Saturday, February 9, 2008
The Treaty of Versailles
Many historians have blamed the failure of the Treaty of Versailles for the start of WWII. Research at least two historical opinions on the Treaty of Versailles and state your opinion on why the treaty was either a failure or a success, make sure you back up your opinion with details. Due February 17th.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
54 comments:
Two historian opinions on the Treaty of Versailles:
Georges Clemenceau
liked the harsh things that were in the Treaty:
1. Reparations (would repair the damage to France),
2. The tiny German army, and
3. The demilitarised zone in the Rhineland (would both protect France),
4. France got Alsace-Lorraine, and German colonies.
But he was disappointed with the Treaty:
a. He wanted the Treaty to be harsher
b. He wanted Germany to be split up into smaller countries.
Harold Nicolson, a British delegate at Versailles, declared the treaties 'neither just nor wise', and called the delegates 'very stupid men'. But Winston Churchill believed that the treaty was the best that could be achieved, and that 'the wishes of the various populations prevailed'.
David Lloyd George
Many British people wanted to ‘make Germany pay’, and Lloyd George liked:
1. The fact that Britain got some German colonies (expanded the British Empire),
2. The small German navy (helped Britain to continue to 'rule the waves').
But Lloyd George hated the Treaty:
a. He thought that the Treaty was far too harsh and would ruin Germany,
b. He thought it would cause another war in 25 years time
In my opinion, the Treaty of Versailles was an obvious failure because it was a main cause of a second world war. Almost none of the stipulations were positive, as Germany was angry. The League of Nations formed, but couldn't even get the support of the most powerful country of the world, so that made the League a powerless organization. The Treaty ended up punishing Germany severely, virtually tying up their economy in war reparations and debt, because of the lost money from getting stripped of their colonies. It also created disorder in Germany because the Kaiser was overthrown. Wilson tried to be a peacemaker, but was not well received in Europe or the United States.
Two historical opinions on the Treaty of Versailles are:
Germany: disliked the reparations clause, disliked the fact that they had to have a small army, and did not want their colonies stripped away from them.
American citizens: did not want America to be involved in the League of Nations. They refused ot ratify the Treaty of Versailles.
In my opinion, the Treaty of Versailles would have been effective had the American citizens ratified it. Had it been ratified, the Germans would not have had enough money to initialize the second world war.
William Carr: He felt that although the Germans did take much loss after the war, they were lucky they didnt recieve more than what they did. IF Clemenceau had his way, Germany would have been in a much worse condition than they were already in.
David Lloyd George: He hated the Treaty as he believed it was way too harsh on the Germans and he believed it would ruin the German as a nation. Also he felt because of the treaty a war would occur again with 25 years time.
I think that the Treaty of Versailles was a failure because it set much of the reperations and blame on Germany which somewhat made it inevitable for them to do what will occur in the years to come as they grow to a huge power almost taking control of all of Europe during that of WWII
These are two different opinions on the Treaty of Versailles from two historians:
Lentin, Guilt At Versailles (1984)
The Treaty of Versailles should have made the victors either to conciliate the enemy or destroy them. The Treaty of Versailles did neither. It did not pacify Germany, still less permanently weaken her, appearances notwithstanding, but left here scourged, humiliated and resentful.
William Carr, A History Of Germany 1815-1945 (1985)
Severe as the Treaty of Versailles seemed to many Germans, it should be remembered that Germany might easily have feared much worse. If Clemencau had had his way instead of being restrained by Britain and America the treaty could have been much worst for Germany.
In my opinion, the Treaty of Versailles was a large overall failure, not to mention the overture of the second World War. It failed to address the needs and opinions of all of the nations involved in the war, and furthermore was agreed upon by the four most powerful emerging nations of the war. Thus, the treaty contained only the views and interests of the Big Four, rather than all of the nations involved. Beyond even this, two of the Big Four (Great Britain and France) were focused on punishing Germany and reaping financial gain. This changed the treaty from an agreement for peace to an agreement for punishment. Also, Wilson's Fourteen Points were pushed aside by the avenging countries. His idea for the League of Nations was largely weakened due to the fact that his very country failed to ratify it. All in all, I believe a lasting peace cannot be made on the basis of vengeance.
The Treaty of Versailles is a topic of much discussion in history due to the fact that many believed it led to WWII. Therefore, many different historical viewpoints exist regarding the treaty and its significance in history.
