Researching WWII

WRITE a brief blog post summarizing what you learned in your online research today. Feel free to focus on what you found most interesting, even if it changes the direction of your initial question.

1) How did Hitler and the Germans eventually get officially defeated?

2) How did WWII actually officially begin?

3) What different strategies did they use compared to WWI?

4) What event made Japan get involved in the war?

Through my research, I was able to learn that World War II was officially started when Germany invaded Poland. There were many preparations that Hitler made before invading Poland, such as the Munich Agreement and creating an air force and a larger military. Once Germany invaded Poland, Britain and France had no choice but to declare war on Germany, thus starting the second world war.

In the first world war, both sides used trenches and fought in "trench warfare". Also, Attrition Warfare took place in the first world war, which is where a side attempts to win a war by wearing down the enemy of personnel losses and resources. Through the losses of soldiers and resources, the enemy is supposedly suppose to surrender because they simply cannot continue fighting in the war anymore. For World War II, the U.S. air force was superior, they had more troops, and were able to win the war by overrunning the enemy. Even though the Germans had more advance technology, they did not have as many troops, so they eventually lost.

Research Results

Before I started researching I just wanted to know why World War II had started, and I did find that out and I'll talk about it later, but before I got to that information something else caught my eye. There was an article on the PBS site about POWs. Seeing as I'd never learned about them, I wanted to get some insight as to how POWs were treated during the war. What I found, however, made me regret looking at the information in the first place.

Prisoners of war were treated terribly. According to PBS, they were given rotten food and cold, uncomfortable places to sleep. The Japanese split the POWs into groups of ten people, and if one person did something wrong then the entire group would be taken down to the docks and shot.

After reading that, I continued on my search for why the war was started. And I found it. It was Germany...again. What happened was that Hitler wanted a part of Poland, and after Britain and France so willingly gave him Sudetenland, he figured he might as well just go in and take it without consulting anyone. But apparently, this was crossing the line and taking Poland was too much after taking poor Sudetenland. What's interesting is that even thought there had been severe animosity between the two countries before, Germany and The Soviet Union signed a non-aggression act just five days before Hitler tried to take Poland. Interesting, right? Meanwhile, the French suggested that Hitler should try to negotiate with Poland. But Hitler had had enough of negotiations and decided that he would just go in and take it. Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939 and Britain and France declared war on Germany a day later.

Why did the war start anyway?

I was particularly interesting in why WWII started, and only a few decades after the first World War. It seemed weird to me that after so much destruction, the countries of Europe, and followed by other countries in the world, would want even more? I discovered in my research that France, Britain and the Soviet Union actually provoked war primarily in their attempts to maintain peace with Hitler, and therefore with Germany.

Britain and France wanted peace, and Stalin sensed Germany was out of control and tried to unite all the anti-fascist countries. He also wanted peace, and was convinced that Hitler would not start a war against the rest of Europe if they were strongly united. However, while Britain and France were anti-fascist, they were not fans of the USSR's communist regime either. They didn't want to unite with Stalin so they desperately tried to keep the peace with Germany so they wouldn't need an anti-fascist alliance. This is what pushed Britain and France to easily agree to the Munich Agreement, in which Hitler promised peace so as long as he got to take over Sudetenland. This move lost Britain the support of the Czech Army, but they were convinced it has prevented war and did not want to go to war with Germany over the seemingly small matter of Sudetenland. However, Hitler, being the bad guy he was, went against his word and invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia, breaking the Munich Agreement.

Before Hitler broke the agreement however, Stalin was becoming suspicious of Britain's deals with Germany. The Munich Conference was something Britain would normally support, unless, Stalin thought, they were trying to force Germany onto the Eastern front instead of the Western front. By now, Stalin was convinced war with Germany was inevitably. However, this didn't mean Germany had to be fighting Russia. He figured Britain was probably thinking the same thing, and was trying to push Hitler to declare was on the USSR. Stalin tried to buy time to build up his army by signing a peace treaty with Germany. The countries had always argued over Poland, and the Nazi-Soviet pact was signed on August 28, 1939, agreeing to share Polish territory. This certainly took the world by surprise. Fascists and communists had always been enemies. However, barely 4 days later Germany invaded Poland (after trying to convince the world that Poland had invaded them first, which of course was not the case) This was the last straw. War was declared on Germany on September 3rd, 1939.

With the Munich conference and the Nazi-Soviet pact, it is clear that Russia, Britain and France were desperately trying to maintain peace with Germany. However, with Hitler so out of control, the treaties were broken, leaving the Western and Eastern fronts with absolutely nothing gained from these treaties and plenty lost. This was what eventually started another World War.

Research results

My research was a little haphazard. It turns out that the "credible" sites expect you to already know which countries were on which sides, even though Wikipedia will gladly tell you the basics. I got a few short answers to some questions, but for the most part was not able to find what I needed. I didn't know exactly what happened to Hitler at the end of WW2, and while I was fairly sure he died, it was interesting to find out that he had committed suicide. If anyone needs more proof that he was not fit to rule, he was so incapable he couldn't cope with defeat, and would rather end his life than be unsuccessful and dishonored.
One of my other main questions was about whether the battle tactics of WW2 were more humane than the trench warfare of WW1. I was able to get more information on the types of strategies used in WW2, but it is entirely a matter of opinion whether they are humane or not. WW1 was extremely tortuous and horrifying to the individual, whereas WW2 worked more on a larger scale. Bombing was the main tactic of WW2, and many un-militarized, civilian areas were completely obliterated. England and France weren't expecting any change in tactics form WW1, so they tried to fortify the Maginot line and took up defensive positions in Belgium, but Germany had only wanted them to think that and attacked them on their unguarded side.
The final thing I researched was the Enigma machine, which I had heard of before, but didn't know any specifics about. The Enigma machine was a typewriter-like device used by the Germans to both encode and decode messages, though a series of knobs that scrambled the typed message. AS soon as the British found out about it, they went straight to work on cracking it, but because of how complicated the device was it was very difficult. They were able to decode a fair amount of messages, albeit slowly, but had to pretend they didn't have the information, so the Germans would not be alerted to their open secret and change the device. Unfortunately, Germany found out and made the device even more complicated, but the capture of multiple German boats containing Enigma devices helped crack the code.

Munich Conference

Dolly Thompson's 1938 broadcast told of the Germans actions and how they were appalling and this is exactly right because what Germany is doing should not be tolerated what they are doing are all signs pointed to them assembling their forces for some purpose and I would have to think that World War might be on their mind. That they are doing all of this to get power and be the dominant force that they believe that they are

The first sign that they are building up is them forming an air force, then they joined forces with Austria and they formed an alliance with Japan, then they seized Czechoslovakia and the whole time most of Europe just stood slack jawed and not willing to do anything about Germany. So what Dolly is saying is exactly the truth that the actions of Germany are appalling and someone needs to do something before the whole thing escalates and causes a whole new World War to start and undoubtedly will leave all of Europe in disarray.

Researching the War

Today in class, we spent time researching questions we had about World War Two. While I was going through the detailed chronology of World War Two, I came to the conclusion that Japan's leaders must have been insane. I had already known about the Kamikazes and their lunacy, but two other tidbits of Information struck me as on par with their craziness. First, I was shocked by the resilience of the Japanese government. The time line shows that Japan was nuked twice, and had the Soviet Union Declare war on them before they finally surrendered. Even after being blitzkrieg-ed by everything the air force had to offer, Japan still asked for a conditional surrender (four days later they unconditionally surrendered). The fact that they didn't immediately surrender after being NUKED shows that their government was either stupid or extremely resilient; either way it is still an interesting that Japan took so long to accept defeat. Another thing that struck me as bizarre was Japan asking there citizens to commit suicide rather than get killed or turn themselves in to the Americans. It describes that around a thousand Japanese citizens either killed themselves or were killed by Japanese soldiers.
Overall, in our research today in class I found exactly how extreme and ridiculous Japan's leadership was during Word War Two. Kamikaze fighter pilots, demanding suicide from their citizens, and the unwillingness to surrender even after it was clear that there was no way to achieve victory shows their true colors.

Why the Jews, Hitler?

