The League of Nations was invented by Woodrow Wilson after WWI in order to prevent the outbreak of another horrific great war. The League of Nations is a gathering of the leaders of each country to discuss problems that may have potential to light a fuse. The First World War started with the contribution of bad communication and the interception of a single letter to reach its recipient. The League of Nations is therefore direct communication and no misunderstandings. Some countries might have seen this as a way of every country being at equal playing grounds with equal power, and for the dominant nations this may have been degrading or even insulting. Therefore they despised the tactic. The more powerful nations wanted more input and Wilson wanted equality. Could these different views of lead to the failure of the League of Nations to prevent the Second World War? These possibilities have always been considered and the arguments have been proposed. So why did this plan for peace not materialize and function to halt another war? It was simply too slow and complicated for each country to gather its leaders, meet in one spot, and all agree on a topic. The French or British never contributed an army to the League, USA did not support the League of Nations, and with no army came no aggression or control, the biggest threat it could pose was for the weaker nation to stop trading with the big bad mean nation. France and Britain noticed the rise of the German army, with the development of the new war technologies being created, but were reluctant to stop it because of the possible spread of communism from Russia. Hitler was also a manipulating power fiend that convinced all the nations of his loyalty to respect and follow the Treaty of Versailles. At the same time the Treaty of Versailles was just too extreme for the Germans to put up with and Hitler being the psychotic lunatic that he is could not follow such an odious set of rules, so… Czechoslovakia, Austria, and Poland were invaded, alliances with Italy and Japan were formed, and bang it all begins. In my opinion and from what knowledge I have on this subject, is that there was only one World War from 1914 to 1945 with a twenty year break for the Germans to rethink their strategies and organize another army. With the absence of the motivation displayed by the League of Nations members the Second World War was bound to occur. With the devastating aftermath of WWI such as the great depression throughout the world, German debt, and the unknown victor another war had to happen and the nations had the opportunities to stop it, but these opportunities were not capitalized on. Everybody knew there was another war around the corner during that time period so for the most part resistance was not upheld in order to fight their destination.Basically the League of Nations failed to ensure peace. Following WWII, for the most part, the majority of the countries went through a golden age of prosperity and freedom. As long as there is people with opposing religions and ideas there will never be peace. This has been displayed even in todays world by the non-stop fighting throughout the middle eastern part of the world.
I agree with how you said there is only one world war between 1914 to 1945 with a little break in between because if the league of nations were such a good idea than it would of prvented the second world war.
The League of Nations did fail to stop the war, but was it fully capable of stopping it? People everywhere in Europe were frantic to start the war due to the ideals of nationalism and militarism. Also, the League of Nations had just been created with no expierence. What do you expect from a group of rookies?
You say that the League of Nations was too extreme? To some extent this may be true, but WWI was Germany's fault. Germany should have been punished the worst. This was why Germany took the brunt of the effects of the war.
If the League of Nations could really prevent the second World War from occuring, was there a more legitimate reason to why they didn't. And with the dominant nations not necessarily agreeing with the other nations, why wasn't there a compromise made or a new plan made up. Lastly, why didn't the U.S. agree on this assemblance when the creator was from the United States.
I agree with all of these people here in this chat. The league of nations might have been to rough and to straight forward for many people causing it to fail. As chase said it was fully capable of stopping the war but the other nations seemed to not agree with the ethic that the league supported.
Hoffman... That is a legitimant reason, they did not have an army. The new plan was not created yet becuase the war had not occured yet and the did not know it would grow to that extent. Lastly, America at this time did not want to be involved with European affairs so they tried to stay as isolated from them as possible.
We can't deny that at least the idea is good (we still have the UN), but did the failure of the league actually contribute to the cause of WWII, or was it never able to gain momentum as Chase points out?
I would not say that the failure of the league contributed to the start of war, but it sure did nothing to prevent it from occuring. The League of Nations was fairly new at the time so it had little to no backing support which resulted in its inability to gain momentum towards anti-war efforts.
Could these different views of lead to the failure of the League of Nations to prevent the Second World War? These possibilities have always been considered and the arguments have been proposed. So why did this plan for peace not materialize and function to halt another war? It was simply too slow and complicated for each country to gather its leaders, meet in one spot, and all agree on a topic. The French or British never contributed an army to the League, USA did not support the League of Nations, and with no army came no aggression or control, the biggest threat it could pose was for the weaker nation to stop trading with the big bad mean nation.
France and Britain noticed the rise of the German army, with the development of the new war technologies being created, but were reluctant to stop it because of the possible spread of communism from Russia. Hitler was also a manipulating power fiend that convinced all the nations of his loyalty to respect and follow the Treaty of Versailles. At the same time the Treaty of Versailles was just too extreme for the Germans to put up with and Hitler being the psychotic lunatic that he is could not follow such an odious set of rules, so… Czechoslovakia, Austria, and Poland were invaded, alliances with Italy and Japan were formed, and bang it all begins. In my opinion and from what knowledge I have on this subject, is that there was only one World War from 1914 to 1945 with a twenty year break for the Germans to rethink their strategies and organize another army. 
With the absence of the motivation displayed by the League of Nations members the Second World War was bound to occur. With the devastating aftermath of WWI such as the great depression throughout the world, German debt, and the unknown victor another war had to happen and the nations had the opportunities to stop it, but these opportunities were not capitalized on. Everybody knew there was another war around the corner during that time period so for the most part resistance was not upheld in order to fight their destination.Basically the League of Nations failed to ensure peace. Following WWII, for the most part, the majority of the countries went through a golden age of prosperity and freedom. As long as there is people with opposing religions and ideas there will never be peace. This has been displayed even in todays world by the non-stop fighting throughout the middle eastern part of the world.
555 words
ReplyDeleteI agree with how you said there is only one world war between 1914 to 1945 with a little break in between because if the league of nations were such a good idea than it would of prvented the second world war.
ReplyDeleteThe League of Nations did fail to stop the war, but was it fully capable of stopping it? People everywhere in Europe were frantic to start the war due to the ideals of nationalism and militarism. Also, the League of Nations had just been created with no expierence. What do you expect from a group of rookies?
ReplyDelete-Chase Namimatsu
You say that the League of Nations was too extreme? To some extent this may be true, but WWI was Germany's fault. Germany should have been punished the worst. This was why Germany took the brunt of the effects of the war.
ReplyDeleteIf the League of Nations could really prevent the second World War from occuring, was there a more legitimate reason to why they didn't. And with the dominant nations not necessarily agreeing with the other nations, why wasn't there a compromise made or a new plan made up. Lastly, why didn't the U.S. agree on this assemblance when the creator was from the United States.
ReplyDeleteI agree with all of these people here in this chat. The league of nations might have been to rough and to straight forward for many people causing it to fail. As chase said it was fully capable of stopping the war but the other nations seemed to not agree with the ethic that the league supported.
ReplyDeleteHoffman... That is a legitimant reason, they did not have an army. The new plan was not created yet becuase the war had not occured yet and the did not know it would grow to that extent. Lastly, America at this time did not want to be involved with European affairs so they tried to stay as isolated from them as possible.
ReplyDeleteWe can't deny that at least the idea is good (we still have the UN), but did the failure of the league actually contribute to the cause of WWII, or was it never able to gain momentum as Chase points out?
ReplyDeleteI would not say that the failure of the league contributed to the start of war, but it sure did nothing to prevent it from occuring. The League of Nations was fairly new at the time so it had little to no backing support which resulted in its inability to gain momentum towards anti-war efforts.
ReplyDelete