. This of course meant that they were going to try and do anything possible in order to avoid another international war. So that meant British and France were letting Hitler walk all over them and take advantage of them. This is why I said I would agree with it to a certain extent because it was not just ONLY Hitler’s tactical skills to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents when his opponents where actually the ones helping him do it.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
- Evidence going for Hitler’s long-term plans for war where kind of leading others into thinking he actually DID want the war. For example, in packet 13 they where saying that Hitler was complaining about the population and how it was too large for the area it has already acquired. They tried to say how he wants more land so the people can have more food and more living space (Lebensraum). Evidence that is going against the view that Hitler had no long-term plans for war was not as strong as I think compared to the evidence going for view that he had long-term plans for war. Evidence for the view going against was that Hitler didn’t have any detailed plans for acquiring Lebensraum and never had any intention for an international war. In fact he was mostly prepared to go to war with Poland. Some Historians had said that Hitler only got as far as he did because others didn’t know what to do with him, and for the most part I can actually say I agree with that.
4. “Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy – expansion in the east.” Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
ReplyDelete- I would actually agree with this statement. I agree with this statement even though it might not be all that true because other than the fact that Hitler wanted to rebuild the German army and destroy the Versailles settlement that was hated so much, it was all a way of just preparing to annex lands for further expansion in the east. Hitler wanted to expand east because he felt that the Germans needed more living space (Lebensraum). Hitler wanted more living space for the Germans because he felt as if Germanys population was to big for the land that the people where in so he felt that Germany needed to be expanded more the east in order for his people to acquire more living space and food. This is the reason why I agree with the statement that Hitler had one over-riding aim in his foreign policy and it was to expand more to the east.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
- Appeasement is a way of avoiding war with aggressive countries such as Germany, Italy or Japan. It was usually followed by Britain but then France soon followed the ways of appeasement. The way you avoided war by using appeasements was to follow the demands from the aggressive countries. From around mid 1920’s to 1937 Britain and France believed that war must be avoided at all cost, so by them believing that, they allowed various acts of aggression and breaches of Versailles. They took appeasement so serious that it got to a point of its climax in Munich where French and Britain seriously didn’t want war with Germany. It was so bad that they made Hitler a present and this present was Sudetenland. This is what caused the destruction of Czechoslovakia, so you can clearly see that the appeasement failed. So you can say the appeasement was a way of Britain and France just helping Germany get back on their feet, I say this because Britain and France just let Germany step all over them and breach Versailles. So I would say the appeasement had a “profound” effect on the outbreak of the Second World War.
Victor Harris
ReplyDeleteMs.Noce
I.B History 11
11/24/13
1."Hitlers alone caused the Second World War in 1939." How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not ? Explain your answer in detail.
-I don't agree with this fully because even though people think Hitler being a master mind, you have to think of the League of Nations. The League of Nations was the reason why the economy was so bad that lead to the Great Depression. On Hitlers part he had four main goals. First destroying the Treaty of Versailles, and he aslo wanted to get the terrioty that Germany lost. Lastly wanted all the German people inside Reich. Yes Hitler had a HUGE impact in world war two, but I will say other key elements helped in the world war 2.
2."Hitler's foreign policy successes bewteen 1935 and 1939 were the results of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weakness of his opponets". How far would you agree with this view ? Explain in detail
-I agree. Hitler is brilliant for discovering his opponents weakness, I mean this is war and you do what you have to do to win. Hitler was so powerful that knowing Britian and France weakness, he would attack Polond, and Historians say this was the reasoning of world war two. Hitler knowing his opponents weakness means he could do anything he wanted. While all this was happening he still wanted to achieve his goals that he wanted, like destroying the Treaty of Versailles and while this was all happening Hitler was still making Germany stronger. So yes I do agree with this statement.
3.Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
-Well when Hitler was talking about Germanys population, he was saying that it was to large for the area that they had. Hitler wanted more land and food to provide for the Lebensraum(another word for the Germans). Hitler going in debt made it clear he had no love and simply hatred towards the Jewish people. The against for this was Hitler actually never had "detailed plans" for any major war, he was mostly ready for Poland. On page 76 it said " He got as far as he did because others did not know what to do with him". So what I'm thinking is Hitler only kept going because of how others reacted. In the book "Hitlers Empire: Nazi Rule in occopied Europe(2008), it says Hitler really didn't have evidence that had serious thought out plans.
4."Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy-expansion in the East".Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
ReplyDelete-I agree with this statement because he wanted Germany and it's army to be more powerful. Hitler aslo wanted to expand Germany to expand it's territory.Hitler said the population of Germany was going to be huge that's why he wanted an expansion. What he did was annex(which means extension) Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland to make Germany grow. So yes I agree with the statment Hitler with the expansion in the East.
5.How far was apeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War 2 ?