The Germans believed that the treaty "drained Germany's life and blood" and forced them into a never ending repayment of reparations to the Allied Powers.
"The criminal madness of this peace will drain Germany's national life-blood. It is a shameless blow in the face of common-sense. It is inflicting the deepest wounds on us Germans as our world lies in wreckage about us"
from a speech made by a German MP in the Reichstag in 1919.
On the other hand, British nationals and Americans believed that the treaty was necessary but also realized its relative weaknesses.
"The historian, with every justification, will come to the conclusion that we were very stupid men... We arrived determined that a Peace of justice and wisdom should be negotiated; we left the conference conscious that the treaties imposed upon our enemies were neither just nor wise."
Harold Nicolson
In my opinion, the treaty itself was a failure that didn't address many of the problems of the war. The Big Four were unable to negotiate effectively at the conference and some of Wilson's fourteen points were not used. Most importantly, the fledgling League of Nations that was meant to safeguard against future crisis was not given a military presence and the United States didn't join. Therefore, the treaty gave way to the rise of Hitler and WWII.
I agree with Mikeb on his opinion that the Treaty of Versailles was a chief cause of WWII.
I also agree with Mikeb on the fact that the League of Nations was rendered powerless by the lack of entrance of the United States.
I agree with gio1022 regarding the fact that the treaty was a failure as the countries could not come together to come up with an efficient treaty.
I also agree with mikeb on the fact that the League of Nations was basically a crippled alliance that could never have stopped the second world war.
The Treaty of Versailles signed at the Paris Peace Conference ended Germany's surrender, yet it established a stepping stone into WWII.
Georges Clemencau agreed with the points made in the treaty where France would gain German colonies and war reparations would be made. Yet, disappointment arose because he believed the rash treaty should be harhser upon Germany and split it into smaller countries. Yet, he also thought the treaty was a bit harsh on Germany and could cause another war.
President Woodrow Wilson helped shape this treaty after creating the League of Nations and establishing the Fourteen Points. He liked the treaty and wanted to furthur America's fight for democracy. He hastened the Allied victory of the war in 1918 and supplied funding and food supplies that helped the Americans in the war.With this treaty, he took personal control of negotiations with Germany to punish them.
In my opinion, I believe that the Treaty of Versailles was a complete failure. The greatest reason for its failure was the part where Germany had to accept to pay for all war damages and accept war guilt. Any country after war has to readjust their economy, even more so if they lost. This decline in Germany's economy forced them to look into the beliefs of another government, one that would fix the economy and help the people regain their status.
Second of all is the popular and ironic turn of the U.S. decision to not be in their own League of Nations. Perhaps if the U.S. would be in there, just their presence would be more than enough to have countries watch their tongue and intervene in the matter of government (since the U.S. likes to establish democracy).
I know there should be two reasons but I think this one is a huge contribution as well: France and Britain. Obviously they lost a lot of men/money/land and wanted some back. But their blind anger and selfish gains went too far and cornered Germany. There's a saying that (insert animal's name) will bare their fangs even in a corner. And that is pretty much what happened to Germany.
I agree with kobe17 because of his/her mention of a small army. In a country that is weakened from war, I believe the best way to start off recovery is to actually have a decent defense. With that said, the people would want someone that would build that up and who better than Hitler.
I strongly agree with lakers_117 in almost every aspect. President Woodrow Wilson had some incredible ideas in his Fourteen Points, but people had different ideas in mind and the Big Four wanted some reform in them. I think this was the major cause in WWII, the lack of realization to the problems of war and how to handle it.
Georges Clemencau was one individual who agreed with the idea of reperations and colonies granted to Germany. Many thought that this would anger Germany and drag the world into another war. Even with this hughe blwo to Germany George wanted to humiliate Germany even more by trying to split Germany into smaller countries.
Another individual David Lloyd George thought that the treaty was to hard on the Germans and would inevitbaly pull us into another war.
The Treaty of Versailles was a bad idea. This treaty was the main reason that we were in a second world war. It was very weak and was not thought out thouroghly enough to last.
David Lloyd George was Britain’s representative at the Treaty of Versailles. Though aware that huge anger directed against the Germans was felt in Britain at this time, he was more concerned about the Russian Revolution of 1917. He did not want the revolution to spread west and he saw Germany as the only country that could act as a barrier against the Communists. To him, The final treaty had to come across as tough on the Germans but it also had to leave Germany sufficiently strong to combat any Russian expansion west. Lloyd George's influence watered down the severity that the treaty could have had on Germany.