In my original blog post about World War II, my wondered why Hitler chose the Jews as victims. After doing some research, I discovered that Hitler believed socialism was a Jewish conspiracy. Hitler observed that many socialist leaders, like Karl Marx and Leon Trotsky, were Jewish. He believed the Jews were discouraging the war effort, and often spoke out against them. The Jews had been prosecuted over the years, so were supporting socialism because of the promised equality. Once Hitler was recognized as an enemy to socialism, he was taken in by the German Army, and lectured soldiers. He told them that Germany lost the Great War because the Jews and Marxists had betrayed their country. Since socialism was popular after the Great War, Hitler called his new political set up 'Nationalist' Socialism to appeal to the country. In his plans, all people of 'German blood' would be considered equal, and the 'aliens' (such as Jews) would lose their rights as citizens. Hitler became more popular, and now, he propagated that Jews were the cause of modern art, pornography, and prostitution, as well as the cause of Germany's defeat in World War I. He also claimed that they were plotting to take over the world. This all happened before Hitler became Chancellor of Germany.

Although I did not find why Hitler picked the Jews in my research, I can guess. The Jews had been picked on before, and Hitler had a root of hatred against them. Another explanation is that Hitler thought the Jews would be easy targets, since they were a minority and had been in the past.

Researching the War

I extended my understanding of WWII in class today by researching the questions that I had asked earlier.

Through my research (and also through class discussion), I learned that Germany annexed/occupied several territories before WWII, including Sudetenland and Austria. These occupations initially constructed tension between Germany and other European powers. However, Germany's occupation of Poland triggered the war, considering that France and Britain declared war two days after the Poland invasion.

My second question addressed the amount of casualties for each participant in the war. According to several sources, the USSR (Russia) suffered the most military losses, totaling at over 20 million. This statistic highlights the USSR's involvement in the war, even though the USSR did not necessarily initiate the war.

Germany's economy drastically improved before the brink of WWII. Hitler helped cure Germany's severe case of hyperinflation by making economic reforms and holding secret meetings with bankers. Most surprisingly, Germany ironically borrowed money from the United States. Judged by this transaction, the United States must have either been neutral and/or oblivious to Hitler's true regime.

Exciting Stuff!

The part of World War 2 that I decided to research was some basic facts and chronology. Although usually not the most exciting topic, I felt that I had heard a great many stories (from my grandpa especially) about the horros of combat during World War 2, and wanted to gain a solid base of information on which to build these stories. I was very interested to see how the war had originally "started" - the beginning is obviously objective. Germany staged a fake attack on a Polish radio station on September 1, 1939. The objective of this odd action was that when Poland reciprocated, they could call it an "unprovoked attack." I was shocked at how low Germany was willing to stoop in order to attack Poland without appearing ridiculously aggressive. I also saw a strong parallel here with the Holocaust. Hitler and the Nazi party were infamous for inventing reasons to persecute or harm people, and this is no exception. When Germany decided that you were in their way, no amount of logic would talk them out of it. They would take you to prison or kill you on the spot, and if they couldn't find a good reason to do it they would make one up.

Another date I felt was important was September 3, 1939. Britain and France declared war on Germany because of an alliance they both had with Poland. Sound familiar? This is exactly how World War 1 started, with a bunch of tricky alliances and Germany jumping the gun just a bit. The one thing I would like to know is this: Did Germany attack Poland because it actually wanted Poland, or did Germany just want to start a huge war without appearing to be on the offensive? I wouldn't put anything past Germany at this point.

The Home Front

In my initial post, I asked how World War II affected the home front. As I had already suspected, the war had affected America at home, but I had no idea how drastically the environment had been changed. Since most of the nation's men were fighting overseas, women were called on to join the workforce. In a famous propaganda poster, Rosie the Riveter is pulling up her sleeve in a pose with her muscles flexed, encouraging, "We can do it!" The American industry boomed during World War II due to the vastly increased rate of weapons production, and with it came a very welcome recovery from the depression of the thirties. In fact, the spirit of the time even called for marginalization of unnecessary production not related to the war. For example in 1941, three million cars were manufactured, but throughout the war, there were only one hundred and thirty nine. Car and machinery companies instead began to focus their efforts on engines, ships, guns, tanks, and trucks. Because of the people's determination to serve their country, the United States' total production for the war was about equal to the production of the rest of the world during the same time period.

In addition, the absence of the country's men often left women in charge of a household alone. The war ultimately turned the stereotypical American woman's role to the supporter of the family. Over 350,000 women joined the military in various divisions. Citizen were asked to collect scrap metal that could be used to build armaments, and kids often scoured the street for cans or rubber tires. At the same time, rationing began which basic essentials were limited, and luxuries were out of the question. In total war, everyone and everything seemed to be constantly directed towards the war effort in an act of support and patriotism.

Communication during the War

The first picture of dead American servicemen since Pearl Harbor.

Today I researched a little of what was going on in the home front. The PBS website had good information about communication during the war.

When I hear the word censorship I automatically think of communist countries like China or countries whose governments have more control over its people. I didn't know how much censorship there was in the United States during the war. Not only was there censorship in the newspapers, but government agencies and President Roosevelt himself played a leading role. All news was passed through the government controlled Office of War Information (OWI) and reporters felt an obligation to protect the public from grisly news or else a nationwide panic might ensue.

The people got their news primarily from radio broadcasts, newspapers and newsreels that preceded movies at the theaters. 50 million Americans watched newsreels each week to catch the latest on the war. As the war dragged on and Americans realized just how serious the war was people scanned the newspapers more frequently to see if anyone they knew had died.

It was only after two years of the fighting against Japan that the government allowed the release of pictures showing dead Americans in LIFE magazine at a beach in New Guinea.

Op-ed on Munich Conference

The Munich Conference demonstrated timidity from the British people in response to illegal German actions. It is obvious that Germany is exhibiting more warlike behavior, just like at the onset of World War I. Then and now Germany is assembling an army, building up their navy and seizing other countries' land. Why are we, Great Britain, victors of the Great War, the people who wrote up the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, allowing Germany to get away with their actions? They are blatantly breaking the terms set upon them by the Treaty of Versailles and should be punished. So what does our government do? Chamberlain goes to Munich and instead of rebuking Germany and drawing up new punishment for the rule-breakers, he allows Germany to keep Sudetenland. Not only does Neville Chamberlain not do anything to chastise Germany, but he comes home and declares the Munich Conference to be a success! What a joke. How can you call allowing Germany to occupy the demilitarized Rhineland, annex Austria and keep the Sudetenland a milestone for Anglo-German relations?! Pull the wool off of your eyes Chamberlain! Hitler's playing you for a fool. And just because we have agreed on this peace settlement now doesn't mean there won't be war later. Yeah, I listened to our prime minister say there won't be any more wars between Germany and Great Britain, but how long will this "peace" last? Peace isn't a settlement, it's a continental wide mutual agreement.

What I've Learned

My research on World War II evidently opened my eyes to the significance of this war. How deep the war goes is unmeasurable. One thing that captured my eyes was the role America took in the war. I used to think that America was one of the first to enter the war but in fact the remained neutral for an extended period of time due to their focuses on their problems at home.

I used to think that the Nazis were just the main problem and that they were just horrific people but when you look deep into the war, everyone played a part in the inhumane acts that took place in World War II. America played a big role in these acts by prisoning Japanese people in America, and by taking the world into a new age of warfare known as Nuclear Warfare. By dropping a nuclear warhead on Japan they had killed 90,000-166,000 in Hiroshima and killed 60,000-80,ooo Nagasaki.

In conclusion, when researching World War II I was able to learn more deeply about the war. I was able to experience a deep understanding of what it was like to live in that time.

The Result of Tension

Question: Why would Japan tempt the United States into the war with the Pearl Harbor (7 Dec. 1941) attack?
Answer: Japan's recent aggression towards neighboring countries had long been troubling to the United States. In 1937, Japan fully invaded China after several years of conflict following its capture of Manchuria. 1940 saw the Japanese occupation of Indochina. This actions did not sit well with the United States, especially not with the president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. In reaction and discouragement, FDR stopped trade between the two countries with a series of embargoes, which Japan accused was an "unfriendly act." The truth was, Japan was desperate for American oil - it had no ties in the Middle East and relied greatly upon trade with the U.S. to fuel the very machines that had taken over China. Indeed, without the oil, Japan could not hope to continue to hold China for much longer. As a result of this tension, both countries predicted that Japan would seize American assets in the Far East, which would call the U.S. Navy across the Pacific to help their isolated troops. U.S. Pacific Fleet commander Admiral Husband E. Kimmel and army Lieutenant General Walter C. expected this and requested further equipment from the government. However, the Japanese saw this possibility and decided to step from the mold with a preemptive strike on Pearl Harbor, completely skipping the seizure of the resources that they needed. They did not see their strategy as a call to arms for Americans, rather as a gambit to defeat the U.S. effort before it was even begun. In short, they hoped to subdue us for the duration of the war. Unluckily for the Japanese, they had completely misread our policy of isolationism, and instead of having the desired effect, the attack on Pearl Harbor succeeded only in kindling American fervor to join the war.