-Some Historians believed that yes the appeasement was the blame for the war. They said Britian and France should of taken action to Hitler before Germany got to powerful. It seemed that Britain and France couldn't macth Germany, so there really wasn't nothing they can do. I would say the appeasment had some affects on the second world war only because Germany was growing in power, and basically doing what they want.
WorkCited:
Packet 13
Jalexis Ruiz
ReplyDeleteMs.Noce
IB History
1."Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939." How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
In my opinion I don’t agree with this statement about “Hitler alone was the cause of the Second World War in 1939” my reason for that is because I think the treaty of versailles was something that made hitler cause the war. The treaty of versailles took away a lot of power from germany and hitler wanted them to get it all back when he had control of germany. But then again the treaty of versailles placed all the blame onto the germans. I dont think that was very fair at all because there was other countries that took place in that war not just germany but germany had to play back all the damage they had done. Hitler didn’t want to cause the war he just wanted germany to get back up on his feet , he just wanted a little war to happen not a big one it was like an accident. But i really think in my opinion that it was the treaty of versailles that made him cause the second world war in 1939.
2."Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents." How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
In my opinion I think between 1935 and 1939 Hitler did make some success. Hitler would do everything and anything to get what he wanted. Hitler wanted to get all the germans from poland but he ended up failing.. So from there he wanted to invade poland for that. The military was still weak in germany that also cause hitler to trick his opponents.
3.Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
The evidence I would claim about “Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war” would be that he was only trying to get Germany to gain their military power back and he made it happen.Another thing he wanted to do was to destroy the treaty of versailles because they were blaming him for the cause of ww1.
4."Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy - expansion in the East." Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
I agree with this statement because Hitler wanted to take charge of austria and Czechoslovakia to put them together to make germany bigger and greater. He wanted them to expand. Hitler took care of them he made sure they had bread to eat. Hitler didnt want to leave germany the way it was he would make sure everything was correct that is why the foreign policy took place.
5.How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
What I think about this is that the appeasement had cause for the outbreak of the second world war but not all the blame. My reason for that is because they let germany get back all their power . Germany tried taking over poland but Britain and France was on poland side. But the appeasement was a bad idea it just made everything worse like it caused the war to take place. But for the result of germany being able to rebuild their military powers back was the reason for the outbreak for the second world war.
work cited:
packet 13
Junior FanFan
ReplyDeleteIB History
Ms.Noce
November 24, 2013
1."Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939." How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
I agree that Hitler alone started the second world war because he was in the League of Nations. The League of Nations is to help nations Hitler had his own plan so he left and started invading countries. For example in packet 13 " The Germans invaded Poland on september 1st. But Hitler should have full blame because the treaty of versailles I think it was weak because it was suppose to watch over Germany but instead of reducing their army Hitler made it more powerful. Also nations seen that Hitler was up to no good but they just left him alone, they should have step in when they had suspicion of Germany. For example " this breach in Versailles caused Britain,France, and Italy to draw together briefly in suspicion of Germany".
2"Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents." How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
I agree with this view until 1934 because that's when Germany tried to start a battle with Austria but Hitler had to back off because his army wasn't ready yet. For example " When Mussolini moved Italian troops to the Austrian frontier and warned the Germans off, the revolt collapsed. Hitler taken back had to accept that Germany was not yet strong enough". But before
that Germany had the other nations under control because he showed them that he was a good man by signing a ten-year non-aggression pact. but he ends up invading Poland anyways.
3.Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
The evidence for Hitler's long term plans was when he wanted more land for him and the Germans. For example " He claimed that Germany's population was much too large for the area into which it was constrained, more land was needed to provide food for the German people". Hitler wasn't completely crazy because he still cared for the people of Germany. When Hitler tried to acquire Lebensraum that's when nations knew that Hitler had no clear goals for war.
4. Hitler had one simple overriding aim in foreign policy - expansion in the East." Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement
Hitler wanted to expanded to the east because he wanted to make Germany bigger. Hitler tried to take Austria and Czechoslovakia. Hitler didn't just want a great army, he also wanted to have control over the nations and their goods.
5.How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
Appeasement play a huge part in world war 1 because Britain took the appeasement policy too far because if they went to war with Germany they could have decreased the army. But they choose not to and Hitler was happy because he made his army stronger. So Germany was able to get more soldiers and weapons to start world war 2.
Work cited: packet 13
Dimas A. Amezquita
ReplyDeleteIB History
Ms. Noce
November 24, 2013
International Relations 1933-9 Questions:
1. “Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939.” How far do you agree with this statement? Why or Why Not? Explain your answer in detail.
I disagree with this statement that Hitler caused the Second World War. I really think that Hitler wanted Germany to be a feared powered country again. Hitler did not like how The Treaty of Versailles made Germany weak and it made Hitler want to go to war and bring back the power that Germany used to have. He wanted the Treaty of Versailles to be destroyed, so he could be able to build a army and try to get some of their territory that they lost in World War 1 back to where it belong in Germany. I think if the Treaty of Versailles was fair or did not even exist, maybe Hitler would not cause any war. So I am saying is that the Treaty of Versailles made Hitler to cause a major war in 1939.
