Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
THE POLICY OF APPEASEMENT WAS JUSTIFIED HFDYA, GERMANY WAS MORE…
THE POLICY OF APPEASEMENT WAS JUSTIFIED HFDYA
AGREE
historical reasons
haunted by WW1
TofV too harsh
gave fire to hitler and what he wanted
AGREE
practical reasons
economy not ready
great depression of 1929
empire not keen
couldn't afford it
military not ready
appeasement bought time
USA in isolation
Nazi germany offer a buffer to soviet russia
DISAGREE
rearmement
not justified as it allowed Hitler to rearm GMY
gain strength
Anglo/German agreement 1935
Setedenland at munich
1939
military
economy
Rhineland
can go in either disagree
Austria
gained strength
DISAGREE
agression
not justified as it allowed him to become aggressive and put too much trust in his promises that other leaders signed/ believed
Rhineland gives him confidence
he can do that he could do other things
had the confidence to be aggresive
Czech/Slovakia
1939
prime example of over aggression
he didn't think GB would declare war on him because he had never done so
GERMANY WAS MORE RESPONSIBLE FOR WAR IN 1939 THAN ANY OTHER COUNTRY
AGREE
short term
poland
czechoslovakia
AGREE
long term
rearmement
other countries are looking aggressive so he should too
Rhineland
breaking the treaty
willing to take a risk
therefore peace was not a priority
Austria
sends in his army to 'keep a fair vote'
gets involved in the spanish civil war
testing out his bombers
takes GMY out of the LofN
not willing to work with others
peace was not a priority
DISAGREE
GB AND FR TO BLAME
appeasement
DISAGREE
failure of the league
Manchuria
the league didn't stop his aggression
no sanctions to punish GMY
Hoare-Laval pact
undermine the league
league looked weak