Georges Clemenceau was France’s representative at the Treaty of Versailles. Georges Clemenceau was completely in tune with what the Franch wanted out of the peace treaty, which was the destruction of Germany. The Treaty of Versailles was greeted with some disapproval in France. France wanted no mercy to be shown to the Germans.
I believe that the treaty was a failure because it failed to address the problems and needs of the nations in the war. The opinions of some of the nations were left out and the treaty was based mainly on the four most powerful nations (the Big FOUR). France was bent on giving no mercy and destroying Germany. The punishment of Germany played into the hands of the communists and paved the way for Hitler and the start of World War II.
I agree with MikeB’s statement of the treaty of Versailles being a failure because it was a main cause of the second world war. The treaty punished Germany severely, virtually tying up their economy in war reparations and debt and created disorder in Germany. This helped the takeover of Hitler and Communism which eventually led to the second world war.
I agree with gio1022 in which she said the treaty contained only the views and interests of the Big Four rather than all of the nations involved. France was focused on showing no mercy to Germany which led to the treaty being an agreement for punishment.
In my opinion, the Treaty of versallies did little to shape any sort of long-term peace from the results of World War I. Instead, the treaty,rashly put together, and in my opinion it exposed the Allies’ inability to cooperate toward an agreement, and stimulated German nationalism from resentment over the treatment by the Allies in the treaty.
David Lloyd George: He apeealed to the fact that he believed the Treaty of versallies was way too cruel on the German citizens and he believed it would ruin the German as a nation.
* He believd that it would cause another war in the next 25 years
The poeple of America:citizens didnt want America to be associated with the League of Nationsand they also refused to validate the Treaty of Versailles.
I agree with Mikeb on the fact that the League of Nations was "rendered powerless by the lack of entrance of the United States."
And I agree with Mikeb on his opinion that the Treaty of Versailles was as stated "a chief cause of WWII."
The Germans were convinced that by agreeing to the Armistice, they would be consulted by the Allies on the contents of the Treaty. Since it did not happen, the Germans were in no position to continue the war as their army had disintegrated. The lack of consultation angered the Germans but they could not do anything about it. So when the terms of the Treaty of Versailles made public, this angered the Germans even more. Many in Germany did not want the Treaty signed, but the representatives there knew that they had no choice as German was incapable of restarting the war again. The nation had been blamed entirely for the First World War and had been forced to pay compensation to the allies under the war guilt clause of the treaty. Germany lost 13% of its land, 12% of its people, 48% of its iron resources, 15% of its agricultural production and 10% of its coal. German public opinion soon swung against the Treaty even though they had no choice but to sign it.
Most people in Britain had wanted revenge and so the Treaty had gained some satisfaction. Lloyd George was satisfied that Britain had gained most of Germany’s colonies so that Britain could recover its wealth and power. France, however, did not like the idea of weakening Germany because of the fear that it would rise to power in twenty-one years.
I believe that the Treaty of Versailles proved to be a failure in addressing the problems of the nations effectively. One in being the reparations imposed on the Germans. Because they had already lost to the war and were deeply bankrupt, making them pay for the cost of the war on all sides destroyed their economy. It was believed that crippling Germany addressed the causes of the conflict, however, all it did was lead to an economic depression and the move towards political extremism. Also, the disarmament of Germany was short-term. No other major power disarmed and gave power to Hitler the initial economic policy in rearmament, paving way towards WWII.
1. Representing the French, George Clemenceau wanted to show no mercy towards Germany after the war. He believed that “Germany should be brought to its knees so that she could never start a war again.” Clemenceau saw how the Germans destroyed the north east corner of France, and was determined that Germany should be limited militarily to the greatest extent. Likewise, he thought that the Treaty of Versailles was too lenient towards Germany.
2. In comparison with the French, David Lloyd George, from the British side, wanted to punish Germany but with more lenience than what the French wanted. Privately, he believed that if Germany was so discouraged from the limitations and expectations conveyed to them, they would be influenced from the communistic ways of Russia. He believed that if Germany became disillusioned with their government, they would turn their hopes on communism. Likewise, he wished that Germany would be strictly punished, but not to the extent that they would be discouraged that they would morph like Russia.