2. “Hitler’s foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents.” How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail
I agree with this view because Hitler used his own strategies and had skills to achieve what he wanted to the foreign policy during 1935 and 1939. One example was he wanted to invade Poland because his strategy of getting all of the Germans from Poland failed. Germany was a weak military country, but Hitler was trying to act cautions so he could be able to trick his opponents. The way he did it was telling many other states to demilitarize their weapons and Germany would do the same. This was a tactic that Hitler used of tricking other countries of having peace. Like Britain who thought Hitler and Germany were going to have peace with them by signing a ten-year non-aggression pact, but this signing ruined France’s entente and Russia to improve their relations because the Nazi German army was getting stronger and made a big threat to Russia and France.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
The evidence of Hitler not having no clear long-term plans for war was Hitler trying to go to war with Poland and was not trying to cause or create a major international war. Another thing was that Hitler really did not like the Treaty of Versailles and wanted it to be destroyed because it was taking away Germany’s power and blaming Germany for causing World War 1. The evidence, which in fact had plans for Hitler to annex Austria, Poland and some parts of Czechoslovakia because Hitler knew that they had some large German minorities. With Hitler trying to build a army, I really think that Hitler did have some kind of long-term plans for war.
4. “Hitler had one simple overriding in foreign policy – expansion in the East.” Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
I agree with this statement because Hitler disallows the foreign policy by trying to expand Germany’s land. Hitler wanted to annex lands in Poland, Austria, and some parts of land in Czechoslovakia, and Hitler wanted to take Russia’s Ural Mountains. The reason for Hitler wanting all these lands for Germany was because there was a large population in Germany and Hitler noticed that space in Germany were decreasing.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
I think that the appeasement was really a big part for a outbreak to start of causing the second World War. Britain made a bad choice of following the policy of appeasement because it started the war. with Britain following the policy of appeasement, they avoided any war with Germany and Germany was able to give any demands to Britain, this was way for Germany to strengthen their military for them not going to war with Britain. If Britain did not let Germany to give them demands and not avoiding war with Germany, then German’s military would not have strengthen and be powerful.
Work Cited:
Packet (#13)
Stephanie Santiago
ReplyDeleteNov.24, 2013
IB History
Ms. Noce
International Relations 1933-1939
1. “Hitler alone caused the 2nd world war in 1939.” How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not?
I agree with the statement because Hitler had a huge impact on the cause of the 2nd world war in 1939. Hitler had proclaimed the renewal of enrollment during March of 1935. The outcome to that was put in a negative impression for Germany by France, Britain, and Italy. The French were so disturbed by Hitler that they signed the treaty of mutual assistance along with USSR. A year after Hitler was caught addressing armies, getting shut down by the Treaty of Versailles, but even then the Germans weren’t removed by the British and French. Hitler along with Japan had got together to sign the Anti-Comintern Pact. By the end of all that Britain and France had decided to go to war with Germany.
2. “Hitler’s foreign policy successes between 1935-39 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents.” How far would you agree with this view?
I do agree that during 1935 to 1939 Hitler had successful foreign policies, Because of his successes he was very much admired and significant in Germany. He sure did keep his word and managed to make everything he planned possible to happen.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
Hitler had failed his goals for building a union with Austria and Germany. Leading to that was the murder of Engelbert Dollfuss the Chancellor, which Mussolini had backed up. After that the conflict had failed and Hitler had felt disappointed because he realize that Germany wasn’t as powerful.
4. “Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy-expansion in the East.” Explain why you or agree or disagree with this.
I agree because Hitler wanted to negotiate with Britain to become successful but instead the British led Germany down and said they wouldn’t dare risk themselves for Germany on the East.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the 2nd world war.
The appeasement was to blame for the outbreak of the 2nd world war because it failed badly, The appeasement was made to be controlling instead of negotiating by the British. It was unsuccessful because it proved how weak France and Britain were.
Cites: Packet #13 International Relations
Dianna Colon
ReplyDeleteIB History 11
Ms.Noce
November 24, 2013
1.“Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939.” How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
- I think that Hitler did not cause world war two alone. One of the reasons why I do not agree with the statement above is because Hitler’s main purpose was to help Germany recover their power. The Treaty of Versailles was said to be one of the possible responsibilities for the Second World War. This treaty caused Germans to have a desire for revenge, which eventually also caused Hitler to be angry and want revenge as well. That said, Hitler wanted to get back Germany’s lost as well as to destroy Poland. A.J.P. Taylor believed that Hitler did not want to cause a big war and that all he expected was a short war with Poland. The world economic crisis was also said to be one of the possible responsibilities for the Second World War. It was said that without this crisis, Hitler probably never would’ve came to power. This means that if this crisis were never to happen, Hitler probably wouldn’t have had power, which means that he would’ve never been able to get back at the Germans lost. These are the main reasons why I think that Hitler alone was not the cause of world war two.
