free forum make a forum for free message boards free forum hosting free phpbb forum phpbb create free forum

zatkinsweltman · Joined: 09 May 2010 Posts: 27

Why did the League of Nations come out of WWI? What specific, new challenges does the League of Nations address? Looking at the League of Nations, what kinds of ideas might you have about how the world was changing at that time?

Heres what we need to post on.

zatkinsweltman · Joined: 09 May 2010 Posts: 27

It seems to me that the league of Nations was made to prevent further warfare. They were made to make peacefyul resolutions and assist countries in case of agression, (Packet page 19). Basically wilson wanted there to be no more war after such a large amount of deaths during this one. It also seems to me that the world really was changing towards a peaceful approach and although some countries didn't agree with the idea of a league of nations, IE france (Page 20), They all wanted a peaceful solution and were willing to try anything that would get them closer to not having another war. Obviously this didn't help as world war II and other wars continued to follow this war.

edalven · Joined: 07 May 2010 Posts: 37

Let me preface this by saying "I THINK..." The following is rather biased.

I think the League of Nations was a necessary end result of the Great War. Although unsuccessful, it was an attempt at a lasting peace. Woodrow Wilson fought a long and hard battle to get support for his 14 Points, and after much compromise, the League of Nations emerged as a force for peace. I think its motivations were well-founded and righteous, but some decisions of the Treaty of Versailles had ramifications on a unimaginable scale. For example, the policies that required Germany to pay for reparations, while it was already in a deep depression may have seemed fitting, but they just made the population even more resentful of the Allies. This set the stage for Hitler's rise to fame, and ultimately World War II. Also, the Allies' exclusion of Russia from its decision-making may have influenced its distrust of the West, and fueled the conflicts that would emerge in the Cold War. Russia was going through political turmoil at this time, and after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, America and its allies made little effort to befriend The USSR. (As of 1922) [In fact, it took Hitler's backstabbing of Stalin in 1942 to form the Big Three Alliance and restart talks between the US and Russia.] In conclusion, I believe that those in power mishandled the aftermath of World War I, and set a time bomb that would result in World War II and other conflicts.

TheHappiestSnowman · Joined: 10 May 2010 Posts: 9

In my eyes the leauge of nations wan attemp to get countries on a speaking and communication level so that countries could communicate and avoid a war like ww1 again. Being in communication with other countries would have probably stopped ww1 from happening. If countries had know the real strengh of their enemys they might have not gotten themselves into a war that would reduce them to ruin. Also in a way the leaugue of nations was solidifying nationalistic pride into European pride. It was kind of like an exclusive club of western powers. I think it was made to help nations see ther similarities and reconcile their differences in a peaceful way.
_________________
If you give a man a cupcake he will have dessert for one day

If you give a man a million cupcakes he will have dessert for the rest of the month until the sad day when all the other cupcakes go stale

Free Forum