In my opinion, the Treaty of Versailles was a failure. Such a failure can be exemplified through the outbreak of World War II. The Treaty failed to represent the needs and ideas of the other countries involved in the war. Thus, the limited cooperation of the nations contributed to the conflicts that would give rise to the next war.
In regards to lakers_117's comment, I agree with the fact that since Wilson's 14 Points were not used, the Treaty of Versailles was ineffective in solving the conflicts between nations, making war inevitable.
Also, gio1022 makes it evident that the Treaty of Versailles failed to represent the concerns of the other nations. The treaty only included the concerns of the Big Four.
The two points of view
1. Georges Clemenceau: he agreed with the treaty but he also believe that it was to harsh on the country of germany. he believe that the way that germany was being treaty in the treaty was too mean. they were making germany pay for something that everyone did.
2.Lloyd george believed that they treaty was great because he favored that britain was getting so much power out of the treaty. that they would get more land and that there was nothing that germany could do about it.
i believe that the treaty would have been a success if all of america supported it. but, because only a small percentage did it was not effective at all.
I agree with gio1022 in which the Britain and France were more focused on punishing Germany, turning the agreement towards punishments. This was rather out of the fear of Germany rising up to power again, leading them to focus on their needs rather than the peace between all nations.
I agree with Lakers_117 in which the ineffective negotiation between the Big Four caused the failure of the Treaty of Versailles. They liked the harsh things that were in the Treaty yet one would be disappointed by wanting the Treaty to be harsher while the other thought the Treaty was far too harsh and would ruin Germany.
President Woodrow Wilson
Presented the Fourten Points and also wanted to push for the formation of the League of Nations (similar to the UN. His goal was to make nations out of the former-countries that Germany annexed. He aimed to establish permanent peace.
Georges Clemenceau
He aimed to have Germany take full on blame for all of the war and wanted them to repent through money, repairs, and then also restrict Germany where they would become powerless in the eyes of the world-power nations.
I personally believe that it was the final decision of the Treaty of Versailles that definitely pulled us into the events of WWII. The harsh restrictions that were set were not necessary in stripping a nation, however, I do not blame the Big Four and their nations for their ideas and conflicts on deciding what to do with Germany and the aftermath since it was the first World War afterall, there was much devastation to be dealt with and the first time is the best time to learn from, which we are slowly coming to modern times with wisdom on the effects of war.
In response to mars, I fully agree that the treaty did not address the real issues of what had happened and inevitably pulled us into WWII because of the decisions made.
I also agree with christi815 because of the fact that the decisions that were made by this treaty "paved" the way to WWII and the government that was to be rebuilt in Germany.
Many historians believe that the Treaty of Versailles was a failure, thus lead to World War II.
Henry Kissinger called the treaty a "brittle compromise agreement between American utopianism and European paranoia--too conditional to fulfill the dreams of the former, too tenative to alleviate the fears of the latter." Kissinger believed the treaty failed to address all the problems of the war, and was only concerned with punishing Germany.
On the other hand, there were those who supported the treaty.
The British military historina Correlli Barnett claimed that the treaty was "extremely lenient in comparison with the peace terms Germany herself, when she was expecting to win the war, had had in mind to impose on the Allies." He believed the treaty's terms were being extremely generous to Germany when considering the consequences the Allies would have suffered if they lost the war.
In my opinion, I would have to agree with Henry Kissinger and all those who opposed the Treaty of Versailles. The Allies were much too concerned with punishing Germany than addressing all the problems that were caused by the war. By attempting to punish Germany as harshly as Germany was going to punish them if they had won the war, they created bitter resentment and tension between the nations of Europe, indeed leading to the cause of World War II.
gio1022
I agree that it failed to address the needs and opinions of all of the nations involved in the war.
mar
I agree that the treaty failed to address the needs of the other countries involved in the war. I also agree that the limited cooperation of the nations contributed to the conflicts that would give rise to World War II.
Treaty of Versailles has led to the WWII due to its lack of cooperation. Two examples are:
1. Georges Clemenceau was content with the harsh things in the treaty.
The treaty made germany pay for the damages.
Germany also had to demilitarise in Rhineland.
He aslo was disspointed with the treaty because it was as harsh as it could be.
Lloyd George:
he did not like the treaty because he beleived that it wasn't harsh enough.
Carlos Magaña
He said the united states and the allies made sure Germany didn't rise to power again and wanted to leave them weak but not hopeless was a top priority. Hitler then rose to power and said abolishing the treaty of versailles was what it would take to make Germany great again.