2. “Hitler’s foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents.” How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
- I agree with this view for the simple fact that Hitler had many successes. I felt as if Hitler was very intelligent once it came to his success. One reason I say he acted intelligent was because he acted bravely but also soothed his opponents with what they wanted to hear, which I feel is a smart move. Hitler had signed a ten-year pact with the Poles. This pact ruined France’s Little Entente and improved relations between Russia and France. Another success was that Hitler isolated Britain by offering to limit the German navy to 35 percent of the strength of the British navy. Hitler combined Germany’s position by signing the Anti-Comintern Pact with Japan. It was said that Hitler’s best success was the Anschluss with Austria. This was a triumph for Germany because it showed the weakness of both Britain and France. These are the reasons why I agree with this view.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
- The evidence that goes for the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war was that as A.J.P. Taylor says in his book, “The Origins of the Second World War,” is that Hitler did not want to cause a big war, he just expected a short war with Poland. Taylor felt as if Hitler was pulled into the war by accident after the Poles called his bluff. This shows that Hitler had no long-term plans for war. The evidence against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war was that as Adam Tooze says in his book, “The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy,” is that Hitler was afraid that the if delayed the war any longer, the danger that Britain and France would overtake German rearmament was greater. This shows that Hitler would do anything in order to make Germany remain with its power, and that he might have long-term plans for war.
4. “Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy – expansion in the East. Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
ReplyDelete- I agree with this statement because Hitler believed that Germany’s population was too large for the area where it was forced to be in. He also believed that Germany needed more land to provide food to the Germans. Also he claimed that a area was needed where the excess German population could both colonize and settle.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
- I would say that appeasement had a big blame for the outbreak of world war two. Some historians argue that Britain and France should have stated their opinion with Hitler before Germany became too strong. An Anglo-French attack would have taught Hitler a lesson. Alan Bullock wrote, “Success and the absence of resistance tempted Hitler to reach out further, to take bigger steps,” (Section 5.6 (a)). Hitler was convinced that Britain and France would remain unresisting. This shows that the appeasement was also responsible for the outbreak of the Second World War.
Source: Handout #13
ESSAY
ReplyDeleteCarlos Callejas
1. “Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939” How far would you agree with this statement?
It is easy for one to say “yes, World War II was Hitler’s fault”, but this is not my case. I partially agree with this statement. Indeed Hitler contributed to the outbreak of World War II. To trace the origins of his motivation we must look at what caused the Germans to grow desperate and` organize in extremist groups: The Versailles Treaty. Hitler wanted to restore Germany’s power (which was stripped by the Treaty) and took advantage of the hardships brought by the Versailles Treaty in order to rise to power and achieve his goal. If the Treaty had been less severe with Germany, perhaps the War would have been prevented or at least scaled down. Another cause was the Allied failure to intervene in cases such as the Invasion of the Rhineland and the rebuilding of the German military, the Allies were aware of this but chose to do nothing to not risk war (appeasement policy).
2. “Hitler’s foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the results of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents.” How far would you agree with this view?
I agree with the above statement, Hitler was indeed a surprisingly good tactician. He was able to assess his enemies’ weaknesses and manage to work around them to achieve his own goals successfully. He reunited the great majority of the Germans into the Reich through politics, except those in Poland. He managed to rearm Germany by withdrawing from the Disarmament Conference and the League of Nations with very believable motives and gained support from other countries to set up Germany’s military once again. Another great success was the Anglo-German treaty with the British, this Treaty diplomatically allowed Germany to rebuild her submarine force. Hitler did most of this by taking advantage of the British policy of appeasement which meant that Britain was, pretty much, letting Germany do whatever they wanted so as to prevent a future war (obviously, it was a failure). Hitler also destroyed the French mini-entente with Poland by signing a non-aggression treaty and tricked Britain into thinking the appeasement policy was working in that Germany was now trying to achieve peace.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
Hitler claimed that he was only prepared for a short war with Poland to take territory, and to rebuild German glory. Hitler was a brilliant strategist and leader; so his words can be mere part of his plans to expand Germany through global War. There is no evidence of any true agenda to accomplish his expansionist goal of the “lebensraum” (Living space) promised to the Germans, it’s likely just a propaganda strategy to gain favor from the Germans; the idea is quite difficult to achieve and its extremely ambitious attitude supports the idea that it was simply a move to gain support. Similarly, Mark Mazower in his book “Hitler’s Empire: Nazi rule in occupied Europe”, argues that there is also no evidence of Hitler planning thoroughly to build and maintain a Nazi Empire, perhaps there was no such evidence due to Hitler being worried with his accomplishing his goals and Poland. Hitler’s heavy armament building and militarization would prove otherwise, that he was preparing to fight a large-scale conflict. The reason of that could be a simple desire to keep Germany able to defend herself against many enemies surrounding her (France, Britain and USSR), or, considering Hitler was a master of deception and his expansionist goals; he was intending to take over Europe through a global scale war.
