While Europe was dealing with invasions, alliances, and Hitler's onslaught- the United States reverted to an isolationist policy. December 7, 1941 changed everything. After the Pearl Harbor bombing, the United States declared war on Japan. As a result of the alliance system, Germay declared war on the U.S. and vice versa.
Address all FOUR questions in your post-
First- define appeasement and cite your source.
Second, why was appeasement doomed to fail?
Third, WHy did the United States shift from Isplationsim to involvement?
Fourth- Is Isolationsim a good foreign policy? EXPLAIN
Don't Forget to respond to TWO classmates as well. To address a specific classmate, use the @ and their google handle
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
Appeasement is basically giving into a bothersome country’s demands in attempts to keep peaceful relations. (Source: Danzer, Gerald, et al. Glossary. The Americans. By Danzer, et al. Evanston: McDougal Littell, 2007. R54. Print.)
With Hitler, appeasement was doomed to fail because the enemy had a mission: conquering the world. Hitler wasn’t going to be satisfied with the Sudetenland because he wasn’t planning on stopping there. Soon he would invade Poland, set up alliances, and inflame the whole world with war. Appeasement is like whetting someone’s appetite for something he/she already intends to completely devour.
The US switched from isolationism to involvement (officially) after the bombing of Pearl Harbor because the war had hit much too close to home. What had once been a dreary-looking war over Europe’s (not America’s) issues suddenly became a necessary defense tactic. After the attack in Hawaii, the US was shocked into joining the Allies, and even former isolationists were all-in against Japan especially.
Isolationism is not a very good foreign policy, because in most cases neutrality will not last long. The way I see it, someone might be “neutral” about a subject for a little while to consider the facts and opinions of both sides, but eventually they’re going to need to jump into one boat or the other. Because of this, it makes a country look bad to be neutral for a little while, but then to hop in once her own soil is threatened. Also, the idea of remaining entirely undisturbed by another country’s suffering, when she shares your own nation’s values and has helped your country in the past, is kind of selfish. It seems like America realized the worldwide threat of the enemy, though, when it entered her own nation.
Appeasement is when someone is granting concessions to potential enemies to maintain peace.
("Dictionary, Encyclopedia and Thesaurus." The Free Dictionary. Farlex, n.d. Web. 24 Feb. 2013.)
I think its doomed to fail, because the enemy such as Hilter wasn't looking for peace, he wanted to take over the war. Appeasement might work for a short period of time, but soon enough the enemy will want more power.
Once pearl harbor happened America wasn't going to stand around and do nothing. If they stayed in Isolation they would had just looked like fools without nationalism.
Isolationism is good to an extend. If the people around you can fight for themselves, and nobody is hurting you then there is no need to be involved, but once they mess with you,or a close friend or country something needs to be done.
I like all your details you put into your essay such as talking about Hitlers plan, and the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Also, I agree that Isolation only works for a short period of time. Well done. @Katie Sosnowski
Appeasement is the policy of acceding to the demands of a potentially hostile nation in the hope of maintaining peace(Dictionary, Encyclopedia and Thesaurus. The Free Dictionary. Farlex, n.d. Web. 24 Feb. 2013.)It was doomed to fail because there was no way the enemy would want peace. All they wanted was the power to everything. They moved from isolation to involvement because of Pearl Harbor. The American people wouldn't just let us be attacked and it go unnoticed, thats why we made a movement to avenge the lives lost to the Japanese in a war we weren't even a part of... yet. I think it is a good idea for isolation so that you won't get in the middle of someone elses war. If I were a country i wouldn't want to get in the middle of something else if i wasn't a part of it. I would stay far away as possible.
I liked how you explained that Americans would look like fools if the didn't do anything about Pearl Harbor. The way you explained it was great. @Meghan Gravatt
Appeasement is defined as "the policy of granting concessions to potential enemies to maintain peace". I think appeasement was doomed to fail because the enemy had a hidden agenda, they weren't looking for peace. Pearl Harbor caused the United States to move from isolationism to involvement. America couldn't just sweep this attack under the carpet and forget about it. The United States had to do something about it. I don't think isolationism is a good foreign policy because a country can stay quiet for a little while, but sooner or later they are going to have to do or say something that goes against this policy
@Katie Sosnowski I agree with you about how isolationism isn't a very good policy. You put a lot of good details in your comment. Good job.