Sports During the War

Though many athletes became soldiers during the War, sports still played a large role. The 40's saw many star athletes, including Joe DiMaggio and Ted Williams leave the field in order to go fight. Sports took a major hit during the war though. Because many of these star athletes were leaving, almost anyone could become an athlete. There was even a one handed pitcher and a dwarf who played at the time.

Despite all this, sports did not lose their popularity. Even though they were miles away, soldiers still tried to follow sports, mainly baseball and football. And of course there was the 1936 Olympics in Berlin, which was one of the most memorable Olympic Games of all time. At these games, the German team was very strong and Adolf Hitler expected them to win every medal. However Jesse Owens, a black man, dominated track and field by winning four medals in front of Hitler. This went against everything Hitler preached about Aryan superiority because blacks were portrayed as inferior to everyone else. Though the Germans did take the most medals overall, these Olympic games were remembered for Jesse Owens' amazing feat.

World War 2 and me

I don't know much about World War II. The most I know is that Germany was the bad guys in numerous occasions and that America (Like Always) were the good guys. Adolf Hitler lead Germany to become a "Greater Germany". Germany not only lead a war but back home they created one of the greatest massacres to their Jews. Leading a mass genocide against the Jewish people known as the Holocaust. 

What I would like to know about the war is something different from the Holocaust. I think I've essentially learned enough about the genocide. I would like to learn more about the war itself. I don't really know too much about it. I'd like to know who was involved and what Germany's main plans were. Not only that but I'd like to know where America comes into play with World War II.

Faulty Argument

It's October 1st, 1938. Dorothy Thompson makes a speech that makes me think. Do we really want to see another war? I know I don’t. We just got out of the Great War. What Germany is doing is preventing a war from occurring. What Dorothy Thompson was saying is not the whole truth. Her faulty argument is based on the time it took to make the decisions, the inequality of those decisions, and the execution of the decisions.

             Dorothy claims that four hours is not enough time to come up with the best decision. I disagree. There was no other way, and they saw this, and knew right away what they needed to do. There was no need for time. The longer they waited, the farther away they would be from finding an answer. It’s like eating breakfast. You don’t sit there for 40 minutes trying to decide what to eat. You take at few minutes to decide to eat a bowl of cereal because that’s all you have.

            Ms. Thompson believes that the decisions made at the conference were unequal. These decisions were necessary to prevent a war from happening. One nation has to step up and take the lead to prevent war. It’s only right to reward them for stepping up.

            In Ms. Thompson’s speech, she claims that how the decision was executed was incorrect. However, these measures were taken to prevent a war. Imagine a group of kindergarteners playing a card game. If one group of them plays the game differently, you are not going to let them play.

             Overall, Dorothy Thompson was wrong. She did not see the advantages of not going to war, and was pressuring people to fight.

Germany Being Generous

While Thompson argues that “compared with [the Munich agreement] the Treaty of Versailles is a great humane document and a normal and reasonable treaty,” she is not seeing this from Germany’s side. The Treaty of Versailles blamed an entire world war on Germany. It made them pay off millions and millions of dollars, and they were not allowed an air force, a military, or any sort of defense. So really, in comparison to the Treaty of Versailles, the Munich agreement is “a great humane document” to use Ms. Thompson’s phrasing. Because Germany was treated so unfairly after World War One, it only makes sense that they would want this treaty to prevent another war or another opportunity for them to be blamed.
France and Britain completely controlled Germany after WWI, using the Treaty of Versailles, without the consent of Germany itself. Sound familiar? Maybe something “in which the defendant was not even allowed to present a brief or be heard.”? Dorothy Thompson could turn her argument around and apply it exactly to the Treaty of Versailles, which, as we all know, what against Germany.
Not only this, but by agreeing to this treaty at the Munich conference, war will be prevented. That is precisely what the countries agreed upon. Why is Thompson arguing against peace? Simply by evacuating the small territory of Czechoslovakia, peace will be prevalent among countries who have never been peaceful before. It’s quite generous of Germany to agree to peace with Britain and France, especially after being blamed for an entire war, which obviously wasn’t the case at all.
Really, Germany is not the enemy here. Britain and France are taking way more than they deserve from Germany. Millions of dollars, a military, a war guilt clause, and an entire countries’ sense of nationalism? Who’s really being unfair here?

Munich Agreement

I believe that the Munich agreement was a bad thing because by signing the agreement with Germany, it allowed them to do whatever they want. Sudentenland was of great importance to Czechoslovakia and by signing that over to Germany, it emerged as a failed appeasement because Germany went on to do whatever they wanted to. When Britain and France gave the Sudentenland to Germany, it was implied that they allowed Germany to take over all of Czechoslovakia. The Munich agreement was essentially a bad thing due to the fact that Czechoslovakia wasn't even invited to the conference. Not only was it Czechoslovakia exclusion from the conference that lead to them being over powered by Germany but it was a combination of Germanys geography and demography that allowed them to take over all of Czechoslovakia. 

The Munich Conference Take 2

The Munich Conference was a successful and useful meeting between four countries. By allowing Germany to take Sudetenland, France, Britain and Italy were showing Germany that they still had control over its actions. The original Treaty of Versailles was terrifically unfair, and allowing Germany this small act of redemption will help to improve relations between all the countries. Sudetenland is so small that it will not increase Germany's power anyway, and will not make Germany any more of  threat. France, Britain and Italy, by holding this conference, showed that they are willing to once again view Germany as a near-equal. It is as if Germany was a naughty child who has finally been allowed to come out of its time out. Germany has seen the power that the rest of Europe can hold over it, and this offering of peace will persuade Germany not to act out of line again. Sudetenland was merely a pacifier for the baby of Germany, and will undoubtedly stop it from pushing its luck any further. 

Now that relations between these countries have been improved, all of Europe should look forward to an era of peace and companionship. Germany has been shown its place, and now respect is once again being attributed to the once-powerful country. Soon, all the European superpowers will once again become friendly rivals and the world will live in a happy state of balance. 

Response to Munich Conference

The Munich Conference of 1938 was a good thing because peace was (temporarily) achieved when Europe was at the precipice of another war, only 20 years after World War I. Germany was obviously in the wrong here, they broke the terms of the Versailles treaty because they started expanding and developing their military. France and Britain were anxiously watching and hoping that Germany wouldn't be so brash as to stir up another war that could potentially have the same ramifications as World War I had. Eventually Germany went to far, but France and Britain were correct when they agreed on peace. The allies didn't want another war that would leave ten million people dead, and with a worldwide economic depression a war would only further their troubles. Of course Britain and France would want to proclaim that a successful peace treaty had been achieved, probably to galvanize public support in a time when people were suffering economically and hadn't fully recovered from the lost of loved ones in World War I. It is also a mini-success that French, British and German leaders were able to discuss volatile political matters because these countries historically had been great rivals. 

Give the people what they want

The Munich Conference has brought unity, cooperation, and peace to Europe's main powers: France, Britain, Italy, and Germany. 

Germany's occupation of Czechoslovakia (CZ) unites citizens of German heritage, considering that many Germans live in CZ. Instead of having two separate nations, Germany and CZ can unite to form a more economically and politically powerful nation. Therefore, for Germany's sake, the Munich Conference is beneficial and will finally bring people who share a common language and ethnicity.

More broadly, the Munich Conference establishes international cooperation among these four countries. Since the terms of the conference indicate no aggression or hostility, citizens of each of these countries can feel assured that war will not take place. This circumstance will increase levels of national confidence in each of these countries, promoting positive nationalism and potential economic success. By appeasing Hitler's demands, Germany has no reason to push further, so they are not a threat. Although the terms of the conference allow Germany to rise above the conditions of the Treaty of Versailles, hostility seems absent, so Germany's success is entirely for its own improvement, not necessarily to threaten other countries.

Again, the Munich Conference seems to assure the prevention of war, which is essentially the most important goal after all. As the paranoia of war exits the minds of citizens, countries can become more efficient in terms of labor and politics, leading a content and more stable worldwide society.