When it comes to Hitler’s intentions, no one but him can be really sure.
4. “Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in Foreign Policy- expansion in the East” Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement, Hitler did intend to expand Germany by annexing Austria, Czechoslovakia, Rhineland and Poland to reunite the German people and regain territory lost. And to accommodate the army and population he planned to conquer and expand as far East as the Ural Mountains in Russia. His reason for annexing countries was that the Versailles Treaty gave too little space for Germans to live and produce food; so the only viable way was to expand Germany. I feel his ambition to expand Germany far into Russia was an overblown statement to increase his own popularity.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for World War 2?
I would say it had a large part in letting the Germans follow their plans and grow uncontrollably, beyond Allied control. Mainly by not intervening in situations where Germany could have been subdued, such as the invasion of Poland; in which the Allies betrayed Poland by breaking their promise: Britain did a half-hearted attempt at mobilizing; eventually retreating when they saw German troops, and France did nothing when it could have defeated Germany. But since Hitler and Germany were in a spirit of lust for power and revenge, there was nothing that could be done to prevent war even if Germany was defeated, except having been less severe with Germany in the Versailles Treaty; the origin of the chain of events that unfolded into World War 2.
SOURCES:
Handout #13
Miladys Florentino
ReplyDeleteWorld History 11
Ms Noce
Questions:
1. "Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939." How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
- “Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939” I disagree, I believe he wasn’t the only one involved causing the Second War. Even though, Hitler wanted to make Germany have power again by destroying the Treaty of Versailles and also building an army, as well as recovering the lost land which happened in World War 1. Besides, Hitler trying to improve Germany, he did some dirty work himself which may had sparked the war such as sending troops to the Czech capital as well as invading Poland. Due to this, Hitler was already making allies with other countries. Hitler wasn’t alone and yet he played a huge role of causing the Second War.
2. "Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents." How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
-Hitler’s policy, first few aims were successful by the end of 1939 but not all aims were. I do believe this view was the result of the weakness of his opponents since some aims were successful. But, due to his own tactical skills he succeeded. As well as. Hitler being very powerful he could have had anything done and according to this statement he was able to achieve his goals.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
- Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war, due to the fact that he wanted to regain Germany’s lost land as well as more needed land for food. Also, Hitler aimed to build up Germany’s army which may be a long-term plan which would be needed for the Second War.
4. "Hitler had one simple overriding aim in foreign policy - expansion in the East." Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
- Within this statement, I agree because Hitler wanted more resources for Germany which was needing more land. In order for this to happening, he would have to take over a few countries for land since Germany’s population keep on increasing.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War
- I believe the appeasement was to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War since Britain and France were trying to avoid any war or conflicts with other countries. Regardless, they had to take orders from either Japan, Italy, and especially Germany. This meant that Germany was able to gain more power since Britain and France had to follow their commands.
Source:
Handout Packet #13
1.) I agree that Hitler cause World War 2 was as far was he, build an one of the strongest armies ever created and had a strong hold over his people that he go them. He had also recovered the territories that were taken from him due to the treaty of Versailles. Hitler had also went to conquering new territories that belong to other countries, and intent on capturing Austria from Czechoslovakia and poland. He intended on destroying the treaty of Versailles. Hitler had made his aims very clearly.Britain had help in the process by building a fleet. Hitler didn't pursue all of this by himself because he had help from his allies Italy and Japan. So we can't say that hitler was the main cause of the second WW because, other countries were involved too.
ReplyDelete2.) I agree was far was that Hitler was successful in exploiting his opponent's weakness because he used his crafty skills to his benefit. He took advantage of Britain and france because they weren't careful in observing their enemy. They should have known that after the first world war that Germany was going to plot something to obtain all her losses and avenge her lost.
3.) As I examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war. I found it that Hitler actually wanted to go to war, because according to packet 13 he was complaining about not having enough natural resources for his growing population of citizens. He knew that expanding his territorial gains would led to war. Which is way he had recreated his army to be well prepared for when everything was going down in havoc. Not to mention that he wanted to destroyed the Versailles treaty and defied it by breaking many of its rules. He was fully aware of his intentions and what they would conclude.
4.) I agree with this statement because one of Hitler's goals was to expand Germany and because most of the territories that she lost were located in the East due to the treaty of Versailles he wanted to reclaim them and also expand her land and gather all of the german speaking people.
