All of these factors helped to break stalemate: New Technology, The American entry into the war, the blockade of German ports and the German offensive in March 1918.How far do you agree with this statement?
All of these factors helped to break stalemate: New Technology, The American entry into the war, the blockade of German ports and the German offensive in March 1918. How far do you agree with this statement? Stalemate was on the western front for many years. It cost a lot of lives. It was finally broken however, in 1918. I will now examine each of the four factors that contributed to the breaking of stalemate to see if all of the above points did contribute to the breaking of stalemate, and see if I agree with the above statement. New Technology The tank was a main factor of new technology. The British invented the tank. When they were first invented they could travel at 6KM per hour and were armed with machine guns and cannons. It was first used at the Battle of the Somme (1916). The first time they were used they were not very manoeuvrable and very unreliable, they travelled at walking pace and it wasn't until November 1917 at Cambria when the tank achieved success. The tanks in Cambria had caterpillar tracks copied from the farm tractor and with armour plating; the tank was the answer to the machine gun, the trench and barbed wire. There were only a few tanks in the Battle of the Somme and the element of surprise was wasted but the Germans didn't copy the idea until it was too late. Attacks at Cambria with the 378 Mark IV tanks without a preliminary bombardment but
To what extent did the nuclear arms race make the world a more dangerous place in the years 1949-63?
To what extent did the nuclear arms race make the world a more dangerous place in the years 1949-63? The arms race arguably made the world a more dangerous place, the word 'dangerous' could be defined as an unsafe threat to the world and human population. This was demonstrated through the tests of 'brinkmanship' in the Cuban missile crisis. The increased spending, in order to impress the 'third world', leading to new delivery systems, such as the ICBM's in 1957, the destructive power of the new H-bomb and Lithium bomb. However, the arms race acted as a strong deterrent through promise of 'Mutually Assured Destruction' and also creating a limited war due to the capacity of the nuclear weapons. The nuclear arms race made the world a more dangerous place; it evoked a threat coming from the two world superpowers. The destruction capacities of this developed nuclear weapon have increased thousand times more than the atomic bomb. The world greatly changed when the USA exploded the Hydrogen bomb in 1952; following by the Russians creation of the Hydrogen bomb in 1953 this led to the world becoming a much more dangerous place. This stimulated the arms race and creating a resilient competitive atmosphere between the world powers. In result obviously the damages of the consequences would be greater than of the atomic bomb more, therefore this placed the world in a dangerous position.
Why Did The USA Become Increasingly Involved In The Vietnam War? The Vietnam War was a prolonged and unsuccessful attempt by South Vietnam and the United States to prevent the Communists of North Vietnam from uniting South Vietnam with North Vietnam under their leadership. The Vietnam War was probably the longest war in which the Americans fought in and the only war in which they were defeated. This essay will discover the facts and reasons for why America became involved in the Vietnam War from the Second World War up to sending the first troops up to Vietnam in 1965. At the end of the Second World War Americans were still concerned about the spread of Communism and were still offering military aid and economic aid to any country requiring defense for themselves over Communist countries. The USA was still a great believer in the Domino Theory. This was the belief that if one country fell to Communism the rest would follow. America had also been so concerned about communism due to the fact that countries such as Poland, Czechoslovakia and Romania had communist governments. Following the surrender of Nazi Germany in May 1945 near the close of World War II, the uneasy wartime alliance between the United States and Great Britain on the one hand and the Soviet Union on the other began to unravel. By 1948 the Soviets had installed left-wing governments in the countries of Eastern
World War One Sources Question a) The main aim of the Schlieffen Plan was to win a war over France so that Germany could become the most powerful country in Europe. However if, as the Germans thought, France's ally Russia would come to help the French then the Germans would have to split up their army as Russia bordered Germany on one side and France the other therefore Germany would have to fight a war on two fronts. The Germans therefore thought up a plan that would enable them to fight only one country at a time. The plan was that Russia would take six to ten weeks to mobilise their army, after they had heard about the war, as Russia's railways and roads were quite backward and it would take time to assemble all their men from all over the country. This would give the Germans enough time to defeat France. The problem was how to defeat France in just six weeks when the French already had troops along the French/German border and behind the troops were heavily fortified towns. The Germans needed to launch a surprise attack on France if they were going to achieve their objective of winning a war over France. However, the French had not put up any defences on the French/Belgian border as Belgium was a neutral country and the French would not expect an attack from there. Part of the Schlieffen Plan, therefore, was to attack through Belgium and the Germans hoped that the
To what extent was America's policy of containment successful? Use Korea, Cuba and Vietnam in your investigation.
