最受欢迎的免费文章

是绥靖对还是错

大卫云 2014年12月13日 2172个字
Seungyun Baek

历史10A

绥靖政策——对还是错?

假设#1。阅读文档A和B后,创建有关问题的假设:当时绥靖英格兰在1938年正确的政策?举证据的文件,支持你的答案。(是)绥靖是英格兰正确的政策于1938年。这是因为它是基于这样的理念是什么希特勒想要的是合理的,当他的合理要求已经达到,他会停下来。绥靖政策是唯一能够在这段时间举行的唯一实际的行动。英国和法国还没有准备好进入另一场战争。他们已经有了他们无力进入另一场战争严重损害。这给了他们时间来准备战争,因为这是不可避免的反正。这也给了他们时间,为老破碎设备做准备。需要联盟来进行,并通过这一点,这是所有可能的。 Also, through this policy, they were able to get public support. Appeasement also allowed Britain time to retool factories for war. Many Britons during that time saw Hitler as a defence against Russian Communism. This all happened because they thought that Hitler would soon be satisfied after remilitarizing the Rhineland, annexation of Austria and czechoslovakia. Wanted to please Hitler this way. The empire was already overstretched and its financial resources quite limited. The U.S. was isolationist. Soviet communism was feared, France was weak. This was all done to prevent war and preventing war is something needed to be done. Their objective was for the collaboration of all nations in building up a lasting peace for Europe. The Czechs, left themselves and told they were going to get no help from the Western Powers, would have been able to make better terms than they have got. This also gave the greatest chance of securing protection for the country. Czechoslovak State would’ve not been able to be an independent entity without this. Chamberlain remembered the slaughter of the First World War and all the damages it cause. He thought that having another war would destroy civilisation and thus came up with the appeasement. Because of the appeasement, the war morale of the British people, who knew they had done everything possible to avoid war was improved. They felt like the already did everything they could to stop this and so their morale was developed. This also gave Chamberlain that he couldn’t trust Hitler. Appeasement rested upon both a traditional perspective on foreign interests and a rational assessment of military means and political will. Appeasement gave time for everyone and it started as an idea for peace and not war and violence and to keep from good men dying for no reason. Appeasement was just trying to give Germany justice. Appeasement was moral cowardice which meant that it was a necessary consequence of discarding morality as inconsequential. Appeasement was a reversion to and an extension of traditional British foreign policy and diplomacy. So in conclusion, appeasement was something worth trying and something that was good to have been accomplished. Hypothesis #2. After reading documents C,D and E, create a hypothesis regarding the questions: Was appeasement the right policy for England in 1938? Cite evidence from the document to support your answer. (No) Appeasement was not the right policy for England in 1938. This is because first of all, Hitler was not a man you could appease. If he saw someone’s weakness or something suffer, it would only encourage him. This policy was supposed to prevent war from happening, but war happened anyways. It shows failure of this and that It wasn’t right for their plan wasn’t achieved. Appeasement happened because the memories of the first world war were relatively fresh and they world was still dealing with the depression. This isn’t good at all because it allowed Hitler to pursue his quest for power and domination. This also gave Hitler confidence and the thought that he could achieve a lot if he wanted to do so. This also showed Hitler that Britain and France were hoping to avoid war at all costs so he knew he could push them and it gave him an advantage of knowing what they don’t want. Appeasement was not right because it was unfair. Just like the treaty of Versailles, talks about giving Czechoslovakia was happening even without the presence of the actual Czechoslovakia. They had extensive industry too, just giving Hitler more power and goods while austria had a large fighting force. During these years Hitler gained power and popularity which helped him fight WWII so successfully. This was also a major cause for strengthening the Nazi’s Germany. Because the surrounding Nations, mainly Britain allowed Hitler to take the territory he wanted, including the Sudetenland from Chezalavokia. This just sprung Hitler’s mindset about spreading communism and his ideas to the world and to take over. If Britain was able to stop Hitler in 1936, all before Luftwaffe grew in strength and power, Blitz in 1940 would’ve never happened. The outcome is also very important and due to this, Czechoslovakia was weakened. Poland and Hungary took other land. This wasn’t in any means what the Czechoslovak wanted and they weren’t even part of it. This also allowed Russia to decided that Britain and France would never have the guts to stand up to Hitler, and so war with Germany was inevitable and was coming. During the time of March 1939, German troops marched into Czechoslovakia. They took over Bohemia, and established a protectorate over Slovakia. The terrorized Czech government was eventually forced to surrender the western provinces of Bohemia and Moravia and finally Slovakia and the Carpathian Ukraine. Chamberlain mis knew Hitler and should’ve never trusted him from the beginning. When Stalin saw that Britain did not help Czechoslovakia against Hitler, he became convinced that Britain would not help the Soviet Union if Germany attacked it. Consequently Stalin signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact with Hitler in 1939, dividing Poland among themselves. Appeasement was useless in stopping someone like Hitler because he was never satisfied with what he had and wanted more. Hitler was a very greedy man and would do anything to fill his needs. It also abandoned millions of Austrians and Czechs to the brutal Nazi terror. If the countries stood up towards Hitler, people believe that war would’ve ended quick or never even occured. And most importantly, this all gave Hitler time to prepare for war and just get stronger. Yes it also have time to the Britians but it just gave more time and ideas for Hitler to do what he demanded. A lot of people also praised and liked Hitler when this came about just giving him more confidence for his future acts. My response to “Was appeasement the right policy for England in 1938?” In my opinion, the appeasement was not something that should’ve happened. First of all, it didn’t achieve anything that it wanted to. War did happen later on and it also just gave time for Hitler to get stronger for the war. Hitler was evil, and Chamberlain should have opposed him instead of giving him what he wanted because that was made Hitler more demanding and greedy. It was a big mistake because Chamberlain misunderstood Hitler and just did him good for his future plans. I would like to say that this was a regretful happening because it just gave Hitler confidence that if he wanted to achieve something he could, making him unstoppable. The policy of Appeasement was a system of yields, compromises, and sacrificial offerings to Hitler's Germany that allowed him time to rebuild the German military into an amazing whirlwind machine. Since Hitler wanted more and knew that he could achieve what he wanted, this sprung World War2. It shouldn’t have happened because it could’ve stopped Hitler’s future acts of evil and violence. Even though it gave time for England and France, it also gave time for Hitler and Germany to also gain power and think of ways to succeed. Everyone knew that war was inevitable. It’s just that they were so tired and scared of the consequences of war, that they wanted to believe peace. The war consequences were very damaging. It made England and France very poor in terms of government and made it’s people scared and to live in fear. They had to live with the consequences of war. Since war was going to happen anyway why have an appeasement? That was the question that made me choose no for my opinion. It just gave hope to people that peace could be accomplished and that peace wasn’t something far away. But the truth was that it just gave the people more days to suffer. It is also wrong because giving Hitler something he wanted could stop him for a minute but also make him want something bigger and better. And people thinking that stopping and holding Hitler with a piece of paper was a foolish thought. It was also very unfair because they were talking about the status of Czechoslovakia and how to give it away without actually having them included in the conference and conversation. It was just like everyone resting and being at a happy state thinking there would be no war while Hitler and Germany just gets stronger and improving themselves. So for these reasons, I think that it would’ve been better if appeasement never happened so they could’ve stopped Hitler from getting on the top of his head thinking he could do everything starting his dictatorship.