5.)I would say that the appeasements should be blame for the war as far was they didn't pay attention to what was happening with Germany. they let her break many regulations of the treaty of Versailles. And Germany saw this as a way to proceed with her plan to take over. And also to the fact that Britain let Germany take control when they were working together on the fleet.
resources
packet #13
Mu Ying Yu
ReplyDeleteIB World History 11
Ms. Noce
November 22, 2013
International Relations 1933-9
1. “Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939.” How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
• I agree with the statement “Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939” because he prepared to go to war, so that’s why he wanted Germany to be strong again. In the process to make Germany stronger, he had destroy the Treaty of Versailles’ settlement, built up new strong army to restored lost territories by putting German people in other countries and in another to way annex Austria than also took territories from other countries. The reason why Hitler taking territories is because the German’s population is large, which more land was needed to provide settle space for them. Also, Hitler had withdrawn Germany out of the World Disarmament Conference and the League of Nations. By the way he also said that no action was taking by the Versailles, the League is helpless and the Front collapsed lead to his next success and more later on cause war.
2. “Hitler foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents.” How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
• I agree with this statement to the end of 1938 because before the end of 1938 Hitler foreign policy was very success that all his decisions had been pass by the Britain and achieved without war also sign the ten-years non-aggression pact. But after that Hitler was going against Czechoslovakia and Poland. In part of the Lebensraum policy, Hitler decided to destroy Czechoslovakia because control them brought advantages to Germany’s military and economic dominance of the central Europe. Hitler signs the non-aggression pact with USSR because their secret mission was to divide Poland up to them. When Britain approves Hitler go bluff but in the other side Poland refuse to negotiate and Germany started the invasion.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no long-term plans for war.
• The evidence that goes for the view is A.J.P. Taylor claimed that Hitler never had full plans that worked toward acquiring Lebensraum and for no wars but the only wars is going against Poland. The evidence that goes against for the views are the longer Hitler delay for war, the more danger for Britain and France to overtake German’s rearmament. And Hitler had an expansion goal to take over Europe.
4. “Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy – expansion in the East.” Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
• I agree with this statement because in his way to make Germany the great power, one of his goals was to restore and annexing countries to expand Germany. He had restore Saar and Polish Corridor. In the opposite side he annexed Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland. He also occupying Russia more far east to Ural Mountains. Afterward he sent German people to live in those countries and the reason given was the populations were large which more land is needed.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
• The appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War because first it failed; Britain, France avoid war with Germany. Which these make Hitler happy because he can build the army more stronger to go to war with other countries. In the other side, Britain and France thought it was negotiate with British but it says control, which it made the appeasement unsuccessful because in a shows Britain and France weakness to other countries.
Source:
• Packet # 13
Samantha Foster
ReplyDeleteIB History
Ms. Noce
11-24-13
International Relations 1933-9
1."Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939." How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
I would agree with this statement to some extent. The reason why I don’t completely agree with it is because I don’t believe that Hitler alone started the war. You have to take appeasement into consideration as well as the USSR who signed non-aggression pacts with Germany which also stated that Poland would be divided between Germany and the USSR. I believe that Hitler contributed to the start of war when he attacked Poland instead of just occupying Danzig and the Polish Corridor. By attacking Poland, Hitler had showed the world that he intended to reclaim what Germany had lost at Versailles and reign over Poland. Many historians believe that Hitler had wanted to start a war from the very movement he came into power. Historian Martin Gilbert argues that Hitler had wanted to make up for the humiliation Germany experienced in World War 1.
2."Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents." How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
I would agree that Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents. Hitler had withdrew Germany from the World Disarmament Conference after France had denied Germany the right to equality of armaments and yet insisted that Germany would disarm if other states were willing to do the same as well. This was an example of one of Hitler’s favorite tricks which was “to act boldly while at the same time soothing his opponents with the sort of conciliatory speeches he knew they wanted to hear” (handout 13). I believe that Hitler wouldn’t have gotten as far as he did without using this technique because it acted like a sort of camouflage for him. On the outside, people the Hitler was trying to be peaceful but on the inside he had his own plans and motives.
3.Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
There is evidence on whether or not Hitler had long-term plans for war. Some historians believe that conquering Austria and parts of Czechoslovakia and Poland just the start of Hitler’s plan and he would then proceed to take over the rest of Czechoslovakia and Poland. He would continue on to take control of Russia as far east as the Ural Mountains. All this was part of Hitler’s plan to expand Germany for he claimed that the area in which Germany was restricted in was far too small for Germany’s large population. He promised that He would give Germans “Lebensrawn” (living space). Other historians disagree on such plans. A.J.P Taylor argues that Hitler never had any plans for making Lebensrawn actually happen. He also claims that Hitler never had the intentions of starting a major war. If anything, he expected a short war with Poland. It is also said that Lebensrawn was just propaganda. Its only mean was to make Hitler more popular and gain support and unify the Nazi Party. In general, it is unclear on what Hitler’s true intentions were.
Madelis Mejia
ReplyDeleteMs.Noce
IB History 11
1. “Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939.” How far do you agree with this statement?
