Aggression Dbq Essay

In 1939, the world was plunged into World War II. This happened as a result of Germany remilitarizing the Rhineland, violating the Treaty of Versailles in the process, leaders in Europe assuming power through intimidation and creating laws depriving citizens of basic civil rights, German expansion into other areas of Europe, an attempt to appease Germany through the Munich Agreement, and political and economic instability in the major European countries. This conflict brought up appeasement and collective security, both of which were used before the war in an attempt to prevent it, as responses to aggression. Of the two, collective security is the most effective response to aggression because it has a great chance of ensuring the maintenance

Churchill talks about what appeasement did for Germany, who benefitted from the Munich Agreement, a form of appeasement the League of Nations used to try to avoid war, as well as nations in the League of Nations. He states, “They neither prevented Germany from rearming, nor did they rearm us in time. They weakened the League of Nations...Thus they left us in the hour of trial without a strong national defense or system of international security” (Document 6). This shows that appeasement allowed Germany to continue with its harmful intentions of rebuilding its military, weakening the countries in the League of Nations, and leaving the league vulnerable, which means appeasement did not benefit the appeasers of aggression, but harmed and helped the aggression in its disastrous intentions. George F. Kennan supports the fact that appeasement sometimes assists aggression in its evil intentions. He says that the Munich Agreement, a hopeless act of appeasement, was not needed because it cost the Czechoslovak state, the Czechs had very strong defenses, and in reality, the German generals were ready to try to remove Hitler from the place of power he was given if he continued to advance in his intent on taking over a particular portion of Czechoslovakia (Document 7). This demonstrates that appeasement actually helped Hitler proceed with his evil intentions, which means appeasement sometimes helps aggression in its disastrous intentions. Therefore, appeasement does not benefit the appeasers of aggression, but instead harm them and sometimes even helps the aggression in its evil