Despite some initial efforts by local prosecutors to take legal action against those who carried out the murders, which the regime rapidly quashed, it appeared that no law would constrain Hitler in his use of power. The Night of the Long Knives also sent a clear message to the public that even the most prominent Germans were not immune to arrest or even summary execution should the Nazi regime perceive them as a threat. In this manner, the purge established a pattern of violence that would characterise the Nazi regime: the use of force to establish an empire. Almost unanimously, the army applauded the Night of the Long Knives, even though the generals Kurt von Schleicher and Ferdinand von Bredow were among the victims. The ailing President Hindenburg, Germany's highly-revered military hero, sent a telegram expressing his "profoundly felt gratitude" and he congratulated Hitler for 'nipping treason in the bud'.
By 1942, Hitler had assumed control of the German Army (an army that no longer had the strength and resources seen in Operation Barbarossa) and he listened to his generals much less than he had in previous years. Hitler’s main goals for attacking Stalingrad were to reach the rich oil fields of the Caucasus region; to conquer the main waterway of inner Russia, the Volga River; and to cripple the city so that it could no longer be an industrial or transportation center. These goals were ordered under “directive 41” code named Operation Blue where he ordered all available forces in the southern flank on the long front to destroy the Soviet forces there, allowing the German army to take the oil fields and Volga River . The above reasons were very rational from a strategic stand point, but many argue that Hitler’s obsession with conquering the city named after Stalin clouded his judgment when the battle swung in the favor of the Soviets. His ego forced him to ignore the constant warnings by his generals on more than one occasion.
Compare and contrast the effects of World War 1 on Africa and Middle East. Although the causes for the Great War were laid down years before, but the immediate spark was the Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, an Austrian hungry prince. Due to the alliances amongst the countries, the Great war which had initially started between Serbia and Austria had engulfed the whole world into the War. The main causes of the Great War were imperialism, race for arms, nationalism and the alliance system. Typically, when one thinks of Great War, they think of extensive fighting in Europe but in reality the Great War had numerous battles in the colonized states where there were clashes between Triple Alliance and the Allies.
Since it was not allowed to participate in the conference, Russia’s fate was decided upon by the Big Four. The victorious powers recognized the harsh terms Germany put Russia under in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, which Russia had to sign due to food shortages and massive casualties at the stalemate with Germany on the Eastern front. Because Russia signed this document, it was seen as a betrayal of its commitments
It is commonly accepted that Germany were eager for a war, however in 1914 they were only responding to events in Sarajevo by agreeing to back Austria, as opposed to starting a war with no origin. The Germans also felt cheated by this treaty, because virtually none of Wilson’s ‘Fourteen Points’ had been included in it. On the 5th November 1918, Germany had accepted the Fourteen Points as the basis for peace and an armistice, however when the Treaty of Versailles was signed, the Fourteen Points had been largely forgotten. This shows Clemenceau’s’ and Frances’ determination to crush Germany as they were largely forced to accept charges that they knew would greatly weaken and inhibit them in the future as they tried to rebuild. Germany understood that they would have to ‘reduce weapon numbers’, however they did not expect to
It was very successful and at times controlled vast swathes of the World. However, these very successes were also somewhat responsible for its own downfall. When analysing if the Roman Republic was a victim of its own success one must first point out the reasons for the fall of the Republic. These can be drawn down to four key reasons; one factor which stands out above all others behind the fall of the Republic was the various weaknesses of the government and the way in which it cracked under the Imperial pressure placed upon it which led to Augustus doing simply what was necessary to maintain the Roman way of life. Another key reason behind the fall of the Republic was the influx of slaves and money, which the new found conquering brought to Rome.
Caesar would later destroy what was left of the republic. Over the years as an empire, the political system appeared to be a ball and chain to the public. “ The political office was seen as a hardship, not an asset to the public. There was nearly constant warfare among the Roman leaders themselves in the century leading up to 31 B.C., when the Roman Empire was established. One of the most difficult problems was choosing a new emperor.
Aeschylus was a Greek playwright during the Classical Era of Greece, whose attitude about war was affected by the Persian wars he fought in and the histories of the Trojan War. Aeschylus wanted to transform the peoples’ ideas about cycles of revenge and bloodshed to those of democracy and transcendent law. Transcendent law is a high law that applies to everyone. When people kill each other for vengeance they are taking the law into their own hands. When the law is taken into the hands of each individual the people live in a state of lawlessness.
When we think about the Roman Empire, we usually think of brutality, genius, and unimaginable power. Ingenuity and savergy are defining characteristics of the largest empire the world has ever known. Although treachery and greed let to its demise, many other factors contributed to the eventual fall of Rome. Social causes such as population decline due to war and disease were issues that brought Rome to ruin. Many lives were lost in external conflicts as well as internal civil wars.
‘Mao Tse-Tung was the last century’s most violent and vicious ruler – a power mad figure who dreamt of extending his rule to the entire world, a goal he pursued while engaging in murder, torture, rape and forced starvation, while demanding complete obedience to his every whim.’ The validity of this statement can be proven without much doubt that it is true from the many historical sources both primary and secondary of the horror that Mao’s rule and revolution inflicted on the many people of China that still suffices up to this day. This essay will look at how Mao inflicted fear into the lives of many while looking at both the disadvantages and advantages of his decisions and concluding on weather the statement is justifiable. Mao Tse-Tung was regarded both as a hero and a villain to the millions that served under his reign. Even after his death, he remains as the sacred symbol that China dare not touch. Mao adapted the ideas of Lenin into China’s countryside, focusing more on the peasants than anyone else to achieve military dominance and personal power.