| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "ORIGINS WORLD WAR EUROPE": |
|
|
"The Origins of the Second World War in Europe", 2002.
An examination of P.M.H. Bell's "The Origins of the Second World War in Europe" on the personal choices of Adolf Hitler.
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 1 source, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay will argue that Bell's thesis is that personal choices and not the determinism of historical forces led to the Second World War. In particular, as will be seen, Bell focuses on the personal choices made by one: Adolf Hitler. He contends that German policies of aggression and expansion that ultimately caused the war were shaped more by the personality of one man than by any broader mix of social forces or national interests.
| |
|
The Origins of World War I, 2005.
A discussion into the causes of the outbreak of World War I.
2,025 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 10 sources, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the origins of the First World War, which can be traced to a number of political and diplomatic causes, such as militarism, imperialism, and European great power rivalry. The paper also discusses the views of most historians who agree that entangling alliances among the great powers of Europe were the most important factor.
From the Paper
"Introduction to History of International Relations The Origins of World War I: The origins of the First World War can be traced to a number of political and diplomatic causes, such as militarism, imperialism, and European great power rivalry. These factors all helped to cause the war, but most historians agree that entangling alliances among the great powers of Europe were the most important factor. These alliances were intended to be defensive and were seen as a way to prevent a major European war, but ironically, they contributed to the outbreak of the war instead of preventing it. (Hamilton 551)"
| |
|
Origin of World War One, 2004.
A discussion of the events and politics that led to the start of World War One.
1,321 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper delves into the origin of WWI, focusing on the crisis in the Balkans. The paper explains that within Great Britain there had been growing sentiment for some time that there would have to be a ?show down? with Germany sooner or later to resolve differences about the colonies in Africa, Britain's declining trade monopoly and to stop what the English put as the German desire to rule continental Europe. The writer explores the causes for the start of the war and the extent to which the entire world was brought into the fight.
From the Paper
"World War One, the Great War, was the culmination of decades of rivalry, militarism and nationalism, all of which helped to make Europe as unstable as it was in 1914, before the outbreak of war. In this essay it will be argued that no country was to blame for the First World War; France, Russia, Germany, Austria Hungary and Great Britain all played a role in escalating the conflict."
| |
|
"The Politics of Retribution In Europe: World War II and Its Aftermath", 2002.
Research paper which analyzes the collection of essays in "The Politics of Retribution In Europe: World War II and Its Aftermath".
1,900 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 1 source, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines and analyzes the collection of essays entitled, "The Politics of Retribution In Europe: World War II and Its Aftermath", edited by Istvan Deak, Jan T. Gross, and Tony Judt.
| |
|
The Second World War, 2006.
A enlightening perspective of the Second World War.
2,673 words (approx. 10.7 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper the author takes a different perspective of the Second World War, citing it as not a single armed clash. He looks at the Second World War as a collection of three different conflicts, the Japanese-League war in Southeast Asia and China, the German war in Eastern Europe, and the German-League war in western and central Europe that happened to overlap in time and causes. The author discusses in the paper that despite the different causes, theatres, and strategies of the three conflicts, their simultaneity and their direct challenge to the custom of the global community leads historians and other spectators to classify them as a single worldwide war. He looks at all of the effects of the Second World War on the different participants in terms of political, economic and social issues. In conclusion, the author addresses how in destroying the old world order, the Second World War demanded the formation of a new world order, one shaped by the triumphant, defeated, and neutral powers.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Home Front
Social Solutions
Political Maneuvering
Military Strategies and Operations
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Many pieces of reorganization legislation were rolled back in wartime. A longer working day was reestablished to boost industrial productivity. The federal government made anti-trust legislation a very low precedence. In order to struggle the labor shortage, child labor laws and women's labor regulations were overlooked. With very little public protest, the number of high school dropouts increased notably. During the war, the teenage workforce grew from 1 million to 3 million; about 1 million of these novel workers had dropped out of high school. Traditional politicians had fought against these agencies when they were established, but now that FDR was focusing on winning a war as a substitute of reforming society, they could slash funding for the CCC, WPA, and National Youth Administration (NYA). These programs had always been intended to help those who would be hired last even in favorable economic conditions, so their cease was especially ####### blacks, women, and the elderly."
| |
|
World Wars I and II, 2002.
A discussion of the cause and effects of both World Wars I and II.