I believe that Hitler wasn’t the only cause of World War 2. I think the treaty of Versailles was another cause of World War 2. The whole point for the Treaty of Versailles was end the war. This treaty wasn’t fair because they put all the blame on Germany for causing the war also they made Germany pay for all the damages (over 30 billion dollars). When Hitler was in charge of Germany he wanted Germany to get all of their power back; the Treaty of Versailles took all of Germany’s power away. All Hitler wanted to do was to get Germany’s power back.
2. “Hitler’s foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents.” How far would you agree with this view?
I totally agree with this view. I agree with this because Hitler was a very smart guy when it came down to making decisions. He was very strategic. Hitler’s plan was to get all of the Germans out of Poland –peacefully- Poland didn’t agree with this action so Germany then had to invade Poland. While this was happening Germany’s military wasn’t doing so good, with Hitler knowing this he had to be strategic and trick Poland. This way he tricked them was by telling them they will surrender if the other state will surrender.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
The evidence that shows that he had a clear long-term plan for the war was he in fact did make plans to continue World War 2 and get revenge. The evidence that shows that he didn’t have a long-term for the war Hitler didn’t explain in full detail how his plan was going to go. He just brain stormed.
4. “Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy-expansion in the east-.“ Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
I agree with this statement because all Hitler wanted to do was to save Germany and rebuild it so it can be a better country. By doing so he had to break the Treaty of Versailles. Hitler wanted to move Germany to the east because he believed that Germany needs a bigger place to live in.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
Historians believed that appeasement was to blame for the outbreak of the 2nd world war. They insisted that Britain and France should of done something before Germany got to powerful. Britain and France wasn’t that powerful-put together- to take out Germany.
4."Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy - expansion in the East." Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with this statement. Annexing Austria and claiming Czechoslovakia and Poland as territory were essential parts in Hitler’s quest for making Lebensrawn happen. More land was needed in order to provide food for the German People. More land was also need so that the rest of the Germans could have a place to settle and colonize.
5.How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
I believe that appeasement was to blame for the outbreak of war because Britain and France should have stopped Germany before it gained too much power. Because the appeasers had let him do whatever he wanted, Hitler had gained a widespread of respect and admiration from the German people. France and Britain were also the first to declare war, not Germany. They too were desperate to conserve and strengthen their power and protect their economic interests. A war was bound to happen in order to maintain France and Britain power and status.
Works Cited:
Handout 13
1. "Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939." How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
ReplyDeleteOfcourse, Hitler was one of the main causes for Word War One. He used the financial crisis that prevailed in Germany at the time befor Word War One. He said that he was solving all the problems of Germany to persuade the german nation to vote him and be a follower of the Nazi party. Put it this way, the German nation has fallen for him and he got more and more power. But Hitler was not the only big cause for Word War two. One of the other causes was the Treaty of Versailles which led him ultimately to Word War Two. Hitler wanted Germany to get his power and terretory back but he just tried it in a wrong way too crazy way.
2. "Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents." How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
Hitler was crazy but he also had very well planned and farsighted plans. His problem was, that he overestimates himself and his plans very, though his ideas were very mature. At the beginning he was very succsesfull, thats why i agree. For example the pact with poland but after the time, the people began to notice that he was crazy.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
Everything, Hitler did was an sophisticated plan. Everything was planed from the beginning till the end. Hitler just didn't expected it to become different than he tought. And that was at the end that caused all the demage and the suffering.
1. "Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939." How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
ReplyDeleteWhile I would say that Hitler’s actions were leading causes WWII, he was not alone in leading so many countries into war. His instigation proved a true thirst and goal for war, but many others also lent themselves to the opportunities at hand. The disagreements of governmental structure and tactics that had been brewing since the end of WWI were among the many international disputes that escalated into full-scale war. The dissatisfaction of the outcome of the Paris treaties and other treaties concerning the First World War left Germany and other countries itching for revenge. While Germany, to a greater degree with Hitler at her helm, pushed on for was as ramification for the Allies’ severe actions in the 1920’s, it was an interaction, not simply German action. It was France and Britain, not Germany to declare war in September of 1939. Despite the mutual involvement, the Second World War would never have occurred as and when it did without Hitler’s involvement.
