Why was there a stalemate in the Western front? Intro: The stalemate on the western front between the Allies and the German forces occurred because of many factors. The main ones were the failure of the Schlieffen plan and the failure of each side to trap each other’s armies. * The Schlieffen plan did not work out as expected because Germany had managed to get through Belgium but the Belgium army slowed them down so much that by the time the German army were past Belgium, six weeks had already passed. Germany thought that Russia would take six weeks to mobilize but they were stunned because Russia only took ten days to mobilize and this was a big problem for Germany.
The German army's plan to take Paris in the first month of the war nearly worked out, with the Germans reaching within about 100 km of the French capital. The French were able to organize a strong counterattack in the Battle of the Marne, which ended the possibility of a quick victory. The Schlieffen plan required a rapid victory over France, and when that did not materialize (and the Russians attacked strongly in East Prussia) the Schlieffen plan failed. 3.) It is because the Germans were part of the allied force in World War 1, whereas the U.S. and Canada were part of the "triple entente".
They consisted of Britain, Russia and France against Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy (who later switched sides). I believe that alliances were the most important cause of WW1, because instead of making allies to prevent war, the alliance system actually had an opposite effect. Alliances are a long-term cause to WW1 because they take a considerably long time to make. It led to distrust for each country and secrecy with some countries resulting in an increase in tension. The main leaders of ‘World War 1’ in the ‘Triple Entente’ were George V (British Empire), Raymond Poincaré (France) and Nicholas II (Russia).
The Germans transferred all of the soldiers in the Eastern Front over to the Western front to fight the British and the French. The 1918 Spring Offensive or Kaiserschlacht (Kaiser's Battle), was a series of German attacks along the Western Front during World War I, which marked the deepest advances by either side since 1914. The Germans had realized that their only remaining chance of victory was to defeat the Allies before the overwhelming human and matériel resources of the United States could be deployed. They also had the temporary advantage in numbers afforded by nearly 50 divisions freed by the Russian surrender (Treaty of Brest-Litovsk). However, the strategic goals of the operation were lacking.
After France was taken, there was a long delay which allowed Britain to produce more planes for the Battle of Britain and at one point they made over 100 planes a week. This delay was due to Hitler thinking that Britain would surrender and that there was no agreed German plan. This was a major factor in why Britain remained undefeated because it allowed Britain to manufacture more planes. Hitler’s Germany had to change their method of warfare from ‘blitzkrieg’ to a different method due to the Channel stopping ‘blitzkrieg’. The Channel played a big part in why Britain remained undefeated because it meant that Hitler’s Germany could not use their method of attacking Blitzkrieg.
In Europe in 1014 it seemed very tense, this happened to spark off a war, this was then a result of millions killed. The war was fought between rival alliances of European powers: In 1878, Germany and Austria - Hungary formed an alliance9 the dual alliance) that gave them great strength in the centre of Europe. In 1892, the French and the Russians formed their own strong alliance (the dual entente) that meant Germany had an unfriendly power on each side. Soon afterwards, Germany’s most powerful soldier, general stiffen, drew up a plan that would allow Germany to beat France very quickly in any future war. This would then free most German troops to fight Russia in the east.
‘Was the war main problem facing the Tsar in February 1917?’ [16 marks] In this answer I will be trying to conclude whether or not World War Two was the main problem facing the Tsar in February 1917. I will be talking about the The war was the main problem facing the Tsar because the Tsar was becoming increasing unpopular with the public because he wouldn’t end Russia’s participation in the war. This was because the Allies wanted them to continue fighting, and the Tsar had to do what they wanted because they had lent Russia money, and to continue doing so, the Tsar had to do what they wanted. The w War also links in to Russia’s food shortages. When Russia started participating in the War, factories turned to creating guns, ammunition and other products for the war effort.
The mistake that Madison made was going to war with Great Britain. They were worried because they believed that Americas “peace, prosperity and happiness… are in Great jeopardy… the general government have determined to make war on Great Britain” (I). There are many reasons that he should have not gone to war with Britain such as there is not enough troops to fight a good battle, this will only hurt our economy and bring us more into debt, and since we are always fighting Britain about something was this a real reason for a war? The first reason Madison should not have gone to war with Great Britain is this. There are not enough troops in America to successfully produce a war.
It was not until the 4th August, where the British declaration of war was announced. Why Britain joined the Great War is debatable and historians have come up with numerous reasons such as the threat of Germany, due to public opinion and was it over the invasion of Belgium? Each of these reasons and more I will discuss in the following paragraphs. Furthermore the impending threat of Germany was seen to be a reason for Britain going to war. According to Ferro in his book 'The Great War' he suggests that England felt threatened by Germany due to the unprecedented economic strides the country made between 1880 and 1914, although Germany did not have a financial base on the same scale as Britain's economic power.
Furthermore, German politics suffered polarisation as the left and right became more extreme, divisions were caused by differing views over war aims and developing concern over the establishment of the ‘Silent Dictatorship’. The first world war definitely narrowed political divisions initially which can be shown through Burgfriede which was introduced on 4th August to symbolise the political truce between all parties, even the supposedly ’unpatriotic’ Social Democrat Party gave their support for what was presented as a defensive war. However this political unity did not last as the military was unable to deliver on the quick victory that they had promised, and as the Schlieffen Plan failed and the heavy losses in battles such as Verdunn, the unity of the parties began to fracture. Subsequently Falkenhayn failed to find alternative strategies to break the stalemate and as a result Falkenhayn was replaced with military hero Hindenburg. For this reason, one can argue how the First World War increased political divisions.