George Washington’s ambition enabled him to conceive new concepts that would facilitate the American cause in the rebellion against the English. Innovative ideas and the ability to take risks permitted the Americans to capitalize on their assets and bolster weaknesses. Washington’s ambitions and courageousness were shown in the militia he commanded. The presence of the army and its readiness to fight prevented the British to pronounce proper victory. As a visionary leader, he proposed a new country that would thrive without the relentless scrutiny of its Mother country.
Fischer’s argument that the outbreak of the First World War was due to Germany’s aggressive foreign policy, with a harsh focus on annexation, can be regarded as one of much significance. This theory has been backed up by historians such as Berghahn who claims that Germany ‘[tried] to shift the balance of power in their favour’, and did this through a weltpolitik policy of aggressiveness. This, it can be argued, can be shown by The Navy Race, in which Germany attempted to expand their navy in order to compete with Britain. Despite this being regarded by some as an attempt to
Even though this small band of troops were easily captured and dealt with, it still began to plant a very real threat of invasion into Britain's soils. In 1798, a larger French military force landed in Ireland and successfully assisted the Irish Rebels, which again showed and proved that the threat of invasion to Britain was now significant and there were now also British worried that France would begin to use Ireland as a 'stepping-stone' to invade Britain. After Pitt declared War on France in 1793, he had hoped to fight a traditional colonial war, but due to the state of the army, he had to focus Britain's army on the naval war and pay others to fight the colonial war for him. He paid for this by
As the attempted capture of foreign fields would undoubtedly be a declaration of war, a strong of the Armed forces would be a necessity especially as Scotland was allied with France and they could theoretically face an attack from two angles simultaneously. Also as a true renaissance King, Henry VIII would have liked to promote a strong image to the international community at the time as well as pursuing a never-ending quest for glory. In addition to that one can deduce that Henry would have also liked to keep peace and forge new alliances (political and financial) with strong nations such as the Holy Roman Empire and Spain. Using this criterion one can determine what would have been classified a success or failure in relation to the foreign policy initiatives taken at the time. After Henry VII had died, Henry decided to marry Catherine of Aragon.
The Revolutionary War was one of the most important events in history for America and Britain. The war, in a way, helped America become its own nation and declare independence from Britain. At the time of the Revolutionary War, the English were in control of the Americans. Both sides had crucial advantages over each other that decided the outcome of the war. Let’s start with colonists; one of the biggest advantages they had over Britain was they had a major cause for wanting to fight.
The factors that need considering when associating with the question include; the Disillusionment from the people towards Louis, the actions of the Political clubs, Champs de Mars massacre and the significance of War. In order to see why the republican movement emerged in France, the factors must show what aims of each of these factors led to and what impact they made. After viewing each one of these we evaluate what the most significant factor was in causing the republican movement. To a very significant extent it can be viewed that the Disillusionment from the people towards Louis can be seen as a key factor for the emergence of the republican movement. This is because Louis’ personal actions that he took betrayed people and led them to disillusionment against him as they wanted to press for a trial for the king.
Maximillien Robespierre was a man with drastic reformatory aspirations. He considered the general will to be a necessity and resorted to the Terror because he wished to create a temporary dictatorship in order to save the Republic. He praised the revolution and disguised the gruesomeness of his actions and intentions by reasoning that the Terror was virtuous since it defended the Republic. The Jacobins were liberal radicalists who wished for a central government, control over the economy, and universal suffrage. With the replacement of the Girondins faction in 1793, the Jacobins had complete control of the National Convention, and France as a nation.
Hubris usually marks a loss of reality and a point at which one overestimates one’s own realistic capabilities. The political hubris of the French government played a major part in inspiring the French Revolutionists to take action. The Monarchy was under the unrealistic impression that it could do what it wanted to when it wanted to; regardless of how it affect the working to poor class. Equality The French had plenty more valid reasons to desire and long for equality, which was the ultimate goal of the Revolution. Prior to the abolishment of the Monarchy in 1789, inequality had become a social and political norm in France.
France would have taken any path they could to get around the British forces and take them by surprise and what better place to go than Ireland where there were numerous unhappy land lords and it was right within striking distance of the weaker west coast of Britain. On the Irish side of this, it could be seen that all the discontent that had been simmering just beneath the surface had reappeared during the French revolution. The French revolution had consisted of the British-influenced French government being overthrown by the emerging middle classes. It was anti-clerical and it espoused Liberty and equality. Many Irish Catholics and Protestants felt that such an uprising was also possible in Ireland as the circumstances were quite similar.
The French Revolution: Marxism versus revisionism A review of G Kates (ed), The French Revolution: Recent Debates and New Controversies (Routledge, 1997), £14.99 By Paul McGarr 'One's stance on the French Revolution inevitably reveals much about one's deepest ideological and political convictions'.1 Gary Kates' comment, in his introduction to this collection of essays on the 1789 French Revolution, is certainly correct-though his claim is true of other great revolutions too. Even as the French Revolution was being fought out 200 years ago it was the subject of fierce arguments, which were centrally about the protagonists' own views on contemporary politics. The English reactionary Edmund Burke first took up the cudgels in 1790 with his Reflections on the Revolution in France. In it he dammed the revolution and all its works. He attacked the whole notion of social change and reserved his worst venom for the 'swinish multitude'.