Munich Reconsidered

Dorothy Thompson was completely just in her description of the Munich Conference. We have essentially just handed the Germans exactly what they wanted, by saying that we will stand by and let them take whatever they need from whomever they wish. The "treaty" is not a treaty at all, and is entirely unfair to Czechoslovakia. Germany is putting on the appearance of giving them a say in the matter, but not only was there no representative from Czechoslovakia at the conference, but the alleged "vote" is merely a facade put on by the Germans to fool us into supporting them. The German people of Czechoslovakia have had many years since the end of the Great War to move back to Germany, so it makes no sense that now the Czechoslovakian people should have their lives and their land taken away from them. Germany is manipulating us, and I can tell that it is only a matter of time until they start asking for our own countries in addition to that of the Czechoslovakians. I can only hope that our leaders are able to see it coming, and protect us better than they did Czechoslovakia. I completely oppose this agreement and all of the terrible consequences it will bring.

The Success of the Munich Conference

The Munich Conference was a great success! Finally Europe is on the path to stopping Germany's rapid expansion. The Munich Conference will finally appease Hitler and power hungry Germany. The success of the Munich Conference has shown that diplomacy is an effective way of dealing with Germany. The conference shows that Europe's leaders can come up with an intelligent diplomatic solution in as little as four hours. Also, the Munich Conference did not require much sacrifice from Europe; It is perfectly fine to allow Germany to flex its muscles. Germany has been in a cage due to the Treaty of Versailles and it is not unnatural for Germany to want to expand after being contained for so long. Besides, the Treaty of Versailles crippled Germany to a point where it was treated as unequal to the ret of Europe; The Munich Conference simply gave Germany the equality that all European countries deserve.

Munich Reconsidered, Erika

The past wars are major examples of peace treaty. This treaty is emphasizes how two sides can jot down their agreements and come to a mutual understanding. It grants Germany the right to take over territory with terror and force. Rather than expressing injustice, Germany is expressing a willingness to fight for land and get rid of all racial minorities whom don’t land a hand in political issues. Minority groups are taking up precious territory in which Czechoslovaks and German people can make the world a better place. Plus if we are giving up our lives just to take over this area without protection then we should be allowed to take over.

Germans and Czechoslovaks have immense reasons on their side to do so. Such as proaganda which show that they are able to lead and take over an area that should rightfully be theirs, plus there are organizations that spread all throughout the area supporting the movement.

Czechoslovaks are also under certain conditions in which they have to follow to stay in these houses or they get thrown out just like the others. Germans should make the laws or decisions to occupy territories. Comparing other treaties to the Munich agreement express how much better it was. The Treaty of Versailles was a humane document but not very reasonable. The fact that Germany can’t have a military, air force, and give up area just because France felt they were a threat is really unfair. Germany fighting back to continue their old beliefs and way of life is the way to go. The guaranteed right the Germans had would probable have been corrupted by the French. There is no reason to believe the Munich agreement was a negative affect.

Munich Agreement Reconsidered

France and Britain were right in giving Germany what it wanted in Sudetenland. It was a sacrifice that they were willing to make in order to stay on good terms. They knew that Germany had been willing to start a war over it so they gave it up freely rather than losing lives and resources to a useless conflict over a small piece of land. They saved Eastern Europe from being torn apart by simply giving Germany what they wanted. Their release of power and land demonstrated their confidence in their own strength. They knew that that Germany wouldn't be able to overthrow them so they didn't have to waste money on Sudetenland if Germany tried to take it by force. A good relationship between Germany, France, and Britain was much more important than the small territories that Germany was willing to fight for.

Munich Reconsidered

Our leaders who created the Munich Agreement claim that they are preserving peace between their nations and Germany for years to come. However, this could not be further from the truth. Rather than acting as the final step in peace negotiations, letting Germany proceed with these injustices will be the first step in Germany's climb to power.

In the final agreement - an agreement that only three other European leaders decided to ratify - there is no consideration for the rights of humans. For non-Germans living in Czechoslovakia, there is no clause that even mentions their evacuation, and nothing prevents the Germans from turning to violence. Because the Germans control the plebiscites, a majority of people who would make a difference are not given the right to vote on the decision. The only party that this injustice benefits is the Germans in their rise to power.

And this certainly does not fosters peace and friendly relations between our countries. Chamberlain champions the agreement as though it is peace itself, but this is only an act of temporary appeasement. Germany is allowed to expand its boundaries again through this unjust annexation. But Germany will not stop there when the rest of Europe, evidently, will allow it much more. How many more restrictions does Germany wish to free itself of? Is this the end of tension between nations or the signal of the Germany's militaristic rise to power once again?

A Time to Grow

While France and Britain's decision to give Sudetenland to Germany may have felt like submitting when they should have been strong,  it was one made with the best interests of their countries in mind. The Munich Conference decided to sacrifice a small region of Austria for the greater  good of other, much larger, lands. There was no way that they could have known that Hitler would go on to such horrendous acts, willfully breaking promises made to Britain and France. The leaders of Britain and France would have believed themselves to be pacifying a country, stopping it by giving it exactly what it wants. They, as victims of the situation, hoped that Hitler would be content with the concessions it was given. While, the lack of Czechoslovakian representation may be slightly disturbing, to have made this decision, it was necessary; the Czechs would never have resigned themselves to what was necessary had they a say. 

Looking at the situation, even from hindsight, one comes up with the same conclusions. If Britain and France hadn't made the decisions that they did, the war would have begun much sooner, perhaps in a time when the world was even less recovered from the depression. The time afforded by compromise of Sudetenland won the Allies time, both to realize Hitler's power and purpose, and to strengthen themselves for the oncoming battle. While no treaty could have prevented World War II, the Munich Conference allowed the Allies the strength they needed to win it much later. 

Munich Conference Other Side

In Dorothy Thompson's radio broadcast of 1938 she said Germany's takeover of Czechoslovakia should have been stopped but I believe that what the German's are doing is perfectly acceptable. They are just taking over so they can expand they need to have something they can call their own. What they are doing does not matter, they still are not a threat and what they are doing will not matter in the long run. We have to at least give them a chance to feel confident about something since they got put in their place in World War I. Letting them have Czechoslovakia will not come beack to haunt us, Dorothy Thompson is over reacting and she is going to make people worry about nothing. If they let Germany have Czechoslovakia it will appease them and keep them at bay for awhile, there's nothing to worry about, sometimes to calm an uneasy child you need to give them something to play with and that is exactly what Germany needs, something to call it's own.

If Dorothy keeps ranting about Germany than people will panic and over react to the point where we might even have another World War. Germany really has not done anything wrong they are just expanding and that is what every country does at some point in their history. Just leave Germany be and let them go about their business, but if people believe Germany is trying to do something then it will not turn out well.

Munich Conference Take 2

The Munich Conference was definitely the right thing to do at this time. Before there was a lot of tension between Germany and the rest of Europe after the Treaty of Versailles. Germany was not allowed to have an Air-force or a large army, both of which they have now broken. The main goal of the conference was peace and I believe it has been achieved. Germany is now a lot more powerful and coming back to being equal to France and Britain. And for those who argue that it was unfair, why should Czechoslovakia be represented. They are such a small country. If they were represented, then shouldn't Romania and Lithuania be represented as well? They are so insignificant compared to Britain and France and Germany that they don't deserve representation.

And regarding the matter of the German takeover of the Czechs, it will make Czechoslovakia a stronger country being under German rule because Germany is a lot more stable relative to Czechoslovakia. 

As for peace, Dorothy Thompson said that Peace can be established when there is equal terms between each sides, and now there is. The Treaty of Versailles put Germany a lot lower than the rest of Europe. However now, they are more at par with Europe. Also she said Peace is not the absence of war, but a positive condition. There is no war right now, and the condition is a lot more positive than it was before the Munich Conference, so therefore there is peace and the main goal of the conference has been reached. 

Opposite Opinion of Munich Agreement

From these past wars, there has been a large amount of damage done to numerous countries. To attain peace between Germany and the allied countries, Germany is proposing the Munich Agreement. They may call it peace, but it is very obvious what they are trying to accomplish. One of their demands is for all non-German people living in Czechoslovakia is to be evacuated while the Germans stay. It is obvious that Hitler is planning something significant or else he wouldn't go to such extents to get the Nazis and Germans into Czechoslovakia. Also, the Germans are disobeying the Treaty of Versailles. They created their Air Force and enhanced their army by creating a draft even though the Treaty specifically says that they are to limit their army to 100,000 men and not have an Air Force at all. This "peace" is established by a dictator, "and can only maintain itself by further dictatorship". The non-German citizens of Czechoslovakia all agree with me when I say that Hitler is evil and is planning to take over the world one country at a time.

Notes:
Dorothy Thompson, "Peace: and the crisis Begins", October 1, 1938.