1,305 words (approx. 5.2 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how the causes of World War I and World War II were not one cataclysmic event but were a multitude of causes that basically derived from Nationalism and Imperialism. It shows how these two factors led to the turmoil in Europe and growing tensions and how the outbreak of World War II is an indirect link to the ending of World War I, which led to many years of chaos in Europe. It analyzes how the resulting economic depressions were a cascade of many more economic issues that Europe and America still face today and how the most radical affect was the Cold War, a war that plagued fear upon the American population for forty five years.
From the Paper
"The first cause of World War II was the intense anger over the Versailles Treaty. This Treaty was signed on June 28, 1919 and basically held Germany responsible for creating this world war. The Versailles Treaty ordered that Germany pay for all the damages that the Allies and their governments endured as a result of this war. Germany was then ordered to cut their army down to 100,000 soldiers, as well as their navy, and do away with their air-force. Germany was also angry that their territory had to be reduced as well. The territory of Alsace and Lorraine was ceded by France and certain sections of Prussia went to present day Poland. Germany felt that this treaty was ?dictated peace? and they proceeded to refuse this treaty. In doing so, the future affects would be another war. "
| |
|
Accountability for World War I, 2007.
A discussion of whom should be held accountable for the World War I.
1,628 words (approx. 6.5 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines Germany's involvement in World War I and why she was held responsible for the damages that occurred in Europe, through the eyes of three historians. The paper explains that Germany had rejected the attempts of mediation made by Britain and that it was the miscalculations of German Chancellor Bethmann Hollweg that caused all of Europe's superpowers to engage in a World War. The paper looks at how the three historians; Fritz Fischer, Gerhard Ritter and H. Jarausch discuss whom should be held accountable for the World War. In conclusion the paper shows that it is Fischer's persuasive arguments and ample evidence that clearly identifies Germany's faults in the causation of World War I.
From the Paper
"According to Fischer, Publicist Victor Naumann, who was an adviser of the German Foreign Ministry, engaged in a discussion with the permanent head of the Austro-Hungarian foreign ministry, Count Hoyos, about German aggression for the war in Berlin. He stated that the triple alliance of Italy, Austria-Hungary and Germany was powerful and that Britain would remain neutral because of the Anglo-German settlement in Africa, therefore stating that an attack against Serbia would be best if executed immediately. Ritter criticizes Fischer for bringing forward Victor Naumann as a witness to the Berlin Agreement as he was only a journalist and not a diplomat and therefore questions Fischer's credibility. However, Fischers claims are proven true when Count Hoyos met with the Austro-Hungarian ambassador, Szogyeny in Berlin on July 5th, 1914 and presented him with two documents: a memorandum that stated the situation of the monarchy and a proposal that insisted the only way to save the monarchy from being swallowed in the "Pan-Slav flood" was to "eliminate Serbia"."
| |
|
England and Germany After World War I, 2006.
An analysis of the conditions in England and Germany after World War I.
3,550 words (approx. 14.2 pages), 6 sources, APA, $ 99.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper studies the conditions in Europe after World War I, which ultimately led to Second World War. The paper focuses on England and Germany as countries representative of the Allied and Axis powers. The paper begins by examining the Weimar Republic of Germany, which had inherent weaknesses that, when combined with economic strife and early political challenges, created a high level of instability. The paper shows how the Nazi Party exploited the Republic's weaknesses. The paper examines in detail Hitler's rise to power, and the culminating impact of world events. Next, the paper turns to Britain, which like Germany was showing signs of great economic stress after World War I. The paper discusses high unemployment coupled with a shrinking export market, which contributed to the downward spiral. The paper also studies the psyche of the British public, which believed that that World War I was the last war -- a belief that was reflected in the government's decision to cut military spending. The paper concludes with an assessment of the U.S.'s Land-Lease program and its positive impact on the economic and military recovery of England.
From the Paper
"The conditions in countries where many of the Allied forces resided were similar to those of the Axis forces. One country for each of the allied and axis forces whose history following World War II are similar to the other members of each group will be examined. The British are a good representation of the Allied forces and Germany for the Axis, especially in the European theater. What occurred in each of these countries following World War I laid the foundation for what were to follow in World War II. Each holds some very interesting events, which set into motion what would occur in the future. Mussolini first coined the term "Axis" in a speech he gave in Milan, Italy on November 1, 1936. In this speech, he referred to the Rome/Berlin alliance as an Axis in which all European countries would revolve around. This alliance, however, was a result of forced isolation from the rest of Europe, rather than a sincere Italo-German partnership of mutual respect."
| |
|
European Economics after World War II, 2008.