标准A:认识和了解。
最大的10
成就水平
描述符
0
该学生未达到下列任何描述符所描述的标准。1 - 2
该术语的使用不一致或不正确。事实和例子要么没有,或者那些使用是不相关或不表现出理解。学生提供了不准确或有足够的细节描述;说明不存在或肤浅。3 - 4

术语的使用大多是准确的,通常是适当的,尽管仍有一些错误。所使用的事实和例子大多是相关的,并且通常表示理解。学生提供可能需要更多细节的基本描述;解释通常是充分的,但有时是肤浅的。5 - 6

术语的使用要准确、恰当。相关的事实和例子被用来表示理解。学生提供准确的描述;解释是充分的,但没有充分发展。7 - 8

一系列术语的使用是准确和恰当的。一系列相关的事实和例子被用来表示理解。学生提供准确和详细的描述,并进行解释。9–10日

学生表现出对广泛的术语的优秀掌握,并适当地使用它。大量的相关事实和例子被用来表示理解。描述准确详细,解释充分。

标准B:理解和应用概念
最大的10
成就水平
描述符
0
该学生未达到下列任何描述符所描述的标准。1 - 2
概念的应用是不恰当的。学生可以通过认识到与主题的基本联系来展示一些概念意识和理解。3 - 4
概念的应用并不总是恰当的。学生通过描述与主题的基本联系来展示概念意识和理解。5 - 6
应用概念是适当的,但肤浅的。学生表现的概念认识和描述的题材连接的理解。学生试图概念应用到其他情况,但并不总是成功。7 - 8

