‘A strong alliance was the most important reason for a country to succeed in war’. To what extent do you agree with this view of the period from 1792 to 1945? When considering alliances it is important to note that whilst strong alliances can lead directly to success and mostly weak alliances are counter-productive, having a weak or strong alliance doesn’t equate firmly to success for either side. It would be fair to say however that not having an alliance has more of an impact than having one does as, especially in limited war, success can be achieved by the side who manages to isolate their enemy from having alliances with other countries, or simply weakening their current alliances; Austria and Hungary both became weaker as they drifted away from each other in World War One. Ultimately however it must be said that throughout the period alliances change in their importance, but they generally become more decisive during longer conflicts, as alliances are helpful to sustain numbers of men, supplies going to them, and increasing the scale of your side of the war.
Although there failure of completely vanquishing the warlords there can be little doubt that Chiang was fairly successful in solving this domestic problem and the effects it would have on the country as it is probably that without him stabilising the political and social unrest civil war would have broken out in the country much early than it did. The GMD was able to successfully implement new and improved transport links throughout the country. The three thousand mile railway track connected North and South which helped Chiang to begin re-unifying the country and the people. However there can be little doubt that the transport was created for sole purpose of the urban rich who were the majority of his supporters and it only aided them to become
Providing the Confederacy with war supplies influenced Southern power, and their assertiveness towards the Union proved beneficial to international relations. The victory of the Union encouraged the forces in Britain that demanded more democracy and public contribution into the political system. Rather than an outbreak of war, relations between America and Britain were ultimately improved when the idea of widespread famine threatened England. The American Civil War proved difficult but eventually beneficial for Britain, giving them the opportunity to check their growth and rise to power. Keeping within British tradition and diplomacy, Britain never openly partnered with the South and their involvement in the war was to protect their own people, economy, actions and
Explain why the Nazi Regime proclaimed “Total War” in February 1943. (12 Marks) One factor behind why the Nazi regime went ahead with total war was because it offered a chance to revive public morale following the defeat at Stalingrad. The public morale down at this point however going to war with allies seemed the perfect opportunity in regaining the trust of people in the regime. Josef Goebbels speech proved to be a great example in uplifting the people’s moods in regards to total war. His powerful speech was influential and enabled the German public to feel more optimistic within the war as well as regime.
Not only was America prosperous, but they also were generous. America helped other nations rebuild their countries by funding the projects. In the post-war, America gave off an idealistic example of a leading nation. Its industrialization left it one of the leaders in military power, but they didn’t intend to use it for selfish reasons. Along with common weaponry, America possessed the knowledge of creating the most powerful weapon of all time, nuclear
Having leadership skills is what makes a good leader a great leader. In the terms of Churchill his leadership skills were led by his charismatic resolutions lead to increased political focus that help lead him to war time peacemaking. In terms of being a good manager his ability to lead during a turmoil time brings his management skills to question. Having the ability to manage an entire country through the biggest world war and his ability to us his leadership skills in doing so was a
Although British had the victorious win, fighting this war was very expensive. The British wished to cover the cost of the war. The British believed that as they had made America secure and safe, the Americans should bear some of the costs of achieving this security. As a result of this, they enforced Navigation Act and the costs associated with the two new taxes led to protests. A newly-formed Stamp Act Congress formed by delegates from nine colonies objected the British ideas based on the principle of “no taxation without representation.” This was the
He also showed courage by using his diplomatic skills to neutralize many foreign affairs and showing the United States of America in a positive light around the world. If using peaceful politics, advancing human rights, and skillful diplomacy are characteristics of courage in politics, then Jimmy Carter is a perfect example. Admittedly, the Carter administration was often criticized for the dismal shape of the economy during his reign. His daring choices often placed him at odds with Congress and popular public opinion. Despite high inflation rates, at the end of his term Carter could credit an 8 million job increase and a significant decrease in the budget deficit.
Susan Doran tells us that Great Britons still hold the opinion that, “Elizabeth I is both the best known and the most admired monarch” (Doran). Alexandra Briscoe states that, “Elizabeth I is considered one of Great Briton’s most successful and popular monarchs” (Doran). Given the efforts to reinterpret and rewrite history due to the issue of gender definitions attributing historical importance to the male and not to the female, the idea that Elizabeth I had this notoriety seems an anomaly of the early modern period. Was her high profile history and success due to luck, laws of succession and coincidence, or did she earn her fame due to her own skill, judgment and intuition? Is it possible her attitude and confidence were really not all that unusual for the time period, but highlighted due to the skewed social recognition of gender?
The success of the Bolsheviks in the Russian Civil War was due to Lenin, Trotsky and their combined political, social and military capabilities as they were experts. They introduced various political and military policies that enabled them to raise support in Russia and create a dominant and successful military force. Both leaders showed immense dedication to the socialist cause and in doing so provided ruthless and brilliant leadership that ensured Bolshevik victory in the Russian Civil War. Peasant support for the Bolsheviks was a result of the Whites political and social faults. Firstly, the Whites treated the peasant class harshly, they did not see the advantage of gaining the support of the larger lower class as about 82% and they did not take full advantage of that.