To what extent was America's policy of containment successful? Use Korea, Cuba and Vietnam in your investigation. American policy of containment refers to the foreign policy strategy of the US in the early years of the Cold war. The policy was to defeat the Soviet Union by preventing it from expanding the territories under its Communist control or otherwise extending its influence. This, naturally, resulted in strained relations and rivalry between the two superpowers. Despite the many difficulties, American policy of containment during the Korean War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the Vietnam War did manage to contain the expansion of Communism to a certain extent. The containment of communism in Korea was successful. The Korean War, which started on June 25, 1950 and ended with a cease fire on July 27, 1953, was a civil war between North Korea and South Korea. This Cold War era fighting is considered to have been a proxy war between the United States and its Western democratic allies, and the Communist powers (Soviet Union and People's Republic of China). North Korea was supported by Communist China and the Soviet Union, and South Korea was supported by the United States and its Western allies. Communist North Korea sought to spread its influence and control to the South. In October 1950, hostility spilled over into open warfare. North Korean troops overwhelmed the South
Does the film 'The Battle of The Somme' provide us with a realistic picture of what it was like to be a British soldier in the trenches?
Does the film 'The Battle of The Somme' provide us with a realistic picture of what it was like to be a British soldier in the trenches? The film 'The Battle of The Somme' was released in London on the 10th of August 1916, it was a famous documentary that was filmed by Geoffrey Malins and J.B. McDowell. They were one of the first groups of cameramen to film the British soldiers on the Battlefields of the Western Front. They helped the government to produce a video, to show people that War wasn't as bad as it seemed. It was however a silent film and so captions had to be use to explain what the next section of the film was going to show. The film gave us an insight into what the life of a soldier would be like. Many historians have argued over whether this video is an accurate and reliable source of information and hopefully this will be resolved. The film however may not be reliable and trustworthy because the shots may have been fixed and set-up, they were also the opinions of only one person, so if they felt that everything was great, this would then show in what they took pictures of. The government could also have only selected the views that they wanted for the film so they may have left out the gory bits and pictures showing the British Forces suffering. The way that the film portrays Equipment and Supplies can be supported by many of the sources, the sources suggest
'By 1938, Hitler had created full employment in Germany. This is proof that Nazi economic policy was a success.' How far do you agree with this statement? The Nazi's economic policy certainly benefited Germany with unemployment rates drastically reduced, big businesses significantly boosted by rearmament, propaganda further exposed through the KPD and DAF, the currency stable and a steady increase in investments, and infrastructure in place to enable economic expansion along with many other improvements. However, there were also aspects of failure in which the German people took the toll. The people's wages were no higher in 1939 in comparison with 1928 and the number of working hours increased while the worker's rights were diminished. Hitler placed more emphasis on what he believed the nation needed in the future, rather than the demands from other party members, and the present needs of the people (guns and butter debate). As Hitler chose to rearm Germany faster, the level of lifestyle for the German people decreased with luxury items and consumer goods slowly became a rarity. Goerring, the new control over trade instinctively sped up rearmament so that the import value that would have been spent on food for the people, were spent on raw materials for the army. The aim of employing the nation was a definite success, with only 0.2 million unemployed by 1938, and an
How far do you agree that the actions of the USSR were primarily responsible for the division of Germany in 1949?
How far do you agree that the actions of the USSR were primarily responsible for the division of Germany in 1949? After the end of World War Two there were many meetings, including the Potsdam Conference, between the leaders of England, America and the USSR. It could be argued that the actions of the USSR were primarily responsible for the division of Germany in 1949, however this could be debated. Personally I think the actions of the USSR were primarily responsible. One of the reasons why the actions of the USSR were primarily responsible is due to Stalin's determination and need for a buffer zone for the USSR. The Battle of Berlin alone had resulted in over 300,000 casualties for the USSR and they had suffered more deaths in the war than England and America and so felt they needed the security more. Taking harsh reparations from Germany would render it weak and unable to attack again, providing the security that Stalin needed. The allies disagreed as it seemed similar to the approach tried after the First World War in the Treaty of Versailles (1919) and realised Stalin's plan would not work. As well as this there was a breakdown in cooperation due to Soviet intrusions in Eastern Europe. If the allies were to agree at all, Germany must be split and so the actions of the USSR were primarily responsible. Secondly, Stalin's introduction of communist-style government in the