应用概念是合适的,并显示一些深度。学生表现的概念认识和解释的题材连接的理解。学生申请概念的其他情形。9 - 10

概念的应用是适当和复杂的。学生通过详细解释与主题的联系来展示概念意识和理解。学生能有效地将概念应用于其他情况。

标准C:技能中的应用
最大的10
成就水平
描述符
0
该学生未达到下列任何描述符所描述的标准。1 - 2
学生可以选择和使用一些相关的信息。这个学生的分析能力很弱。学生的论点、决定或判断并不总是相关的,或者可能缺席。这名学生试图进行调查,但几乎没有展示出什么技能。3 - 4

学生选择和使用大部分相关的信息。这个学生的作业缺乏必要的深度分析。学生做出一些相关的论点、决定或判断,尽管这些都是没有依据的。这个学生展示了基本的调查技巧。5 - 6

学生选择和使用的相关信息。作品表现了分析的充分证据。参数,决定和判决的支持和平衡,但肤浅的。学生表现出足够的调查技能。7 - 8

学生选择和使用了一系列的相关信息。作品表现了批判性分析的一个良好的水平。参数,决定和判断都是很好的支持和平衡。学生表现出有效的调查技巧。9 - 10

学生选择和使用广泛的相关信息。工作显示了高度的批判性分析。辩论、决定和判断都得到了充分的支持和平衡。这个学生展示了复杂的研究技巧。

本文档引用

相关文件

  • 亚里士多德是对是错?

    ......是亚里士多德对还是错?珍妮弗·L.·查德威克大峡谷大学生物学概念实验室2011年6月1日资源1:亚里士多德对还是错?下面方向提出了运动与亚里士多德(公元前4世纪)制作的观测开始的场景。自然发生,这表明生活原稿的理论...

    阅读更多
  • 绥靖政策是错误的吗

    ...进一步的侵略。这种绥靖政策未能阻止第二次世界大战的爆发。下面有一些论据。有些人证明绥靖政策是错误的,有些人则认为绥靖政策不是错误的。创建一个包含两个标题的表格——“错误”和“不错误”。把每个论点用正确的字号写出来。

    阅读更多
  • 绥靖政策是合理的吗?

    ……历史在处理这个问题时有两种观点。一些历史学家说,绥靖是不合理的,张伯伦是一个软弱的人,而另一方面,有人说张伯伦没有其他选择。有许多理由支持双方。绥靖在一个。。。

    阅读更多
  • 绥靖政策是合理的

    ......当时绥靖一个“错误”?H / W 13年7月3日有支持和反对绥靖二战前很多争论。绥靖政策是英国,法国和德国之间的政策。该政策意味着盟国将给予德国,他们想要的东西,只要他们没有发动战争或造成麻烦。绥靖的字典定义是:...

    阅读更多
  • 对与错

    … September 16, 2013 After reading “Some moral minima,” I must say I have to agree with Lenn Goodman’s opinions. He argues that there are certain things that are simply wrong. Though they greatly reflect his relativism, I agree on the topics he chose are all wrong in the eyes of another culture’s morals and ...

    阅读更多
  • 绥靖政策

    ……绥靖政策在多大程度上是导致第二次世界大战的最重要因素?绥靖政策被定义为试图对一个威权国家作出中央政治妥协,以避免发生冲突的外交政策。这项政策主要是英国人遵循的。。。

    阅读更多
  • 什么是错的绥靖政策?

    …绥靖政策是英国以及后来的法国所奉行的政策,即通过满足日本、意大利和德国等侵略大国的要求,避免与之发生战争,只要这些要求不是太不合理。我的意见是,整个绥靖政策是错误的,因为它适用于错误的人。这也许行得通……

    阅读更多
  • 绥靖政策的失败

    ...在20世纪30年代,绥靖被广泛应用于英国和法国,以通过谈判满足德国的要求和妥协,以避免战争。然而,这种方法显然是无效的,因为希特勒已经决心实现一个更大的德国。这一决心促使希特勒在进攻中采取积极行动,以便……

    阅读更多

在StudyMode上发现最好的免费文章betway中文官网

彻底征服作家的障碍。

高质量的论文

我们的图书馆有数千篇精心挑选的免费研究论文和论文。

受欢迎的话题

不管你研究的话题,没准我们有它涵盖。