@Meghan Gravatt I agree with you, and i think appeasment is doomed to fail. It might work for a little while, but sooner or later the enemy will step in to demand power. Great job.
The term appeasement means “giving up principles to pacify an aggressor,” or to satisfy the demands of someone else (page 744). When countries did this, it was normally to avoid conflict or worse, war.
As we all know, human beings are always asking for more. It’s often questioned when enough is enough? Well the same goes for countries and their dictators. Appeasement was doomed to fail because no matter how many territories or countries went on their backs, like Poland, for countries such as Germany, more and more would always be demanded of them. No matter what, stronger countries were always going to want more. It started creating an imbalance in power and ultimately destroying the terms of appeasement, since Germany just forced themselves against everyone else, trying to conquer them all.
In the being of all the scuffles and heat between Germany and everyone else, the United States strayed away from declaring war. They stuck to isolationism, avoiding war and staying out of foreign affairs. This kept us at a safe distance, since America did not want a repeat of WW1. Unfortunately, Japan went on a power hungry assault, following in the steps of Germany, and attacked the largest United States base in the Pacific, killing thousands of Americans and destroying hundreds of ships and planes. This attack was known as Pearl Harbor. This attack on America was the last straw; Congress passed Roosevelt’s declaration of war, thus making the United States involved.
Isolationism is not a good foreign policy. Unfortunately, conflicts with other countries are inevitable. You cannot avoid the rest of the countries that share the same world that you do. Involvement and communication are the only way to settle issues and make healthy decisions. If countries, isolate themselves from everyone else, nations cannot expand; physically and technologically.
Source: (Danzer, Gerald, et al. Glossary. The Americans. By Danzer, et al. Evanston: McDougal Littell, 2007. R54. Print.)
@Katie Sosnowski
Your explanations for each part were great and very clear, right on point. agree with you that isolationism is a poor foreign policy. I also liked the simile you used your second paragraph: "Appeasement is like whetting someone’s appetite for something he/she already intends to completely devour." It's very easy to visualize the true meaning of appeasement with this kind of figurative language. Great job at explaining everything so well!
@Victoria Kaschl
Your explanations were very direct and left nothing to be questioned. They were also very easy to follow. Good job, your information was accurate and you hit all the points! Though I don't agree with your choice of isolationism, you still made a very good argument. Nicely done :)
“Appeasement is the policy of granting concessions to potential enemies to maintain peace.”
(http://www.thefreedictionary.com) Appeasement was doomed to fail because Nazi Germany would push to take over Europe including France. The U.S. was an ally with Britain and France who were fighting the Germans. The war would eventually come to the shores of America, and on December 7th, 1941 the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. The U.S. declared war on Japan, and then shortly after that the Germans and Fascist Italy declared war on the United States. America was now in the war for the long run. Isolationism over the years has proven to be a bad foreign policy, because being in an alliance of nations is much stronger. Global organizations like the United Nations work to help keep the peace around the world. Together the Allies fought WWII and defeated the Axis, and it was a total effort from all.
@Jenna Winters I feel like your point about appeasement not working because enough is never enough is very true. When will dictators stop when they get their way.
@Kristin Stewart I agree with you about isolationism not working because nations need to have allies around the world, and a country will always need to pick sides in a war.
Appeasement is the granting of concessions to a hostile power in order to keep the peace.
(Source: Danzer, Gerald. Glossary. The Americans. By Danzer. Evanston: McDougal Littell, 2007. R54. Print.)
Appeasement was doomed to fail because Hitler had the wrong intentions. He did not want appeasement. He would do anything to get his hands on what he wanted, whether or not it meant keeping his deals. Hitler wanted to control everything,
The United States switched from isolation to involvement because the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. This was really upsetting to the U.S. because many men in the navy were killed. This was enough for America to react and join in.
Isolationism is a good foreign policy to a certain degree. It’s good because they aren’t making allies or enemies with anyone. Also they don’t get involved with wars that don’t involve them. On the other hand it could be bad because people will try to get them involved like Japan did to the U.S.
Appeasement is the granting of concessions to a hostile power in order to keep the peace.
(Source: Danzer, Gerald. Glossary. The Americans. By Danzer. Evanston: McDougal Littell, 2007. R54. Print.)