An analysis of the devastating effect of World War II on the European economy.
3,238 words (approx. 13.0 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 93.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the economic impact that World War II had on Europe. It provides a brief history of the lead-up to the war and the cost of the war in terms of human casualty and then analyzes why World War II had such a devastating effect on the European economy. Finally, the paper discusses the rapid growth of the post-War golden age in Europe and the factors that contributed to it.
From the Paper
"The economy of Europe lagged far behind the United States after World War II and into the 50s (Eichengreen 2007). Its gross domestic product level was barely half American levels per person. The mass production methods in the US, which were introduced in the first half of the 20th century were just arriving in Europe at this time. Typical automobiles and modern household appliances in the US were still few and exceptional in Europe. Even 50 years later, Western Europe was still far from the US in terms of per capita GDP. But institutions of European integration wiped this difference in the quality of life so marked 50 years ago. They locked peaceful Germany into Europe so as to unleash its huge industrial might. It was something, which France and other European countries would not have allowed. These institutions created the Common Market, which in turn induced the huge expansion of trade and increased efficiency. Through the Single Market Program set up in 1986, these European institutions created a continental economy, which can now support global champion firms at a scale and a scope that could compete internationally. And with the introduction of the Euro, the inflation problem, which plagued Europe in most of the 20th century, disappeared (Eichengreen)."
| |
|
Why a Second World War?, 2002.
An analysis of the causes (country by country and globally) of World War II, illustrating the argument that a second coming of global warfare was inevitable.
2,520 words (approx. 10.1 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 76.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the argument that the social and political state of Europe, the United States, and Japan after World War I made the second coming of global warfare inevitable. The root causes for each of the major countries (USA, Russia, England, Germany, Italy, Japan, etc.) are examined in detail and are intricately tied together to paint a picture of how an event as tragic as World War was an inevitable outcome of World War I.
From the Paper
"While many historians consider the German invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939, the spark that ignited the inferno of World War II the embers of global conflict had been smoldering unchecked for some time before then. In many ways, the vindictive and pernicious demands set in place by the Treaty of Versailles on June 28, 1919 made a phoenix-like second coming of German forces bent on vindication and conquest almost inevitable. While German angst percolated, half way around the globe similar discord was brewing in the Pacific with the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931, a blatant violation of previously signed non- aggression treaties by the major Asian countries. These two sparks ignited by German demoralization and Japanese aggression, separated by thousands of miles, ultimately led to events that would pull England, France, Italy, Russia, Northern Africa, and the United States into a two sided struggle for world domination that would leave its mark on mankind forever."
| |
|
World War I and Canadian Unity, 2008.
A discussion of how World War I helped to forge a sense of Canadian unity.
2,760 words (approx. 11.0 pages), 14 sources, MLA, $ 82.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how World War I involved a shared experience capable of galvanizing a Canadian unified identity. The paper describes accounts of nurses, gunners and others, who served in Europe and explains that Canadian achievements abroad were a source of particular pride. Finally, the paper tells of Canadian veterans, who have remained a generation remembered in many Canadian family stories as well as in Europe, and describes Canada's pride in its reputation as a country of military knowledge.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Canadian Participation
World War I as Remembered
Wars and Identity
Something to be Forgotten
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Anthony Smith is a sociologist of the London School of Economics who is devoted to the study of nationalism and ethno-nationalism. He has long stressed the role of warfare and its experiences in forging cohesive identities. (1981) The experiences of war have a way of forging distinct groups whose self-images are made different from others, often in a cohesion not there before, or not in the same way. Jonathan Vance Reading commented on the lasting memory of the Great War that affected perhaps every Canadian family, and certainly, every community, an understanding of the horrors of the trenches of World War I part of national consciousness as much as awareness of what Canadians had achieved. (1997) If one is Canadian or feels a strong connection to Canadians or their sufferings in the World Wars, one may be surprised by one's reaction to signs of something Canadian that is not properly recognized. For instance, when preparing an assignment that addressed Major John McCrae MD (1872-1918) and his poem In Flanders Field, for a different university course, it was intriguing to discover a personal reaction of anger at a poem sometimes claimed by the British and Americans, a short reference made to 'a Canadian doctor'. His poem, now memorized by generations of Canadian school children and a strong symbol of the Canadians in World War II and the veterans of both World Wars 'feels' Canadian and he was not a mere doctor but a remarkable man."
| |
|
World War II, 2006.