Walter S. Zapotoczny
The treaty left several restrictions on Germany that would never allow it to prosper if it was to stay in place. Already this gives a forshadowing that Germany is going to drop this treaty. The lack of growth for Germany grew German's resentment towards the allies and the US and Hitler took advantage of this situation. Since the treaty didn't allow him to conquer or manipulate people the nationalist Socialist party was created.
I think the treaty had a good concept in mind but failed to acheived what its goal was. It left Germany in an economic sink hole and gave the opportunity for a regime to step in and 'offer hope for a new Germany'. Also, it left out the needs and concerns of the other countries which also contributed to conflicts and ultimately the dissolution of the league of nations.
In my opinion I believe that the Treaty of Versailles was one of the key factors in why WWII occurred. President Wilson urged his idea of a peace without victory. However, according to David Lloyd George of Great Britain and Georges Clemenceau of France, their nations wanted both revenge and reparations from Germany. The peace treaty was evidently a failure in which history shows that it had influenced anger within Germany to start WWII. The treaty was a form of punishment in which Germany was to be demobilized and stripped of its colonies in Asia and Africa. In addition it was forced to admit to the guilt of the war and give France occupation of the Rhineland for 15 years. Lastly Germany was to pay high reparations for the damages of the war.
In my opinion I believe that the Treaty of Versailles was one of the key factors in why WWII occurred. President Wilson urged his idea of a peace without victory. However, according to David Lloyd George of Great Britain and Georges Clemenceau of France, their nations wanted both revenge and reparations from Germany. The peace treaty was evidently a failure in which history shows that it had influenced anger within Germany to start WWII. The treaty was a form of punishment in which Germany was to be demobilized and stripped of its colonies in Asia and Africa. In addition it was forced to admit to the guilt of the war and give France occupation of the Rhineland for 15 years. Lastly Germany was to pay high reparations for the damages of the war.
One opinion about the Treaty of Versailles, opinionated by both David Lloyd George of Great Britain as well as Georges Clemenceau of France said that their nations wanted vengeance against Germany as well as high reparations from them. Another opinion came from President Wilson was the main idea of peace without victory. This particular treaty was obviously a failure because it was a detriment to Germany which was the primary reason to the incitement of World War II. Evidence for this would be that Germany was disarmed and rid of its colonies in Asia and Africa. In addition, France was given occupation of the Rhineland for fifteen years.
France and Britain: They believed that the treaty was not harsh enough on the Germans and that there should be even more punishment.
Germans: Though the treaty wasn't fair because it made them take the blame for the war. On top of which there were huge reparations to pay, their military would be a joke, and they lost their territories.
America: Didn't want to be a part of the League of Nations. They would much rather go back to isolation and watching out for itself.
I believe the treaty was both a success and failure, however, i believe it was more of a failure. A treaty is the official declaration that a war is over and is a compromise of who gets the spoils of war and so on and so on, so in that sense, the treaty of versailles was a success. On the other hand, the treaty of versailles really didn't satisfy anyone. After the treaty, there were ill tidings from all nations that were involved. So, yes i agree that the treaty of versailles was an agent in the start of WWII. treaty wasn't satisfactory and the countries were itching to finish the war once and for all with a satisfying conclusion.
I think that Kobe 17 brings up an interesting point. If America had ratified the League of Nations, perhaps, the Germans would not have the money to help escalate WWII.
I also like what gio1022 said. i agree that the treaty reflected mainly what the Big Four wanted and yet the nations were not satisfied.
Esther<3
period 3
In my opinion the Treaty of Versailles did lead to WWII because these terms were not strongly regulated, which made it easy to be disregard certain terms. The German people did not want to accept the Treaty of Versailles and the only reason why they accepted it was because they were bullied into it. Another reason why it leads to WWII was that Germany was so destroyed economically and physically due to these conditions and the war that they needed a “strong” leader to get them out of this predicament. So unfortunately, they turned to Adolph Hitler.
I agree with MikeB when he says that the League of Nations was working great in the beginning but then it just fell apart.
I also agree with raiders10 when he or she states that it failed due to the extreme blame it put on Germany because in my opinion it wasn’t all Germany’s fault.
Two historian opinions on the Treaty of Versailles:
William Carr:
Severe as the Treaty of Versailles seemed to many Germans, it should be remembered that Germany might easily have feared much worse. If Clemencau had had his way instead of being restrained by Britain and America the treaty could have been much worst for Germany.
