Page 1 of 1
Appeasement
#2
Posted 03 February 2004 - 10:06 PM
There is a good page here on the short term causes of WWII with hyperlinks through to more detailed information. There is also a link there to the 'long term' causes of the war.
You should also find the 'Road to War' section of this site useful
However I don't know of/can't find a site which deals with Appeasement in the way your question requires.
In order to answer this question well you need to think about the following:
What were Hitler's Foreign Policy aims? (and would he therefore seriously intend to stick to agreement made with Chamberlain at Munich?)
[You also need to relate Hitler's aims back to the Treaty of Versailles]
Did Chamberlain really believe Hitler's promise (that he had no more territorial demands) made at the same time as the Munich agreement? Or was Appeasement a way of 'buying time' in order to be better prepared for war?
If you are expected to write a full essay (rather than a paragraph) then you would also do well to think about the way in which the League of Nations had fallen into disrepute in the earlier 1930s and the way in which the aggressive nationalism of Japan and Italy had undermined the principle of collective security on which the L of N was based.
Hope this helps.
You should also find the 'Road to War' section of this site useful
However I don't know of/can't find a site which deals with Appeasement in the way your question requires.
Quote
Why did appeasement fail to prevent the outbreak of WW2?
In order to answer this question well you need to think about the following:
What were Hitler's Foreign Policy aims? (and would he therefore seriously intend to stick to agreement made with Chamberlain at Munich?)
[You also need to relate Hitler's aims back to the Treaty of Versailles]
Did Chamberlain really believe Hitler's promise (that he had no more territorial demands) made at the same time as the Munich agreement? Or was Appeasement a way of 'buying time' in order to be better prepared for war?
If you are expected to write a full essay (rather than a paragraph) then you would also do well to think about the way in which the League of Nations had fallen into disrepute in the earlier 1930s and the way in which the aggressive nationalism of Japan and Italy had undermined the principle of collective security on which the L of N was based.
Hope this helps.
#4
Posted 25 February 2004 - 05:29 PM
The following websites may help you:
http://www.pomperaug.../z/wwII/Rob.htm
Click on the PDF file at the bottom of the page
But basically, appeasement in WW2 was when Britain's Prime Minister tried to preserve peace by giving Hitler what he wanted. Finally, it looked like appeasement wasn't going to work on Hitler when he broke the Munich agreement in March 1939 by taking over Czechoslovakia when he wasn't supposed to.
I hope this is what you were after
http://www.pomperaug.../z/wwII/Rob.htm
Click on the PDF file at the bottom of the page
But basically, appeasement in WW2 was when Britain's Prime Minister tried to preserve peace by giving Hitler what he wanted. Finally, it looked like appeasement wasn't going to work on Hitler when he broke the Munich agreement in March 1939 by taking over Czechoslovakia when he wasn't supposed to.
I hope this is what you were after
#5
Posted 25 February 2004 - 07:28 PM
James has been very helpful here. In addition to what he has put I suggest that you look at the following sites. They provide shorter- easier to access information:
http://www.johndclar...RoadtoWWII4.htm
http://www.spartacus...appeasement.htm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/timelines/bri...en_munich.shtml
http://www.johndclar...RoadtoWWII4.htm
http://www.spartacus...appeasement.htm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/timelines/bri...en_munich.shtml
#7
Posted 25 April 2005 - 11:01 PM
#9
Posted 01 April 2006 - 04:12 PM
Have you not seen the replies I gave earlier this afternoon to your other messages?
See here:
http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/studentforu...indpost&p=11198
and here:
http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/studentforu...indpost&p=11199
Anyway if they don't help and what you don't understand is basically what appeasement is then ..... appeasement is giving in to someone's demands (making concessions) in the hope that by giving in on one or two smaller things you'll avoid a bigger problem later.
In the case of the late 1930s, 'appeasement' refers to the British and French policy of giving in to some of Hitler's demands and actions in order to prevent a large scale war.
SO ....the following were all part of appeasing Hitler:
This is a bit like giving in to a playground bully - the more you give in, the more they take/demand and it makes you look weak.
BUT, looking back, there was some sense in this policy for various reasons:
PS. The people who answer questions here all teachers who do so voluntarily in their own time so politeness is appreciated. You'll get a much better response from us if you are.
See here:
http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/studentforu...indpost&p=11198
and here:
http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/studentforu...indpost&p=11199
Anyway if they don't help and what you don't understand is basically what appeasement is then ..... appeasement is giving in to someone's demands (making concessions) in the hope that by giving in on one or two smaller things you'll avoid a bigger problem later.