A discussion regarding America's involvement in World War II.
831 words (approx. 3.3 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 29.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper takes a look at America's reluctance to participate in World War II. The paper goes on to review the issues that led to the US finally getting involved. According to the paper, by the time the US entered the war, Hitler's Nazis had invaded much of Europe. The paper concludes with the idea that the American involvement in World War II transformed the role of the United States on the world's stage. What was formerly an isolationist nation found itself on the forefront of international politics.
From the Paper
"Germany would later retract on its neutrality agreement with the Soviets, by attempting to invade Russia. The unsuccessful invasion of Moscow would become one of the reasons for the eventual Nazi defeat. An emboldened Soviet Union made inroads into Eastern Europe and eventually Germany and under pressure from several fronts at once, the Nazis were forced to surrender unconditionally. Germany surrendered less than a month after President Roosevelt died."
| |
|
World War II, 2004.
An analysis of how the Second World War was a result of a failure on part of the Allies to enforce the terms of the treaties they made, both with Germany and with each other.
4,319 words (approx. 17.3 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 114.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how, in the aftermath of the First World War, there were great efforts made to establish the party or parties responsible for the outbreak of the war and a great desire to justify the belief of the Allies that Germany had been the aggressor; the result of this was the 'war guilt' clause of the Treaty of Versailles. It looks at how, after the Second World War, however, few attempts seem to have been made to establish Germany?s guilt, even though it had, in blatant defiance of the Treaty of Versailles, amassed a large army, and as early as 1935, began, by military posturing and political manipulation, to invade and annex various areas of land belonging to other sovereign nations. It analyzes how it is impossible to deny, looking fairly at the events leading up to the declaration of war against Germany by various nations in 1939, that the war would never have happened had Germany not been under the control of an ambitious warlord, Adolf Hitler, and how, although Hitler was indeed leading Germany down the path towards war, the Allies, consisting mainly of Great Britain and France, according to most historians had countless opportunities to bring a halt to the German war machine before it had the chance to create the formidable army introduced to Europe in 1939.
From the Paper
"In January of 1936, Hitler moved four German divisions to the border of the Rhineland. There he bided his time, waiting for a good opportunity. It came on March First, after the signing of a French-Russian non-aggression pact. Hitler gave orders for a ?surprise entry? into the Rhineland. On March 7th as many as three German divisions -- and possibly as few as one -- crossed over into the Rhineland. While the Rhineland rejoiced the return of the military, the world was unaware. Until noon, when Hitler announced, from the Kroll Opera House, that in the ?interests of the basic rights of its people to the security of their frontier and the safeguarding of their defense were re-established, as from today, the absolute and unrestricted sovereignty of the Reich in the demilitarized zone of the Rhineland.? "
| |
|
World War I, 2008.
This paper outlines the history and events of World War I.
1,910 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 60.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses the causes of World War I, describes the confidence throughout Europe that the war would only last a few weeks and shows how, instead, the war became a bloody stalemate by the end of 1914. The paper depicts the new, deadly methods of mass killing that caused the scale of injury and death to be beyond anything people had believed possible. The paper also points out that tragically, this war to end all wars failed to achieve these lofty goals and within a generation the world was plunged into an even more destructive and horrific war. There is a large amount of source material appended to the paper.
From the Paper
"Historians are in general agreement that World War I was caused by intensifying political and economic rivalries between the great powers of Europe at the beginning of the 20th Century. The leading nations of Europe all sought to expand their empires, which led to arms races, entangling alliances, and increasing tensions. By 1914 these factors combined to produce such instability that the crisis in the Balkans triggered by the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary rapidly degenerated into a general European war characterized by unprecedented slaughter."
| |
|
"The Second World War in Europe", 2002.
Analyzes this thesis of P.M.H. Bell on the causes of WWII.
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 1 source, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
While Bell's thesis is clear as to the structural causes that led to the conflict between European nations in the Second World War, he is significantly hesitant to discuss the role of the German dictator's personality and ideology in defining the path toward general European war.
|
|
|