Munich Reconsidered

The Munich Conference has led us to establish a peaceful relationship with Germany. Once they get Sudetenland, it will no longer bother the other European countries. Germany was always a dangerous country to be near, and thus if we let them have their way, they will see us as allies, no longer needing to fight with each other. As we all know already, Germany has broken the Treaty of Versailles, and is preparing for the battle that may initiate any moment. Although we may have won the last great war, Germany was still a difficult country to defeat. With the pressure and memory of the last war, they have prepared immensely for this war, and in these times it would be safer to please them and be on their side as for now. True, the 'peace' that we have now is barely strong enough to actually last, yet in this situation, it is better than nothing. Giving up Sudetenland will save us many lives on both sides, and thus in this sense we have made the right choice. The consequences of our agreement will show soon.

Go Munich Conference!

The Munich Conference was a great success. The goal was to achieve peace, and this did indeed occur. I understand that Czechoslovakia did not have a representation in the conference, however I do not see this as unfair. In fact, this is even a long term advantage for the Czechs. I do not think that Czechoslovakia would have seen the big picture of what is best overall. In the conference, the Czech people are granted peace and protection, which they did not really have before. I think that the leaders of all of Europe's countries that did represent in the Munich Conference had a fair viewpoint and good knowledge about what is best, and most peaceful, for everyone.

Way to go Britain and France! (No Sarcasm)

Giving Sudetenland to Germany was a fantastic idea. The Munich Conference was supposed to maintain peace and thats what it was doing! Everyone knows that giving a country what it wants will prevent war, especially when they know that war will happen if it the agreement didn't appease Hitler. World War I was terrible on everyone involved, so it was logical that Britain and France would not want it to happen again. And if giving Germany Sudetenland was the only thing that could prevent war then obviously measures would be taken to appease.

The Treaty of Versailles, though it might have seemed unfair at the time, was really made when the wounds made during World War I were still fresh so obviously the terms were made a little too harsh. Just because a country builds an army doesn't mean that they are going to start a war, they just want to make the people living there safe. And just to go farther, Hitler knew that France was just waiting to start another war with Germany because they hate each other, so re-militarizing Rhineland was just another way to ensure the safety of the German population. Britain and France made the right choice in overlooking Hitler's rule breaking because they knew that they would do the same thing for their country if it ensured safety.

And though some may argue that giving over Czechoslovakia was fascist takeover, they would really be overlooking the fact that it was just a sacrifice made for the greater good. Part of the Czech citizens are of German decent, so they deserve to be part of the German nation. And as for the people that would have to leave, doesn't that seem like something they would want to do. Even though Czechoslovakia is their home at the time, when Sudetenland becomes an official part of Germany, it would be a terribly uncomfortable place for them to live because they would not fit into the larger population. Their cultures would be different and they would probably want to find a place where they could live comfortably. So really, evicting all those who are not German isn't a way to get rid of the minorities, but rather to make sure that those minorities have a more comfortable place to live.

And finally, Hitler's expansion was not a way that he could spread his territories, but rather a way that he could make sure all people of German decent could have a place that they could live, be comfortable, and be safe.

Really, Britain and France? Really?

Though hindsight is hard to let go of when dealing with Hitler, it is still easy to see the injustice shining through the formal words of the Munich conference. Afterall, who ever came up with the idea that it was a good thing to give a volatile country what they want and make it easier for them to start a war?

The Munich Conference was supposed to be a way to maintain peace in Europe, but what it really did was make Europe a more dangerous place to live in. Instead of scolding and punishing Germany for breaking the rules of the Treaty of Versailles, the representatives from Britain and France just gave Hitler what he wanted. Did they learn nothing from World War I? Had they forgotten that those rules and regulations were put in place for a reason? This is what it seemed like. If the agreements made had only affected those that lived in Germany and not the surrounding area, it probably would not have been as bad. But since the agreements centered around the lives of the Czech people, it is impossible to ignore the injustice.

It seems that everyone in involved in World War I forgot that Germany had lost along the way. They also seemed to forget that Hitler and Mussolini had just supported the fascist side in a war they had no part in. Were Britain and France trying to send the message that fascist take overs were ok? I would implore them to show one instant history then that would show that fascism worked well for everyone involved. And speaking of everyone involved, why was there no representative from Czechoslovakia? Again, the representatives did not stop think that maybe, just maybe, this "non-hostile" take over that they had planned wouldn't work. No one stopped to even consider the fact that they were evicting thousands from their homeland just because they weren't German. And it even seemed like it was a bad thing that there were non-German people in a country that wasn't Germany. Huh, what a concept.

And lastly, though we it is already clear that the participants in the conference did not think, there is one thing that still needs to be pointed out. Were the British and French representatives really not aware that they were allowing Hitler to spread his territories when the borderlines of European countries had already been drawn? Really? And really Britain and France, were you completely oblivious to the fact that Hitler had already started building an army, and that you were just letting it happen? Just a few things to think about...

"Peace"

In her 1938 broadcast, Dorothy Thompson tells us she thinks that Germany's not-so-subtle take over of Czechoslovakia was quite appalling and should have been stopped by the governments who made the initial Treaty of Varsailles. The German's dangerous rise to power goes unchecked by England and France. Not only does Germany proceed without being stopped, but they are actually given what they want rather than being beaten back down. This was a gamble on the part of Germany's keepers. They thought Germany would stop after taking what it wanted, but instead it kept rising higher and higher until it regained its seat as a major power in the world. They believed that loosening their hold on Germany would keep it from reaching for more, but as we and Dorothy Thompson can see, they were wrong. Germany's sudden shift in power should have alerted those who could have stopped it and Germany should have been stopped dead before it could even start it's evacuation.

The so-called peace was barely a shadow. It was more an agreement not to fight over the land that the German's wanted, but instead just to give it to them and hope they don't want more. It was a risk that the other super powers in the world took without truly looking at the consequences of this seemingly minor release of power. Their "peace" was meant to loosen their hold on Germany's collar in hopes that it wouldn't bite back. This was unwise, but I don't think they could have forseen the final outcome of their actions.

"Peace" and it's BS

Dorothy Thompson could not have said it better in her 1938 broadcast, "Peace: And the Crisis Begins:" The Munich Conference does not open the door for peace, but instead for terror, injustice, and dictatorship. Not only does the Munich Conference grant power to Germany, but it also portrays France and Britain as wimpy appeasers. Here is why.

Czechoslovakia (CZ) is already inhabited with a significant percentage of non-Germans. After having been occupied by Germany, one cannot expect German Nazis to naturally cooperate with Czechs, and vice versa. International intrusion is one thing, but racial and cultural factors come in to play. The important separation in ethnicity and language between Nazis and Czechs triggers initial tension, hostility, and violence, as we have studied in the cases of African colonization. Can Nazis expect Czechs to cooperate? No. In addition, Nazis and Czechs do not necessarily share political ideas. This circumstance will force the Nazis to enfore their political policies, most likely causing retaliation on the Czechs' behalves. Therefore, the barrier of racial tension and political dysfunction will be a internationally costly factor in Germany's occupation of CZ, making the Munich Conference the enabler for a pointless (and harmful) annexation that will harm both German and CZ.

Aside from Germany's reputation, France, Britain, and Italy display themselves as weak, contradictory, and ineffective world powers. By enabling Germany to annex parts of CZ, they are essentially conceding the Germany's will to expand and become more powerful. In other words, they have let Germany tweak the Treaty of Versailles, the very document that they (France and Britain) established themselves. Instead of halting (or at least minimizing) Germany's expansionist campaign, they officially opened the door for Germany to rise back to a worldwide military, political, and economic caliber. Isn't this scenario the exact one that the Treaty of Versailles aimed to prevent? The answer is yes, and although Germany is technically the one breaking the treaty, France and Britain (the nations who helped create the Treaty of Versailles) are accountable to letting Germany back into the game.

The logic of the Munich Conference is obviously flawed. Some may argue its legitimacy, but luckily there exists one historical event to prove its flaws: World War II.

The Munchen Conference

Written from the point of view of a British citizen:

The Munchen Conference is seriously disappointing. It seemed like everyone who opposed Germany's subtle expansion into Czechoslovakia slept in and missed the meeting. The conference has changed nothing. Germany will still continue to expand, but now it will do it quietly as opposed to expansion through brute force. The conference was a half-assed attempt at diplomacy. The soul purpose of the conference was to appease Germany for the time being. It is saddening to know that our leadership is so poor that the government cannot put its foot down on an obvious problem. Germany's expansion is obvious sign for concern, and that the fact that Europe either does not realize it, or is not concerned by it, is very disconcerting. It is blatantly obvious that Germany is planning for war; It has already created its own air force,announced its military conscription, and is building its allies at an alarming pace. The Munchen Conference was an opportunity for Europe to kill the momentum of Germany's expansion and conquest; I fear the repercussions for passing up the chance.

