How far can it be argued that the policy of appeasement was the main cause of world war 2?
The policy of appeasement could be looked at as one of the greatest mistakes any group of powerful people could make. The decision to give in to demands to try to preserve peace and hope that would be the last demand was a terrible policy to have been used by allied leaders.
The reason why this policy was so terrible is that it gave Adolf Hitler half of Europe and 2 years to fully arm himself before the fighting started. Really, the allies could have shut down Hitler fairly quickly if they had gone after him when he mobilised his forces into the Rhineland. Strategically, Hitler was given a great advantage to aid his attempt of the conquest Europe.
First of all, in 1936, the mobilisation of troops in the Rhineland was a direct violation of the Treaty of Versailles. France, Britain and the rest of Europe should have told Hitler to remove his forces. The allies of WWI had agreed on keeping Germany out of the Rhineland because that was where the Germans began their attack in WWI. The allies wanted to keep war from breaking out again, especially in an area of such close rivalry between the French and Germans, thus they made the stipulation on German military action. So, when this part of the treaty was broken, the allied reaction to maintain peace should have been to defend the rules set out by the Versailles Treaty. They could have easily overrun the Germans in a quick decisive battle, as the Germans were not fully armed and ready for war. Instead, the USA passed the Neutrality Acts so they wouldn't have any hand in the responsibility, and Britain and France did nothing, because France would not do anything without Britain and Britain thought that the treaty of Versailles was unfair and Hitler was just taking back Germanys land.
The policy of appeasement could be looked at as one of the greatest mistakes any group of powerful people could make. The decision to give in to demands to try to preserve peace and hope that would be the last demand was a terrible policy to have been used by allied leaders.
The reason why this policy was so terrible is that it gave Adolf Hitler half of Europe and 2 years to fully arm himself before the fighting started. Really, the allies could have shut down Hitler fairly quickly if they had gone after him when he mobilised his forces into the Rhineland. Strategically, Hitler was given a great advantage to aid his attempt of the conquest Europe.
First of all, in 1936, the mobilisation of troops in the Rhineland was a direct violation of the Treaty of Versailles. France, Britain and the rest of Europe should have told Hitler to remove his forces. The allies of WWI had agreed on keeping Germany out of the Rhineland because that was where the Germans began their attack in WWI. The allies wanted to keep war from breaking out again, especially in an area of such close rivalry between the French and Germans, thus they made the stipulation on German military action. So, when this part of the treaty was broken, the allied reaction to maintain peace should have been to defend the rules set out by the Versailles Treaty. They could have easily overrun the Germans in a quick decisive battle, as the Germans were not fully armed and ready for war. Instead, the USA passed the Neutrality Acts so they wouldn't have any hand in the responsibility, and Britain and France did nothing, because France would not do anything without Britain and Britain thought that the treaty of Versailles was unfair and Hitler was just taking back Germanys land.
