One reason Eisenhower shouldn’t be blamed for America’s involvement in Vietnam is that his advisors were too focused on how to win the war in Vietnam rather than if winning the war in Vietnam would actually be beneficial at all. So if his advisors only spoke of strategies to win in Vietnam, this may have lead Eisenhower to believe there weren’t any other options and that continued involvement in Vietnam was the wisest choice. Therefore it could have been the fault of Eisenhower’s advisors and not Eisenhower’s fault himself that America continued its involvement in Vietnam. A second reason that means Eisenhower shouldn’t be blamed was because of the Quagmire theory. By the point of Eisenhower’s presidency, President Truman had already gotten America deeply involved in Vietnam, therefore it would have been difficult for Eisenhower to become uninvolved and it also would appear wasteful of resources, so the only
The League did nothing except protest against Germany’s past aggressive behavior and Japan and Mussolini’s invasion. All this caused Hitler to be more confident that nothing will happen if they were to invade Poland. Britain and France were also at fault for appeasing Germany. When Germany had started its rearmament and invaded Czechoslovakia, they did nothing as they wanted to appease Hitler as they believe they were not strong enough to defeat Hitler and they fear setting economic embargo on Germany would affect their own economy as they have not recovered from World War 1 and the Great Depression. Hitler was a gambler rather than a planner.
They had little choice but to surrender and accept the terms of the treaty no matter how harsh they were going to be. Germany had reason to believe the treaty would not be a majorly harsh one. Due to Germanys defeat the Kaiser had gone and they had a new democratic government put in place during 1919. This new government where not to be blamed for the war and would expect to receive support from the other countries involved in the treaty of Versailles but this did not really happen. The newly formed German democratic government saw the Versailles Treaty as a dictated peace (Diktat).
Therefore, the Vietnam War can be said to be part of the Cold War due to the Americans acting upon their policy of containment and fear of the Domino Theory. However, the Vietnam War can be said to not be part of the Cold War due to its origins not being from communist and capitalist disputes, this is simply why the US became involved. Unlike other events in the Cold War, for example the Berlin Airlift (where Stalin blockaded East Berlin from the West due to the prosperity stemming from capitalism in West Berlin and Germany) and the Korean war (where the communist north attacked the South that was occupied by a US military administration, therefore making it anti-communist). The origins the Vietnam War were due to unresolved Vietnamese problems, for example the creation of a power vacuum due to the withdrawal of France in March 1954. This led to the Geneva Agreements, where Vietnam was divided along the 17th Parallel.
A Cold War was not fundamentally necessary if the USA was to become a global superpower, it was merely a by-product of the USA’s actions in order to establish global supremacy. When the USA put forward the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, they knew it would create some sort of division between East and West because the West would accept American loans whereas the communist states in the east would be forced by Stalin to decline American loans and therefore create a barrier between the two sides of Europe. What the Americans did not intend to do was create war with the USSR, their actions were merely for economic gain, whereas the USSR saw the Marshall Plan and Truman Doctrine as purely aggressive and a threat towards communism, hence the start of the Cold War. Furthermore, by expanding it’s economic influence in Eastern Europe, the USA would also gain military power. This would further enhance the policy of containment and would help to prevent the spread of communism into the west.
Despite the United States’ concerns for the creation of a communist country, the British were unwilling to interfere. The British believed the situation was insignificant. A
Americans remembered with hostility the fervor of World War I propaganda efforts, which were later regarded as violating basic rights as well as conveying misinformation. At first, the government was reluctant to engage in propaganda campaigns, but pressure from the media, the business sector and advertisers who wanted direction persuaded the government to take an active role. Regardless, the government insisted that its actions were not propaganda, but a means of providing information. These efforts were slowly and haphazardly formed into a more unified propaganda effort, although never to the level of World War I. President Franklin D. Roosevelt created the Office of War Information (OWI) in 1942.
The two men have very similar views on the subject of just laws and unjust laws, but each goes about dealing with the problem of injustice differently. "On The Duty of Civil Disobedience" is a writing by Thoreau where he expresses his belief that the less the government does to govern, the better it is. He preferred less involvement from the government, referring to the government as a machine. He felt it was only necessary because the American people needed to feel its presence and hear its din. He believed that his first obligation was not to the government, but to do what he felt was right.
Britain and France showed no resistance due to the appeasement policy followed by the countries’ governments. Britain had several reasons for not opposing the remilitarization such as it believed the treaty had been harsh on Germany. It also believed that the people would not support another war and it was not prepared for an offensive. Britain worried that if its attention was diverted to another war, it would not be able to control its widespread empire and thus lose colonies. France did not support the remilitarization but could not react as, it could not predict the strength of the German army and it knew that nor Britain nor USA would go to war.
Moreover, the general political atmosphere in Europe did not allow new concessions to Italian balance when the powers were concerned with maintaining the balance of power and to prevent the setting of French hegemony in Europe again. So a united Italy in 1815 would only mean French domination of Italy, so the powers generally accepted the settlement even though the 1815 settlement ignored the moral principles which first French Revolution and the Romanticism had unleashed in Europe. Even liberal powers like Britain and the mother of Revolution, France did not dare to take the risk of a war which may be caused if Italy was united and this might invite foreign intervention in the young Italy. So foreign aid was generally unavailable in the first generation of the nineteenth century. Moreover, any war against Austria in the 1820's would mean war against Russia and Prussia too because the Holy Alliance acted as international police force resisting the tide of change.