The Americans had a great importance in the Second Battle of Marne. They helped began because of Germany’s greed for power. There were also many other causes of World War One. Some causes of the World War one was nationalism, imperialism, and militarism. Nationalism was a unifying force, but it also led to intense competition between nations.
While advances in firepower were plentiful, advancements elsewhere were limited and insufficient, particularly in the field of offensive tactics. In order to counter the human wave attack tactics, or unprotected frontal assaults involving densely concentrated infantry formations, both sides turned from an aggressive, offensive approach to a much better suited defensive strategy. The development and use of trenches allowed both sides to turtle down and turn to attrition warfare; the process of winning a war through inflicting gradual, continuous losses which would eventually lead to an inevitable
‘The outbreak of the war in Europe 1914 was due to an aggressive German Foreign Policy which had been waged since c.1900’ How far do you agree with this opinion? Discussions over the causes of the outbreak of war in Europe in 1914 have caused much controversy due to the breadth of events in multiple countries which took place over a short period of time, concluding in war. The evidence within source V, W and X refer to some of these events, thus hold different countries and individuals to blame to different extents. Whilst source V suggests that aggressive German Foreign policy did hold a considerable proportion of the blame, it places the Germans in a sympathetic position due to their encirclement leaving them no other option. Source W is very similar due to the fact that it blames Germany’s strengthening of the military and navy to a large extent, however proclaims their ‘peaceful intentions’; whereas source X dwarfs Germany’s contributions as a state, placing more responsibility for the outbreak of war on Austria-Hungary.
Their trench lines took advantage of the rough terrain present on the western front, hills and villages were used as strong points whilst reverse slopes provided valuable defensive positions. In contrast, the French felt obliged to recapture any piece of native soil and as a result their positions were generally less effective. The British were still attempting to work offensively and thus built their trenches as close as possible to enemy trenches, even when they weren’t preparing a major attack. * Trenches rarely ran in a straight line to counter the effects of shells and other explosives, the zig-zag like layout also provided defence when the enemy managed to capture and occupy another section. * There were typically 3 lines of trenches; the front line, the support line, and the Reserve line.
It is used to manipulate information to influence public opinion, through emotional appeals and demise of the enemy, to create hatred between countries. It promoted patriotism and nationalism within a country. Britain did not have a policy of national service; this was standard in countries such as France and Germany. The whole point of propaganda was to get more and more people to sign up for the war, this was important because of all the casualties and the hardship suffered on the home front. The government did this by displaying posters stating ‘your country
Additionally there were developments that occurred without war, which illustrates that involvement in war was not the only cause for change. Therefore war was an important catalyst and factor to significant changes but was not the sole cause of change. The war that caused most change was Word War One due to its role in the February revolution in 1917 and the fall of the provisional government in the October revolution. The defeats of the war dwindled support from liberals and Octobrists for the Tsarist regime, which was further worsened by criticism from organisations including the Central War Industries committee and the union of Zemstva. This formed support and reason for the Progressive Bloc.
The set up of the trenches allowed the war to be as bloody as it was. For example, if the French were trying the take over a German trench they would have to run across no-mans land being completely open to German and friendly fire. If the soldiers were to make it past no-man’s land they were stopped by a stretch of barbed wire. This would slow them down right in front of enemy trenches making them an easy target. If the French
The Allied forces were to busy worrying about there offensives and were caught off guard. Eventually the allies won but it was a very hard battle for them to win. The Ardennes Offense was what the United States army called it but it becomes popularly called the Battle of the Bulge. The Germans called it Unternehmen Wacht is Rhein, which
This, combined with the war's length and the waning distinction between civilian and military targets, made it difficult for people to perceive the enemy in terms other than extreme hatred. This was reflected in the demands for retribution made both during and at the end of the war, inevitably affecting the peace settlements that followed. In the following selection Gordon Craig of Princeton and Stan rd, a noted military and diplomatic historian who has done extensive work on German history, analyzes these attitudes and their causes while comparing World War I with previous wars. Consider: How the primary documents on the experience of World War I relate to this interpretation; why it was difficult for governments of belligerent nations to compromise; whether this description of what happened in World War I is likely to be true for almost any extended twentieth-century war. The war of 1914 was the first total war in history, in the sense that very few people living in the belligerent countries were permitted to remain unaffected by it during its course.
This is implying of course that the decision by Nicholas II to go to war against Germany and it’s allies in 1914 was wrong, but this is not the case. Russia actually had many reasons to risk war again; the war was weighed heavily in the allies favour as the combined forces of Great Britain, France and Russia were far stronger than that of Germany, Austria and Hungary. Russia was aware of it’s major failing though, it’s slow modernisation had left it trailing behind that of the other countries, and Russia would have to be prepared for the rapid social and economic change that a war brings. This was Russia’s best chance to modernise and not be left behind. Russia’s early hopes were soon dashed however.