1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
deff fn [24]
3 years ago
12

Do you believe that chamberlain’s appeasement contributed to the onset of world war ll? Create a presentation that either suppor

ts or argues against appeasement and how it contributed to world war ll
History
2 answers:
Nady [450]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

Appeasement is most often used to describe the response of British policy makers to the rise of Nazi Germany in the 1930s. It is seen as a policy of one-sided concessions to an aggressor state, often at the expense of third parties, with nothing offered in return except promises of better behaviour in the future.

Prime minister Neville Chamberlain hoped that it would bring a quicker end to the crisis created in Europe by the Nazi clamour for revision of the Treaty of Versailles.

He believed that pacification could be achieved through negotiating a general settlement that would in almost all respects replace the Treaty of Versailles, and bring Germany into satisfactory treaty relations with her neighbours.

Did Winston Churchill warn against appeasement?

Following the Nazis’ rise to power in 1933, Winston Churchill warned of the perils of German nationalism. But the British government ignored him and did all it could to stay out of Adolf Hitler’s way. The nation was weary of war and reluctant to get involved in international affairs again so soon.

By this time, Churchill had become an increasingly marginalised voice and he was side-lined by Neville Chamberlain. Winston Churchill was the most well-known opponent of appeasement, and consistently warned the government of the dangers posed by Nazi Germany, though his warnings went unheeded. He argued that faster British rearmament could have deterred the German dictator, and that a readiness to make a stand at crucial moments could have halted Hitler’s progress before it was too late.

What was the result of appeasement?

Appeasement reached its climax in September 1938 with the Munich Agreement. Chamberlain hoped to avoid a war over Czechoslovakia by conceding to Adolf Hitler’s demands. The Agreement allowed Nazi Germany to annex the Sudetenland, the German-speaking parts of Czechoslovakia.

Chamberlain promised it would bring “peace in our time”, but Churchill scolded him for “throwing a small state to the wolves” in exchange for a promise of peace.

Speaking after Chamberlain signed the Munich Agreement, Winston Churchill said: “You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour and you will have war.”

A year later, on 1 September 1939, Hitler broke his promise and launched the invasion of Poland. Peace was shattered. By 3 September 1939, Britain was once again at war with Germany. Chamberlain declared war against Hitler, but during the next eight months, showed himself to be ill equipped for the daunting task of saving Europe from Nazi conquest.

After British forces failed to prevent the German occupation of Norway in April 1940, Chamberlain lost the support of many members of his Conservative Party. By May 1940, the Allies were losing, and on 10 May 1940, Hitler invaded Holland, Belgium, and the Netherlands.

The same day, Chamberlain formally lost the confidence of the House of Commons, so he resigned. In the face of the Nazis’ relentless march across Europe, Chamberlain bowed to pressure and resigned as Prime Minister. When Lord Halifax – the man fancied to assume the Premiership – refused the role, Churchill was the only credible alternative to lead.

What happened next?

The commonly accepted version of events states that Lord Halifax, Chamberlain’s original choice of successor, turned down the post of Prime Minister because he believed he could not govern effectively as a member of the House of Lords instead of the House of Commons.

Typically the Prime Minister doesn’t advise the King on the former’s successor, but Chamberlain wanted someone who would command the support of all three major parties in the House of Commons. A meeting between Chamberlain, Halifax, Churchill and David Margesson, the government Chief Whip, led to the recommendation of Churchill, and, as constitutional monarch, George VI asked Churchill to be prime minister. Churchill’s first act was to write to Chamberlain to thank him for his support.

Had WW2 ended before May 1940 as many had hoped, history would now know Churchill as an average First Lord with an embarrassing share of responsibility for the failures of the Norwegian campaign. But by a strange turn of history, this failure led to the increased unpopularity of Chamberlain and gave Churchill his big chance.

Damm [24]3 years ago
3 0
Do you believe that chamberlain’s appeasement contributed to the onset of world war ll? Create a presentation that either supports or argues against appeasement and how it contributed to world war ll
You might be interested in
did the korean war serve any purpose? was part or all of it just a mistake? what were the "results"? how much responsibility sho
Studentka2010 [4]

The Korean war had a purpose but it had largely failed.

Explanation:

Truman can and cannot be blamed for the war as he had formulated this policy of attacking in per preemptive measures to control the spread of communism that had plagued the US for so long.

At the same time the nature of the policy was such that it has led to the development of the US in certain senses.

So, as all things in history it is a two way thing and often based around the perspective one has of things.

The war itself was not a success in terms of containing communism as North Korea was out of grasp.

7 0
3 years ago
Was the treaty of Guadalupe hidalgo fair or unfair?
grigory [225]

Answer:

Mexico also agreed to sell its New Mexico and Upper California territories to the United States at a price of $15 million. The treaty effectively halved the size of Mexico and doubled the territory of the United States. This territorial exchange had long-term effects on both nations

6 0
3 years ago
How hard is apush on a scale of 1-10? (10 being the highest) and who would u recommend the course to
Ne4ueva [31]

Answer:

1 and anyone

Explanation:

6 0
3 years ago
How much of the $30 million allocated for the Iran deal actually went to
melisa1 [442]
The answer is 15 million
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What was the purpose of the northwest ordinance
masya89 [10]
It was an act of the congress of the confederation of the United States, hoped that answered your question :)
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Compare the impact of nativism to the impact of slavery on the american political system from 1848-1860.
    10·1 answer
  • According to philippians 2:5-8, what direction did jesus' life take
    14·1 answer
  • Islands are only found near the equator true or false
    13·1 answer
  • Who was the first foreign power to penetrate japan?
    12·2 answers
  • What can you infer about the behavior of the Japanese from the nazi description
    8·1 answer
  • Adolf Hitler took control of the Nazi Party in
    6·2 answers
  • Who was running the Mexican government when Stephen F. Austin arrived to discuss the resolutions? a. General Cós b. Antonio Lópe
    14·2 answers
  • Who controls the supply of money in the United States today?
    10·1 answer
  • Was feelin' that, feelin' that breeze
    14·1 answer
  • What is the name of the supercluster in which the Local Group is located?(1 point)
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!