Peace, and the Beginning of the End

The speech given by Dorothy Thompson on October 1, 1938, is a little ironic. She, among millions of people, sees clearly what Germany's intentions are and how dangerous giving in to them is. She says that Germany is seeking to accomplish the "domination of Europe," which is surprisingly close to the truth. The Munich Conference was held in order to reassure Britan, France, and Italy. Although they all came away feeling better, Germany ended up completely on the top.
Once Germany broke the Treaty of Versailles, it all went downhill for the other countries. None of them even lifted a finger to stop Hitler as he broke agreement after agreement. When he finally went one step too far with Sudetenland, they decided that they had to do something. But instead of keeping him in check like they had hoped, they gave him exactly what he wanted: more territory, and the power to control the people within it. He even managed to make the people who gave him what he wanted feel good about giving it to him. Hitler, in a few aggressive moves, had all the superpowers of Europe completely under his thumb.

Munchen '38

I think that Dorothy Thompson was a little too harsh on our leaders. France and England are far too smart to be as easy manipulated as she says we were. While I think that the Czechoslovakian government should have been represented at the conference as well, I think most of her other points were irrelevant. For example, she stressed the language barrier. Why should we let our differences separate us? Isn't peace about everyone, no matter where they come from, working together to get along? Furthermore, she claims it is not actually a "diplomatic document," or a "normal treaty." What is a diplomatic document but an agreement between representatives of multiple countries? If a "diplomatic document" is actually something else, then I am afraid a great many people (and politicians) have been fooled for a very long time. She also claims it is not a "normal" treaty. The agreement is dealing with the ethnic aftermath of the Great War, which by all means was not an ordinary war, so it follows that any treaties regarding it are not normal either.
In general, the German race seems very proud an bellicose, so I consider it an achievement to get them to accept the terms in the document. The are giving the Czechoslovakian people a fair amount of choice in the matter, which rarely happens in situations such as these. They also have a fairly long time period in which to make their decision and move, so overall it is relatively fair, especially because there are more Germans who will benefit than Czechoslovakians who will suffer. If this agreement benefits so many, and in addition strengthens the bond between Germany, England, France and Italy, then I am in full support of it.

Not Peace

I agree with Dorothy Thompson’s broadcast, including her definition of peace. When she says that “Peace is not the absence of war. Peace is a positive condition – the rule of law,” I think she is completely right. There are many examples of when there is not peace, but also no war. In any genocide, this is true. During the Holocaust, a war was not immediately declared, however Jews were still being slaughtered. This is not peace, and therefore peace is not simply the absence of war. I also agree with Thompson when she says that peace is the rule of law. To have something that is not peace, someone has to break the rules. Violence is not peace, and violence, in 99% of all cases, is against the law. Therefore, when Hitler took away the usual democratic laws and justice in creating the treaty, when “Czechoslovakia was disposed of by four men who in four hours made a judgment of the case in which the defendant was not even allowed to present a brief or be heard,” he made it okay for someone to do something that wasn’t peace. Creating this treaty is the same as just barging into the territory and threatening all the citizens that weren’t German with guns and bombs. There was not justice in making the treaty, as “This document provides no protection whatsoever for their lives, their properties or their existences,” so it amounts to the same thing as a violent evacuation. Hitler contradicts himself when he wrote the treaty. If he claimed to have made peace, but did not use justice or laws to do so, he is simply making not peace. Looking past what we already know about what Hitler did, we can see clearly that the treaty’s intent was not to create peace, but actually the start of a coup, as Thompson states at the beginning of her broadcast. The definition of peace doesn’t change from person to person, or from time period to time period. Hitler needs to get his definition straightened out.

The Munich Conference

Sometimes sacrifices need to be made for a greater cause. When a hostile tension exists between nations, the primary goal should be to restore peace and right everything that has been wronged. For this reason, the Munich Agreement is a great success not only for our nation but for the well-being and peace of Europe as a whole.

Admittedly, we feel a slight, uneasiness regarding the terms of the agreement. The non-German people of Czechoslovakia are not explicitly guaranteed protection in the evacuation. In addition, Czechoslovakia's leader is not given any say in the matter, and the plebiscites can be held wherever seems advantageous for the German. It could also be said that this agreement is made by leaders of only four countries. However, these leaders from across Europe understand the needs of their country, they all have reached an agreement, and the conclusion seems satisfactory to everyone.

Furthermore, the ultimate goal of the agreement is what drove the conference in the first place. Whereas the Treaty of Versailles only increased tensions between Germany and the rest of Europe, this can be seen as a final act that promises peace throughout the years to come. By reversing some of the restrictions that were placed on Germany, we can appease them and begin to rebuild friendly relations. Never again will Germany have need to go to war, and European will have the chance to thrive. As Neville Chamberlain confidently stated, "I believe it is peace for our time."

Munich Conference

For the most part, I agree with what Dorothy Thompson is saying about the Munich Conference. First of all, this treaty is a lot more partial to Germany than the Treaty of Versailles. Germany has occupied Czechoslovakia and the Czechs have been forced to evacuate the area in a very short time. A plebiscite is going to be held, and I think this is very unfair because the Czechs are not promised any protection, and only Germans will remain. In the plebiscite, it is almost like it will be rigged because all the Czechs would be gone, and only Germans would remain.

Also, this issue only pertains to Germany and Czechoslovakia, and they weren't even represented at this conference. I believe it would only be fair to allow the Czechs to have a representative no matter how small they are.

The only slight positive part of this treaty is the main goal is peace and it temporarily been achieved. The peace could be broken by Germany doing something like this again except on a larger scale. The tensions between the major European countries has been eased so hopefully Germany does not do anything to anger the other countries, so we don't get into a war.

However, there is no long term peace because the treaty was not equal. "This is not peace without victory, for the victory goes to Mr. Hitler. This peace without virtue. Therefore it is not peace - but the imitation of a terrific world crisis," said Thompson in her broadcast.

PEACE? What is this "Peace"?

It's October 1st, 1938. Dorothy Thompson makes a speech that makes me think. Is it really fair what Germany is doing in Czechoslovakia? I don't think so. It appears that because of the short time period it took to make decisions, the inequality of those decisions, and the execution of the decisions.

First of all, the conference lasted four hours. The Treaty of Versailles took three years to be decided on. The decisions of the conference will change lives. People's lives all over Chekoslovakia will change drastically depending on the verdict. The fact that it took merely four hours to decide to evacuate parts of Chekoslovakia shows that the deciders did not have enough time to think about all of the consequences of their decisions. In the Treaty of Versailles, there was plenty of time to think about what would happen if each alternate decision was made, and the leaders chose what appeared to be the best option. Four hours seems hardly enough time to come up with one plan for the nations.

In the Treaty of Versailles, no one nation got all the benefits and no one nation got all the detriments. In the Munich conference, it sounds like Germany gets everything, while Czechoslovakia loses it all. Not exactly my idea of fair. I believe that the Czechoslovakian people should have a say in what happens to them.

What happens to the Czechoslovakian people when they are forced to evacuate? Where do they go? They are forced to emigrate. They must pick up their things and leave or face the German Army. These people did not do anything wrong, so why do they deserve to face the German Army?

I disagree with the outcome of the Munich Conference. People should be able to decide what happens to them, and not be forced to leave their homes. (The alternative being confronted by the German Army.)

Prelude to War

Hindsight is not necessary to inferring injustice in the decisions made in the Munich Conference. What struck me the most about the Munich Pact was that the very country being argued over, Czechoslovakia, had no representation in the deliberations. The conference itself was held between only the leaders of Germany, Britain, France, and Italy. As Dorothy Thompson stated in her broadcast, "Czechoslovakia was disposed of by four men who in four hours made a judgment of the case in which the defendant was not even allowed to present a brief or be heard." This put me in mind of the Berlin conference of 1884-1885 where Europeans divided the Congo amongst them; except, the Munich Pact was not even equal to those dividing the country (since all the spoils go to Germany) AND this time, Europeans were doing it to one of their own. To lather the wound with salt, the demands of this treaty pushed the Czechoslovakians out of their country without consideration. Only ten days were given for the people to remove from their own country without protest or rebellion. Those of German descent, however, were allowed to remain, thus filtering the jewels from dirt (I speak only their thoughts, not my own).
Now, the fact of Czechoslovakian occupation is for us a clear indication of further conquests to come, and Thompson's words on the treaty ("armistice made in advance of a war ") prove that this possibility was foreseeable from that time. The very principles of fascism require almost constant military action and expansion. Knowing this, as politicians of the time must have (Germany and Italy were open about fascism), giving into their demands hardly seems the best thing to do. Hopefully, this was realized soon after the mistake was made, when Germany siezed the rest of Czechoslovakia in March of 1939.