Lentin, Guilt At Versailles (1984):
The Treaty of Versailles should have made the victors either to conciliate the enemy or destroy them. The Treaty of Versailles did neither. It did not pacify Germany, still less permanently weaken her, appearances notwithstanding, but left here scourged, humiliated and resentful.
Henry Kissinger:
called the treaty a, "Brittle compromise agreement between American utopianism and European paranoia — too conditional to fulfil the dreams of the former, too tentative to alleviate the fears of the latter."
In my opinion, the Treaty of Versailles was a failure because it really didn't do much to keep the peace after WWI, but instead it actually fueled the fire for WWII. This unknowingly, also xposed how weak the League of Nations were due to it's lack of support from the nations within it. Germany, who had been offended many times during this conflict, began to get more and more frustrated with the propoganda going around saying that the were bad people, which lead to the beginning of the end for Germany. But the country's main defeat was communism.
two historians opinions on the Treaty of Versallies:
Correlli Barnett-
believed that the treaty was quote "extremely lenient in comparison with the peace terms Germany herself, when she was expecting to win the war, had had in mind to impose on the Allies."
also he believed that the treaty was lighter than the treaty that germany had imposed on russia after they left the war.
William Carr-
in his book, A History Of Germany 1815-1945, he wrote that the stipulations on the treaty were harsh but the Germans expected a lot worse. Without Wilson and George being there, Clemenceau would have made it much worse for the germans.
In my opinion the treaty was a failure because it instilled the seeds of hatred into the german population and it didnt do enough to prevent a future war. If the US had of joined the League of nations then, quite possibly, the league of nations might have been able to do more to stop future german aggression.
Carol Faithom, a historian disagreed with the Treaty of Versailles because she thought that Germany was humilated and the French felt that they were not secure by the treaty. She believed that the British demands for re establishment of trade was not met.
Mageret Macmillan however, praises the treaty. She says that the reperations for Germany were needed because they did lose the war. AShe says that the demands were not enforced on Germany enough.
Woodrow Wilson aimed for peace through the League of Nations. The countries annexed by Germany in the past would form it.
Georges Clemenceau planned to blame Germany for the war, and have them take responsibility through repairs, payments, and restrict their power.
Overall, the Treaty of Versailles was a large failure. It failed to include the views of the countries involved in the war, and was agreed upon only by the Big Four, thus restricting the views. In addition, it seemed a couple of the powers thought it more as punishment for Germany rather than an agreement.
1. Carole Faithorn: "The Peace of Versailles was an unsatisfactory compromise with little chance of ensuring an enduring peace." The impression of a failed Peace was the overwhelming judgment of the Treaty. Faithorn believed that the treaty was a failure because
1.the 'Big Three' had different aims
2. Germany was humiliated--> WWII
3. French didn't feel completely secure
4. British wanted revenge and re-establishment of trade
5. Americans had had to give up on their ideals of self determination
In contrast, Margaret MacMillan gave praise to the treaty because it enforced the fact that Germany did lose the war after all. Reparations apparently imposed a heavy burden but Germany only paid a portion of what it owed. "Perhaps the real problem was that the treaty was never really properly enforced so that Germany was able to rebuild its military and challenge the security of Europe all over again".
Given the circumstances at the time, I believe that the treaty of Versailles was not that bad. It established two new ideals of self-determination and the League of Nations. Although it was never approved, the Treaty did in fact end the war and enforce the loss of the Germans.
I disagree with Mikeb. Germany was not severely punished by the treaty. It didn't even pay all the reparations it had to. Germany was already on the path of depression because of the loss of Germany economically, militarily, and financially. I think World War II was already in action in the presence or absence of the treaty.
I agree with "*fabia* when they say that she "believes that the treaty would have been a success if all of America supported it". If Americans and the Allied Powers were more open minded, the treaty wouldn't be criticized as such a failure today.
two opinions on Treaty of Versailles
1.Dr. Ruth Henig:
Compared to the treaties which Germany had imposed on defeated Russia and Rumania in 1918, the Treaty of Versailles was quite moderate... The Treaty of Versailles was not excessively harsh on Germany, either territorially or economically. However, the German people were expecting victory not defeat. It was the acknowledgement of defeat as much as the treaty terms themselves, which they found so hard to accept.
