However as the reality that the war wasn’t finishing began to become apparent things changed. The Australian Prime Minister William Hughes, in 1916 during WW1, called for conscription due to heavy Australian casualties being experienced on the Western Front and a large decline in volunteers to enlist to fight. He also had increasing pressure from Britain to send reinforcement. Despite lack of support from his party (the Labour Party) who traditionally had opposed conscription, William Hughes called for mandatory service for men to join the army and receive military
However, many other factors played a role in the demise of the Parliament such as the fact that they were ill-organised, the lack of popular support and their inability to enforce decisions. Frederick William IV was partially responsible for the failure of the Frankfurt Parliament as he was unwilling to accept the ‘crown from the gutter’. William IV was aware that acceptance of the leadership may lead to war with Austria. Austria had no wish to see a united Germany and wanted to keep it weak and divided in order to dominate. Frederick William shared this view and was unwilling to potentially cause a war with such a powerful state.
Although foreign policy was significant in creating discontent between the Crown and Parliament, there were also other factors to consider. For example, Charles implementing the forced loan and the Three Resolutions, after Buckingham’s death. Buckingham’s initial french policy of sending British troops to fight against the Huguenots who were Protestants brought unease among the MPs as they feared that Buckingham was supporting the Roman Catholic french Royals. So to gain popularity, Buckingham decided to help the Huguenots and led a naval expedition at La Rochelle in 1627. This was a disaster and Buckingham had to retreat his troops without even aiding the Huguenots, which made him become the most despised man in England as he was seen responsible for the military failures.
Oliver Cromwell held many negotiation sessions with King Charles l who characteristically quibbled whilst opening new negotiations with the Scots. King Charles l continually refused to come to any sort of agreement with the opposition and therefore made it virtually impossible for any peace settlement to work. Parliament sent out a delegation to negotiate peace, but Charles was feeling stronger and refused to talk. But there was a peace party within Parliament that was willing to compromise with the king in order to bring the civil war to an end. Both sides were seizing the estates of their enemies to finance the war effort, creating even more political chaos.
However, with this decision Laurier made the English and the French in Canada infuriated. The French where displeased with the fact that he bought bought ships which they thought was too much, but on the other hand the English thought he didn't do enough to help Great Britain in the naval race. To finish, Laurier again continued to split up Canada by the Canadian navy. In conclusion, Laurier split up Canada by sending troops to Africa to help Britain, by denying free trade with the United States and by buying ships from Great Britain. With too many compromises, Laurier lost the election in 1914 which ended his reign as prime minister of
Everyone in government thought that with the end of the war, armies would be disbanded and sent home, which would save a lot of money. However, George III insisted on keeping a large peacetime army on active duty. His idea was that he wanted to protect and preserve order in the new territories of Florida and Quebec. This made the debt skyrocket even further. The American colonists did not believe there were even enough soldiers to really protect the frontier at all, in fact in 1763 a huge Native uprising of various tribes lead by two men named Neolin and Pontiac who staged a massive attack called Pontiac’s Rebellion in May 1763.
In the War of 1812, the Americans were not free to be themselves because the British and French were trying to take their land. If peace and love were taken to mind, the Americans, British, and French maybe could have made an alliance with each other and it wouldn’t have ended in unnecessary death. A world that is full of peace is motivated by unconditional love and abundance or a belief that there IS enough for everybody. A world full of war and violence is motivated by fear and people thinking that there aren’t enough necessities to sustain a happy life and therefore they take from others. The British and the French thought that having more land would mean you are more powerful then everybody else.
Americans enlisted themselves to fight in the war, but found themselves less privileged and looked upon as grunts. In the diary of a Massachusetts soldier (1759) he states, “… and thought we be Englishmen born, we are debarred [denied] Englishmen’s liberty.” He even goes on to say, “Therefore we see now what it is [like] to be under martial law and to be with the [British] regulars.” This soldier now knows what it would be like if the British were to take control, and how Americans are looked upon as garbage. King George III may have been very dull-witted, but he understood that America was growing at an astronomical rate and would, in a few decades, eclipse England. So, King George III thought it a good idea to leave a standing army in America because he saw them as a threat, not as loyal English subjects. Even George Washington was loyal to the British.
Furthermore, Congress was disappointed in the fact that Wilson left some important things in order to compromise with the other countries. Many people believed the League of Nations was completely unnecessary for the US, since it mostly dealt with issues not concerning the US. They did not want to get involved with future European affairs. However, Wilson believed that the only way to prevent future wars was to establish the League of Nations. Wilson’s rock solid position on the League of Nations was one of the most significant reasons why the treaty was never passed.
Madison was faced with huge problems. He had trouble with the cabinet because of rivals and critics. Madison had difficulties with Great Britain and France; Madison had problems trading with their allies. With these problems in tack, James Madison was forced to ignore his constitutional objections against the National Bank of the United States because Gallatin, the architect of Republican financial policy, "insisted that its lending services would be needed to limit the taxes Congress would otherwise have to levy to prepare for the nation's armed forces for war." Page 184 Not only does Madison go against his belief towards the constitution but also was forced into a war, which he never wanted to have any part of.