In the case of the late 1930s, 'appeasement' refers to the British and French policy of giving in to some of Hitler's demands and actions in order to prevent a large scale war.
SO ....the following were all part of appeasing Hitler:
- allowing Hitler to reoccupy the Rhineland in 1936 (on the grounds that it was German territory after all) was part of appeasing Hitler and allowing him to have what he wanted in the hope that it would avoid war between Germany and France.
- allowing Hitler to reunite with Austria in March 1938 (on the grounds that both countries were German speaking)
- giving Hitler the Sudetenland part of Czecholslovakia at the end of September 1938 (on the grounds that there were German speaking people there and that Hitler threatened to invade the area)
This is a bit like giving in to a playground bully - the more you give in, the more they take/demand and it makes you look weak.
BUT, looking back, there was some sense in this policy for various reasons:
- Public opnion in Britain was very much against war in the late 1930s. People could still remember the horrors of WWI and didn't want another one, especially because it was clear that in any major war civilians would be targetted with bombing raids.
- Before 1939, Britain and France were behind Germany in terms of miltary strength. Appeasing Hitler bought time to get ready for war - building more planes, tanks, other weapons.
PS. The people who answer questions here all teachers who do so voluntarily in their own time so politeness is appreciated. You'll get a much better response from us if you are.
#10
Posted 01 April 2006 - 04:28 PM
Mrs Faithorn, on Apr 1 2006, 05:12 PM, said:
Have you not seen the replies I gave earlier this afternoon to your other messages?
See here:
http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/studentforu...indpost&p=11198
and here:
http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/studentforu...indpost&p=11199
Anyway if they don't help and what you don't understand is basically what appeasement is then ..... appeasement is giving in to someone's demands (making concessions) in the hope that by giving in on one or two smaller things you'll avoid a bigger problem later.
In the case of the late 1930s, 'appeasement' refers to the British and French policy of giving in to some of Hitler's demands and actions in order to prevent a large scale war.
SO ....the following were all part of appeasing Hitler:
This is a bit like giving in to a playground bully - the more you give in, the more they take/demand and it makes you look weak.
BUT, looking back, there was some sense in this policy for various reasons:
PS. The people who answer questions here all teachers who do so voluntarily in their own time so politeness is appreciated. You'll get a much better response from us if you are.
See here:
http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/studentforu...indpost&p=11198
and here:
http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/studentforu...indpost&p=11199
Anyway if they don't help and what you don't understand is basically what appeasement is then ..... appeasement is giving in to someone's demands (making concessions) in the hope that by giving in on one or two smaller things you'll avoid a bigger problem later.
In the case of the late 1930s, 'appeasement' refers to the British and French policy of giving in to some of Hitler's demands and actions in order to prevent a large scale war.
SO ....the following were all part of appeasing Hitler:
- allowing Hitler to reoccupy the Rhineland in 1936 (on the grounds that it was German territory after all) was part of appeasing Hitler and allowing him to have what he wanted in the hope that it would avoid war between Germany and France.
- allowing Hitler to reunite with Austria in March 1938 (on the grounds that both countries were German speaking)
- giving Hitler the Sudetenland part of Czecholslovakia at the end of September 1938 (on the grounds that there were German speaking people there and that Hitler threatened to invade the area)
This is a bit like giving in to a playground bully - the more you give in, the more they take/demand and it makes you look weak.
BUT, looking back, there was some sense in this policy for various reasons:
- Public opnion in Britain was very much against war in the late 1930s. People could still remember the horrors of WWI and didn't want another one, especially because it was clear that in any major war civilians would be targetted with bombing raids.
- Before 1939, Britain and France were behind Germany in terms of miltary strength. Appeasing Hitler bought time to get ready for war - building more planes, tanks, other weapons.
PS. The people who answer questions here all teachers who do so voluntarily in their own time so politeness is appreciated. You'll get a much better response from us if you are.
Hi cheers for that it helped alot i had read your replies from earlier and still didn't get it but i do now and soz if i weren't polite it just wound me up cheers
#11
Posted 01 April 2006 - 04:36 PM
Quote
Hi cheers for that it helped alot i had read your replies from earlier and still didn't get it but i do now and soz if i weren't polite it just wound me up cheers
Apology accepted.
I'm glad things are clearer now. Do post again if you have any more questions about things you don't understand.
[ know it can be frustrating when things aren't clear and you are under pressure to produce a piece of work, but "Please" and "Thank you" don't cost anything and, as I said, you'll always get a better response here if you are polite.]
#13
Posted 07 December 2006 - 09:23 PM
Share this topic:
Page 1 of 1


Help
MultiQuote