2.Wolfgang Mommensen:
Basically, I think one can say the Treaty was harsh, but understandable... The allied governments were under the pressure of their own public which demanded the Germans to pay for it all.
I think that the Treaty of Versailles was a failure because it set much of the reperations and blame on Germany which somewhat made it inevitable for them to do what will occur in the years to come as they grow to a huge power almost taking control of all of Europe during that of WWII
President Woodrow Wilson wanted the treaty to be ratified in its original form without any amendments or reservations.
Hiram Johnson opposed the treaty and American entry into the League Of Nations under any circumstances.
In my opinion, the Treaty of Versailles was the cause for WWII. It was a good idea and the terms of it were excellent, but the fact that they didn't ratify it lead to it's overall failure. There were reparations that Germany had to pay back to the allies, but after they aquired the money, they didn't keep up with their end of the deal and used it to start the next war.
i agree with kobe17 because we both said that if the treaty were ratified, the second world war would have been prevented and the treaty would have been effective.
I diagree with riteousprophet when he/she says that the Treaty of Versailles was a bad idea. I believe that it was a good idea, but they just should have ratified t andactually put it nto effect be cause they were just looking or world peace after a hard war.
Two other historical opnions that I found came from David Lloyd George from Britain and George Clemenceu from France.
David Lloyd George was, in the public eye, in favor of taking full on revenge with Germany. He looked for public support so he wne with the public thought. In private he belived that the treaty was ineffective but he felt Germany should be punishes but not to the point that they would be ruined and communism was their last resort.
George Clemenceau has one idea on what should happen to the Germena s and that was that they should absolutely have to pay for everything that they had caused.
I believe that the treaty was a failure because it was made in the interest of the leading nations. It also put the entire blame of the war on Germany and it was a major contribution to World War II.
Two Historian opinions on the Treaty of Versailles:
Georges Clemencau: Clemencau was the French representative at the Versailles Peace Conference. He agreed with the ideas presented in the Treaty (reparations,etc), but also felt that it should much harsher. Clemencau believed in a complete destruction of the country of Germany. He did not believe any mercy should be granted to Germany.
David Lloyd George: Lloyd George was the English representative at the Versailles Peace Conference. He did not agree with the Treaty's harsh punishments toward Germany. He was afraid that a defeated Germany would only expose it to Communism. Lloyd George thought it was better if Germany's punishment was lighter so that the country could serve as a barrier to stop the possible spread of communism into Western Europe.
Personally, I do not believe the Treaty of Versailles was very successful. The treaty only consisted of the opionions of Woodrow Wilson, Georges Clemenceau, and David Lloyd George. THe Treaty completely neglected the opinions of other countries and how they felt that Germany should be punished. Additionally, the Treaty was the obvious cause of the Second World War. Due to its harsh reparations, Germany's economy was serverely hurt, and caused a series of traums throughout the country. Though, the Treaty was supposed to create a peaceful compromise it only started even more drama.
I agree with the comment made by gio1022 saying that the treaty was more of a punishment than an agreement because 2 of the 4 leading nations were focused on punishing Germany.
I agree witht the comment made by mikeb saying that the treaty was a failure because it was a main factor in WWII.
Two hisorian opinions are: The United States did not want to be apart of it. They did not want to be in the League of Nations. President Wilson had to win the approval from the Senate.
The French felt that Clemenceau failed to achieve their demands of the Treaty of Versailles. Therefore, they voted him out of office.
In my opinion I feel the Treaty of Versailles just started more problems then before. The League of Nations was supposed to help each countries but actually it started another war. It was also a problem because not every country involved ratified it.
I agree with kobe17 because I feel that the Treaty would have also been more effective if more Americans ratified it.
I also agree with gio1022 when they wrote that the treaty contained only he views and interests of the Big Four. Because really there was more nations involved and they should have been included too.
Two hisorian opinions are: The United States did not want to be apart of it. They did not want to be in the League of Nations. President Wilson had to win the approval from the Senate.
The French felt that Clemenceau failed to achieve their demands of the Treaty of Versailles. Therefore, they voted him out of office.
In my opinion I feel the Treaty of Versailles just started more problems then before. The League of Nations was supposed to help each countries but actually it started another war. It was also a problem because not every country involved ratified it.
The dude Hiram Johnson was against the treaty and US's entry into the League Of Nations at all costs.
The treaty to be ratified in its original form is what President Wilson had wished for.