2. "Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents." How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
Hitler made great moves forward in foreign policy in the four years leading up to the start of World War II, was in great part due to his cunning but more in an exploitation of ignorance and the reluctance of others to stand up to his violations rather than an exploitation of their weaknesses. While Hitler blatantly rearmed and remilitarized his country in direct violation of the Versailles Treaty, no major objections were raised and the international unwillingness to get involved gave him ample room to grow to war. His methods of obtaining the land that Germany saw as having been wrenched form her after WWI were gained in a similar manner in the years leading up to 1939. The Sara Plebiscite was a seemingly fair and obvious move, an easy and painless gain for Germany. Such plebiscites seemed to become Hitler’s pet tactic, as he used it in Austria with vast success as well. Soon he began to push for power and, while Britain, France and their allies sat on their hands, she, with her allies of Austria and Italy and new land and forces, intimidated Czechoslovakia into surrendering land. As others did not wish for war, Hitler used this to his advantage, pushing Britain and the other former Allies to the brink and gaining as much as he could until, in 1939 war was upon them.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
Hitler did seems to take each step as it came, starting with slowly toeing the lone of the Versailles treaty until he had finally broken it completely. He also seemed to aimlessly gather resources and gain territory as far as other nations would allow him, however, war did seem to remain in his sights. He also cites a goal of a German Reich encompassing all German-speaking peoples and countries and an age of pure German power. He saw such a world as his right to claim and all his actions lead onwards with that end on sight.
4. "Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy - expansion in the East." Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
ReplyDeleteWhile Eastern expansion was a great aim of Hitler’s foreign policy, it seems that there was an over-arching goal of general expansion and domination. While Russia’s looming strength blocked Germany farther in the east, Hitler still tried to regain and gain any territory possible. With the alliance with Italy, Hitler was extending his reach in the West growing closer to European control. He had obvious aims to control and conquer as much as he could, and while he outwardly focused a great deal of effort on the East, where there were more German-speaking peoples, this was an easier area in which to build up his strength and influence to turn to the West.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
Britain and France greatly underestimated Hitler and attempted to appease him during the late 1930’s in an attempt to avoid greater disaster. Hitler, however, was only incensed and rejuvenated by these efforts and was able to move further as they made no real effort to stop his actions. Germany continued to strengthen and ready for the war to come while Britain and France sat idly by and made no move to prevent the then inevitable. Had these two countries world harder to immobilize Germany or prevent her and Hitler from being able to wage such a devastating war, World War Ii would not have become what it did.
Sources Used:
"Adolf Hitler." History.com. A&E Television Networks, 2013. Web. 24 Nov. 2013.
Grange, Allerton. "Hitler's Foreign Policy 1933 - 1939." Allertongrange.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Nov. 2013.
"Start of World War II: September 1939-March 1940." How Stuff Works.com. N.p., 2013. Web. 21 Nov. 2013.
“The Road to World War II.” Spiegelman.de. 2013. Web. 24 Nov. 2013
"World War Two - Causes." History On The Net.com. N.p., 25 Feb. 2013. Web. 24 Nov. 2013.
Jack Roberts
Naomie Bourdeau
ReplyDeleteMs.Noce
World History
11/24/13
International Relations 1933-9
1. "Hitler alone caused the Second World War in 1939." How far do you agree with this statement? Why or why not? Explain your answer in detail.
- I would agree far, because he attacked Poland on all of the fonts. His intentions were very high on destroying Poland. So that’s why I agree with this statement, because Hitler was a bad man in general. Hitler hated communism with a passion, and therefore he wanted to get rid of Russia and just have the country under control completely. Also Hitler hated the Jews and made people feel as if they were being discriminated. Even before Japan had entered the war he killed many Jewish people. So all of those events were just building up to a second world war.
2. "Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1935 and 1939 were the result of his own tactical skills and his ability to exploit the weaknesses of his opponents." How far would you agree with this view? Explain in detail.
-I would agree very far, because Hitler used his opponents. He had small attacks and big ones. So it would be hard for the opponents to overpower him. For example on March 1936 in packet 13 its says “Hitler sending troops into the Rhine land ,which had been demilitarized by the Versailles Treaty; Britain and France again protested but took no action”. Hitler definitely had power because not even Britain and France did not want to take action because they were obviously too scared to do so. So that’s why I would agree with that.
3. Examine the evidence for and against the view that Hitler had no clear long-term plans for war.
-Well the way I can explain that Hitler had no clear long –term plans over for war is when he decided not to agree and send some of the German troops to lodge Prague. This is the Czech capital. The way I can explain that Hitler did have clear long-term plans for war is when he starts to complain about not having enough tools to go into battlefield. Also when Hitler aimed in his foreign policies, to make sure all of them are achieved.
4. "Hitler had one simple over-riding aim in foreign policy - expansion in the East." Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
-I disagree because there were other aims also. Hitler also wanted to rebuild Germany back into the powerful country they also were. In order to that he had to gain more of their military appliance and also destroying the “hating Versailles Settlement”. He went beyond to achieve these aims and he hoped that they would still have been successful by the end of 1938.
5. How far was appeasement to blame for the outbreak of the Second World War?
-It was far to agree that the appeasement was to be the blame of the outbreak of the ww2 because Hitler had gained many countries by then. The appeasement was followed by the British and then by the French. France and Britain was so determined to avoid any conflicts with Germany because they made Hitler present of the Sudetenland. So that’s why I agree.
Work Cited
Packet 13