Appeasement was doomed to fail because Hitler had the wrong intentions. He did not want appeasement. He would do anything to get his hands on what he wanted, whether or not it meant keeping his deals. Hitler wanted to control everything,
The United States switched from isolation to involvement because the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. This was really upsetting to the U.S. because many men in the navy were killed. This was enough for America to react and join in.
Isolationism is a good foreign policy to a certain degree. It’s good because they aren’t making allies or enemies with anyone. Also they don’t get involved with wars that don’t involve them. On the other hand it could be bad because people will try to get them involved like Japan did to the U.S.
@Meghan Gravatt
I like your point on how they arent going to sit back and watch it happpen because of nationalism. Especially since they bombed a naval base.
@Jenna Winters
I do agree with the fact that arguements between countries are inevitable. Not everyone will always see eye to eye. Great post :)
Appeasement is the act of calming something down(http://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/appeasement). Appeasement was doomed to fail because America had a stronger relationship with the Allies than with the Germans and the Japanese. The Japanese and the Germans would also do anything to win the war, one example of this was the Germans attacking Poland without warning to get to Paris. The U.S. switched to involvement after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. U.S. also switched because Hitler started to win the war in Europe against Britain, America's greatest ally. Isolationism is not a very good foreign policy because groups are more powerful than individuals. Much like the buddy rule we learned when we were younger; to keep yourself safe, be around other people that you trust.
@Savannah Esch. I agree with you appeasement was doomed to fail. Germany wanted to take over Europe and didn't plan to stop there. Well done.
@ Victoria Kaschl
I like how you worded the cause for the failure of appeasement; it's true that the enemy simply didn't want peace. Many countries like America may have been war-weary and quick to keep relations calm, but Germany certainly didn't seem to be one of them. Your theory about isolationism makes some sense, but the practice would only work for a short time. Eventually it would be necessary to help allies or defend yourself.
@Jeremy Shearrow
I appreciate your insight on how former country relations influenced the failure of appeasement. It was like Germany and Japan were set up to be America's enemies, because America had closer relations with the Allies. I also like your "buddy system" comparison, because it describes another aspect of isolationism - you don't have allies, which can be dangerous. Great post!
First- define appeasement and cite your source.
to bring to a state of peace, quiet, ease, calm, or contentment; pacify; soothe
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/appeasement
Second, why was appeasement doomed to fail?
Appeasement was doomed to fail because appeasement is not a solution. It is basically a form of procrastination. With an appeasement you do nothing. You do not solve anything. The problem is just left unsolved, and eventually it will get out, because someone will be some agitated by the problem and will take action.
Third, Why did the United States shift from Isolationism to involvement?
The main reason for their shift from isolation to involvement was the attack on Perl Harbor, but this attack did not come just out of the blue. It came after the US had agitated Japan when they took control over the Pacific Ocean. The Japanese thought America would ask for peace, which they didn't. They finally found a reason for going to war against Japan, who had way too much power in Asia.
Fourth- Is Isolationism a good foreign policy? EXPLAIN
It depends on the situation if isolationism is a good foreign policy. If there is a big country that is going to war with a small country it would not be fair for the small country. As an example, what if China went to war with Norway; it would not be fair for Norway, because it is so small compared to China in so many ways. Norway has less inhabitance, less economy, less area, and so on. It would not be fair to not help Norway. They would get destroyed after 1 day. Another situation that would be different is that if too equal countries went to war against each other and you had nothing to do with it, and no one had attacked you, there is no reason for you to get involved. You can see the similarity in humans. If an older child bullied a kid you would automatically step in to stop it, but if to adults were arguing at each other you would just stay out of their way, unless you were involved or included in the argument.
@Victoria Tuttle
I agree with you on reason for isolation It is good to a degree, and it is good if you have no reason to be in the war, but then you also have another reason to get involved, and that is if the country you partially support are being knocked to the ground.
@Savannah Esch
I partially agree with your statement on the isolation. it is true that an alliance is much stronger than standing alone, but if you have nothing to do in that war there is no reason for you to get involved. The only time that I think it should be ok to get involved in a war between two foreign countries are when the balance in the world is about to shift/change, or if you are drawn into the war like America was under the WWII by Japan.
Aspyn Dent
Appeasement is when someone is granting demands in attempts to keep peaceful relations. I think is going to fail. Like Hitler was not looking for peace he just did all thoughs things because he had the power to it did no good to anyone. The united states should do something about appeasement and not just sit back and let it all happen we are the land of freedom we should be out their helping
Post a Comment