From my point of view, the Treaty of Versailles was the main cause of WWII. The refusal of it being ratified lead to its failure eventhough the things listed and mentioned in it were very good. And a deal was made that Germany had to pay for some war costs to the allies and at that time they didnt have money so it was set on whenever Germany acquired that money they'd pay back the allies.
When Germany did, they still didnt do their part starting it up with the upcoming war.
I agree with gio1022 on their opinion that the treaty reflected mainly what the Big Four wanted and yet the nations were not satisfied.
I agree with Christi815 when she states that decisions that were made by this treaty paved the way to WWII and the government that was to be rebuilt in Germany.
One opinion by Carlos Magaña stated that the US and the allies made sure Germany didn't rise to power again but didn’t want to leave it in a weak state. Hitler then thought that by abolishing the Treaty of Versailles was what was going to help Germany rise to power once again. Another opinion by the French Georges Clemenceau was that Germany owed high debts for reparations and that both England and France wanted Germany to pay for the reparations. His goal was to make Germany a powerless nation in order for it never to rise as a powerful nation again. He was backed by David Lloyd George (England) who had the exact same opining about how Germany should be dealt with.
In my opinion, the treaty was obviously a failure and it was one of the main reasons why WWII began. I somewhat agree with all 3 men because they wanted to keep Germany on some restrictions, but I wouldn’t agree with keeping it completely powerless because sooner or later Germany would get tired of its and start a war, as it was started in WWII. Because the allies were too preoccupied with Germany and the punishment it deserved, they didn’t really think about the tension that would soon build up because of Germany feeling oppressed.
I agree with mikeb stating that the treaty was a complete failure and also with raiders10 that it led to WWII beacuse of Germany's resentment towards it.
I chose Germany's view on the treaty and the American peoples view on it.
Germany did not like the reparations clause because the did not like that they had to have a small army. Also their colonies were important to them, so they did not want them to be taken away.
The American people refused to ratify the Treaty of Versailles because they did not want their nation (America) to be involved in the League of Nations.
In my opinion looking at the Treaty of Versailles as a whole, it was a failure. This treaty seems to be the main cause of World War II. Also the treaty mainly punished Germany. They were forced to pay reparations, so they were put into debt. The only positive aspect I see that came from this treaty would be The League of Nations, however that had a downfall. America (one of most powerful nations) did not get involved with the league, therefore making in useless and uninfluencial.
I agree with mikeb making the point that this treaty was main cause of WWII.
I agree with gio1022 stating the treaty only benefitted the Big Four nations.
Georges Clemenceau (French Prime Minister)
The minister wished to permanently hinder Germany from invading France again in the future. He advocated the harshest policies against Germany. For example, Germany would pay reparations, decrease its army, and demilitarize the Rhineland zone.
David Lloyd George (British Representative)
The former Prime Minister of Britain wanted to punish Germany for invading allied countries and devastating the European economy. However, he believed it would not be the best interest of Europe to destroy the German economy and political system.
In my opinion, the treaty is a failure in the long run. It attempted and succeeded in settling issues between nations until the Great Depression. However, after the Great Depression the treaty completely fell apart and can be said to have led the World War II. The reparations demanded from Germany were harsh and crippling to the economy of Germany. According to the Dawes plan, if Germany's economy became crippled than both the European and United States economy would suffer.
Many of the European Nations wanted to take revenge on Germany such as France and Italy. Georges Clemenceau wanted Germany to pay a fine, shorten it's army, and leave Rhineland as a demilitarised place.David Lloyd George wanted Britain to gain some of German territory.
To me the Treaty of Versailles was a failure because nobody seemed to have wanted it. Wilson had to spend months trying to convince most countries to accept the treaty. They RELUNCTANTLY did.
MPH
Georges Clemenceau was France’s representative at the Treaty of Versailles. He knew what the Franch wanted out of the peace treaty. Which was the destruction of Germany. The Treaty of Versailles was actually a disaproval from France. France wanted didn't want any problems from Germany.
David Lloyd George:
He was the former Prime Minister of Britain who wanted to punish Germany for invading allied countries and devastating the European economy. He actually believed that it would not be the best idea for Europe to interfer with the German economy and political system.
I believe that the Treaty of Versailles was a failure because it was a major concept for starting the second world war. The League of Nations was created, but had no support, so also became a failure. This treaty seemed to anger Germany because it nearly punished or was directed toward them. This is why I believe the Treaty of Versailles was a failure.
Post a Comment