Munich Conference

READ Dorothy Thompson's broadcast "Peace: And the Crisis Begins" from Oct. 1938.
WRITE an op-ed style blog post in which you take a position on the Munich Conference. Try and look not from hindsight – where we can see the atrocities of Hitler and the Nazis – but from the perspective of someone living in Britain or France in the 1930s. (Do some outside research if you need to.)

(This is not my opinion, it's what a British or French in 1930's may have believed.)

The world is a violent place and quite often there are wars that decimate the people and resources. After violent wars, all the countries want is peace so they can recuperate their resources and lost lives. The Munich Agreement is the almost the perfect solution for the damage done to our countries from the past war.

Even though the non-German people of Czechoslovakia are being pushed out, sacrifices must be made to maintain peace between countries. The non-German people are provided no protection for their lives or their properties. Also, only the Germans are allowed to live in Czechoslovakia. Even though only Germans will be occupying Czechoslovakia, I believe that it is just a minor request that the Germans are asking in the return for peace between all the other countries. I believe that the Treaty of Versailles made things worse for the Germans, so this could release the grudge that they have between the rest of Europe. Hopefully, this will appease the Germans so we will never have to go to war again with them and have draw the rest of the world into it too.

WRITE a blog post in which you list (bullet points are fine) 1. What you know about WWII. 2. What you want to know about WWII.

- I know Germany and Hitler started the war.
- WWI left Germany in poverty, so they needed a way or person to help escape their economic hardship: Hitler
- He created the Holocaust because he influenced a majority of people in Germany to believe that blond hair and blue eyed boys are the only good people in the world.
- Hated all Jews and they were put in concentration camps
- Nazis were the German soldiers
- Americans, British, Russians, and French were the ones fighting against Germany

How did Hitler and the Germans eventually get officially defeated?
How did WWII actually officially begin?
What different strategies did they use compared to WWI?
What event made Japan get involved in the war?

WW2 list of facts

The things that I know about WW2 are

1. Germany under Hitler blamed Jewish people for their countries
2. Germany used the Nazis as their fighting force
3. Hate against the Jews united the country gave nationalism
4. Started with Germany's invasion of Poland
5. Japan's bombing of Pearl Harbor of Hawaii stimulated America's intervention
6. World War 2 harbored the use of nuclear weapons for the first time
7. Germany worked with Italy, and Japan accessed powers
8. U.S France, Britain were the allied powers

Things I Know About WW2

Here is a list of things I think I know about World War Two:
-America was allied with England and France
-Pearl Harbor brought America into the war
-It was as brutal as any other war, My Grandfather never talked about it.
-The war ended when the US dropped the Atomic Bomb and Hiroshima and another Japanese city, don't remember the name.
-Aerial combat became a large part of warfare
-bomb shelters were everywhere, the threat of enemy bombing runs was huge.
-there were blackouts where cities would make all windows black so that bombers could not identify them as targets at night.
-the war was fought on land, sea and air
-The nazis used the jews as scapegoats
-concentration camps were set up in Germany and other Nazi controlled countries
-Sweden was neutral
-Switzerland was neutral
What I hope to learn about WW2

-Why it was started in the first place
- Why did Japan get involved
-What was Austria's role in WW2
-What were the ramifications of WW2
-Why were submarines important in WW2
-What were the new war strategies developed for WW2

What I Know About WW2

Mostly I've just gotten all my knowledge from books and movies (Number The Stars, the Book Thief, Maus I and II, the Sunflower, Anne Frank, the Sound of Music and Paperclips) but here's what I know:

England was against Germany. In Germany, Hitler persecuted against Jews and forced them to work in concentration camps. He killed 6 million people. (?)

Hitler liked Aryan people, which means people with blonde hair, blue eyes, and who were not Jewish, homosexual, a gypsies, etc. Hitler persecuted against these people and he recognized them if they did not have blonde hair, blue eyes. (but I also thought that Hitler wasn't actually Aryan himself...?)

The U.S. was not part of the war until Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. Then we joined the war, allied with England. Sweden and Switzerland remained neutral the entire war, and they were refuges the Jews could escape to.

Hitler did many horrible things to the Jews, a lot of which occurred in WW1, such as poisonous gas, however he targeted Jews and this is what made it so horrible. People hid Jews in their basements or their attics to protect them.

When the U.S. dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, we ended the war. The damage from that bomb was long-lived and probably still prevalent today.

Then everyone decided to have lots of babies to make up for the population that was killed in WW2 :)

What started WW2?

How were the allies different in WW2 than in WW1 (if they were at all different)?

Why did Japan decide to join the war?

What other countries were part of the war that we don't hear about as much in books and movies/what affect did the war have on other parts of the world?

WW2

What I know is for the most part, from fiction (Sound of Music, Book Thief, Bed knobs and Broomsticks, first few minutes of Narnia, etc.)

-America was Allied with England (and some other people too, not really sure who..)
-Germany was the bad guy (sound familiar)
-HITLER
- He made life terrible in Germany
- He made life terrible for Jews everywhere (killed 6 million (or 600,000)
- Detainment camps
- Numbers tattooed on arms to keep track of prisoners
-gas chambers used for mass extermination (including children)
- Jews used for inhumane scientific experiments (testing poison, etc. )
- In some camps, they would kill people in the showers, by sending though acid rather than water, but you had no way of knowing.
- Prisoners sent on marches though the streets of Germany, to humiliate them.
- In Germany, if you weren't blond-haired and blue-eyed, you had to be VERY careful. It didn't entirely matter if you were actually Jewish or not.
- Lots of people hid refugees in their basements
- England suffered a lot
- Subject of a lot of bombing (especially London)
- Evacuated children to countryside
- Japan got involved (on Germany's side-I think they're called the Axis Powers, but I learned that today)
-Pearl Harbor
-Hiroshima- created a TON of long-lasting damage (I'm not even going to describe it)
- I forget the name of the island, but it was near Japan, and had a very long, bloody battle (may have been Iwo-Jima)

The Allied Powers won. The End (cue baby boom)

Q's:
What exactly happened to Hitler?
Who was on what side?
Were the battle tactics any more humane than WWI?
How exactly DOES a war boost the economy?

WWII

Things I know about World War II

The U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, ending the war with Japan.

Nazi Germany under Hitler tried to create the perfect Aryan race, in the process sending mainly Jews (also disabled people, gypsies...) to concentration camps.

Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.

Axis - U.S. and others...

Allies - Germany, Japan...

Things I want to know about World War II

How the certain alliances formed

What began WWII

The effect WWII had on the home front

WWII

Things I know:
-The Nazis targeted a number of groups, including Jews, homosexuals, and gypsies.
-Enormous numbers of people were killed in concentration camps.
-America was pulled in after being bombed by the Japanese.
-We dropped atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
-It lasted from 1939-1945
-Germany was defeated, again.

How did the Japanese get involved? What pulled them into the war?
How did the war start?
Why did Hitler choose to target Jews and not some other group?

WWII Preview

My Knowledge:

- Axis powers: Germany, Italy, Japan

- the "good guys:" USA, Britain, France, Russia (mainly)

- WWII occurred in response to Germany's excessive military expansion

- Nazis, concentration camps, and the Holocaust all play huge roles

- USA was neutral/not involved until bombing of Pearl Harbor

- Germany became very nationalistic right before WWII

- Poland became occupied by Germany instantly/frequently

Questions:

- What distinct action triggered WWII? Or was it a slowly evolving chain of events?

-Which countries suffered the most casualties/losses?

- How was Germany's economy right before and during WWII?

Things I know about WWII

America, the Soviet Union, France, and Britain were good

Japan, Italy, and Germany were bad (why is Germany always bad?)

America got involved after Pearl Harbor was bombed by the Japanese

America dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki

The war went from the late 30s to the early 40s

Millions of people were killed in German concentration camps during WWII

Why did the Germans get themselves into ANOTHER war?

What was this war about?

Intro to World War II

Back in the day (6th or 7th grade) I was a World War II nut. My friend Pete Foster got me interested with the tv show "Band of Brothers," and I was really into the first Call of Duty computer game. I ended up reading a few WWII books including a monstrous book that covered literally everything in the war.

Here is a brief rundown of what I know.

Germany was being a real nuisance under their new leader Adolf Hitler. They invaded Austria and Poland and then used a lightning fast type of warfare called Blietzkrieg to take over some other countries, including France. They bombed England a ton and this was called the Blitz. Meanwhile Japan was taking over most of East Asia and bombed Pearl Harbor to cripple America's military fleet while they captured more places and took over oil reserves. This backfired because it enraged Americans and motivated them to defeat Japan. A lot of people don't know that the US was fighting against Japan on a bunch of tiny islands in the Pacific that no one had ever heard of before we fought against the Nazis. On June 6, 1944 the Americans, British and Canadians stormed the beach at Normandy to fight back against the Nazis and get a toehold in France. The operation was a success and allied forces slowly fought their way to Berlin. Some battles included Operation Market Garden, the Battle of the Bulge and over in Russia, the battle over Stalingrad was major.

WWII

The main players of WWII were Germany, Italy, Japan, the United States, Britain, and France (similarly to the powers of WWI - Axis v. Allies). Several widely remembered events occurred during this war, such as the Holocaust, Pearl Harbor, and Hiroshima.
The Holocaust was brought about by the Nazi party in Germany led by Adolf Hitler. It was centered around the eradication of people that the Nazis deemed lesser, such as Jews and gypsies. These people were sent to concentration camps where all their belongings were confiscated and they were either mass murdered or set to hard, grueling work. Sometimes they left their homes relatively voluntarily, thinking that they were only being deported. Few Germans knew that this was happening to the Jews. The Nazis also had other camps for their prisoners of war, which were much nicer than those for the Jews.
Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack made by the Japanese on a Hawaiian battle port where many troops were stationed. This was the deciding point for America in WWII. Prior to this point, the United States had abstained from entering the war, but this forced the public to rally against the injustice of the attack. Afterwards, we entered on the side of Britain and France. Japan would not let up in its efforts and was entirely ruthless, turning their own people out of villages for the cause of the war. Kamikaze pilots were not uncommon. Within the U.S. weaponry creation and testing was being done for the purpose of solving this terrible war. Finally, the Oppenheimer came up with the atomic bomb, which he hoped was the weapon to end all wars, or at least the one raging across Europe and Asia. It was dropped twice, in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Oppenheimer was successful and the Japanese conceded defeat.

Questions I Have:

• Why did the Japanese provoke U.S. involvement in the war?
• What set Hitler so firmly against Jews?

Everything I Know About WWII!

-The Germans, Japanese and Italians were the bad guys. We were the good guys, along with the British and the Soviet Union
-We got involved in the war after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941
-The Germans started the war with uneeded aggression to their neighboring countries
-Many new forms of technology were seen during this time, including U-boats, fighter jets, and boats that launched missiles
-The war lasted roughly from the late 1930's to the early 40's
-During the war, the Holocaust took place which was the mass genocide of over 6 million Jews
-The Germans developed a new aircraft, but not fast enough to turn the tides for the airforce
-The US bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, ending the war

WWII

Although I am a boy, I cannot say I have a lot of World War II knowledge. I do know a lot about the holocaust, which is a part of the war. Hitler was the leader of the Nazis, and many minorities were targeted such as homosexuals, gypsies, and mostly, Jews. Six million total Jews were killed, mainly in concentration camps and gas chambers. There is also of course the bombings with Japan, where Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and the US later bombed Hiroshima.

I want to know why so many countries got involved in WWII. I also want to know how each individual country was influenced by WWII.

What I Know About World War II

1. Germany was a main cause of World War II
2. Hitler blamed Jews and minorities for the depression in Germany so he decided to kill all of them
3. Allies- France, Britain, Russia, and later, USA
4. Axis- Germany, Italy, Japan
5. Two areas the war was fought in: Europe and Asia
6. USA got involved after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor
7. Jews were sent to concentration camps like Auschwitz, Buchenwald, and Ravensbruck.
8. The USA dropped an atomic bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
9. Robert Goddard was a main creator of the Atomic Bomb
10. The war ended on June 6, 1944 on D-Day, when the Allies stormed the beaches at Normandy.

Questions:
-Why did the USA stay quiet for so long?
-What were the role of colonies/former colonies, tribute states in the war (India, South Africa, Australia)
-What role did propaganda have in the war?

WWII Thoughts and Questions

What I think I know about WWII:

6 million Jews were killed, 11 million people (Jews, homosexuals, handicapped people, Gypsies, etc)

Hitler was leader of Germany

Hitler Youth was popular

Jews forced to wear star of David

Jews sent to ghettos and concentration camps (terrible conditions)

Jews many killed in gas chambers and by starvation or illnesses from bad conditions

Some people kept Jewish families hidden, or took in Jewish children

Questions:

Why did Hitler pick the Jews as enemies?

Wasn't Hitler's grandmother Jewish?

Animal Farm Allegory

In the first couple chapters of Animal Farm by George Orwell, it becomes obvious that the story is a historical allegory to Russian Communism after World War One. Orwell cleverly portrays three important communist figureheads as three of the most important pigs of "Animalism". Karl Marx is clearly represented by Old Major, who teaches the other animals the foundation of communism and preaches revolution against the humans. Leon Trotsky is portrayed as Squealer the pig; one of the leaders of Animalism and the pig who is in charge of propaganda. Stalin is portrayed by Napoleon the pig. Napoleon is a bully, he rules with an Iron fist and uses intimidation tactics to keep the animals in order. Napoleon also eliminates Squealer when the disagree on political actions by releasing his own set of trained war dogs on him. The way that Napoleon got rid of Squealer is meant to show the way that Stalin got rid of Trotsky. Napoleon's war dogs are to be seen as the NKGB; Stalin's secret police. It is exceedingly obvious that Animal Farm is a direct reflection of Russian Communism.

Animal Farm Allegory

Animal Farm by George Orwell can be viewed as a historical allegory to communism and the Russian Revolution of 1917. Old Major can be seen as Karl Marx who gets all the animals to start to have communist values. Napoleon can be viewed as Stalin because his corrupt actions are similar to Stalin's. Snowball can be viewed as Trotsky, who gets kicked out by Napoleon just as Trotsky got kicked out of the communist party by Lenin. Snowball is probably one of Stalin's officials, and the dogs represent the NKVD, Stalin's secret police. George Orwell probably wrote about the Russian Revolution because he was alive during the time, so it makes sense that Animal Farm is about communism.

Animal Farm

Something that interests me is the multitude of methods that the pigs use, especially Squealer, to influence public opinion towards Napoleon's rule regardless of how corrupt he has become. Because the farm animals are mainly terrified by the idea of Mr. Jones's return and support their own "perfect equality" among animals, the pigs find it especially easy to convince them that every action is taken to preserve the integrity of their new political structure. Whenever the facts seem to falter, the pigs justify their actions by warning them that they definitely don't want Mr. Jones back. In addition, any inconsistencies that happen to pop up are smoothed over when Squealer insists that this was how things always were or that everything is for the good of Animal Farm. When the pigs took to sleeping in bed, the commandments mysteriously changed overnight, and the animals couldn't doubt it after Squealer had explained that the pigs are the ones doing the brain power. When Napoleon seized power by chasing Snowball out, it was put forth that Snowball, who had so sensibly led them, was no more than a traitor. Similarly, the communist propaganda, speeches, and public opinion were guided by the goal of perfect communism and the fear of tyrannical capitalism. Because many people were initially faithful that they would eventually reach the perfect society that they had imagined, they followed this idea and overlooked minor problems. Essentially the idea boiled down to the simple, "Four legs good, two legs bad," that was always chanted at the opportune moments. No one can disagree with the ultimate goal, so it seems impossible to point out a flaw when the leaders, and seemingly everyone around you, believe in this illusion.

Another thing that's interesting is how Orwell portrays Stalin through Napoleon and the workings of his corrupt government. From the beginning, Napoleon is a spiteful, malicious character, which we clearly see when Napoleon chases Snowball out with his vicious hounds. These dogs represent the NKVD, who would execute dissenters with Stalin's word and strike fear into others so that no one would speak out against them. Napoleon also began to hypocritically gain power within his institution by stating that the pigs, who kept the entire system in order, needed more privileges, an extra hour of sleep, lodgings inside the house, and special food. Similarly, Stalin and the vanguard were responsible for teaching communism and ensuring that the rest of the society was in order. By doing this, they also took extra privileges by placing themselves above the rest of a society in which everyone was supposedly equal.