How Did Hitler Use Collective Security On Hitler?
Before Hitler was leading the Germans and the Axis powers in WW2, he was defying the treaty of Versailles and committing crimes to try to get Germany back to its former glory. Even though Hitler was committing all these crimes, the League of Nations was not doing anything to stop him. This allowed Hitler to keep doing what he was doing. All of this made Germany more powerful. Also, the fear of war forced the League of Nations to make decisions that they probably would not have made if they were more powerful thus placing smaller countries at risk. If the League of Nations was more assertive with Hitler, then Germany would not be able to become as powerful, enter the start of a war and take over territories. If the League of Nations used collective
…show more content…
It was obvious from the beginning that Hitler wanted to take over the territory, especially for the reason of reuniting all of the Aryan people by the use of violence that he expressed in his book Mein Kampf. Instead of being mad at Hitler for forcefully taking control of the nations, leaders like Neville Chamberlain were sympathetic and thought they were too hard on Germany. Therefore, this attitude allowed them to keep defying the Treaty of Versailles. If the league of Nations was a little bit harder on Germany, it would make Hitler feel less safe and have him hesitate to take over more land. Because they were not assertive, this puts smaller nations at risk because they did not have enough military power to protect themselves from Germany. This later became reality when Hitler invaded and took over smaller countries that were defenseless to stop him. However, when the Allied powers began to use collective security and declared war on Germany after they invaded Poland it worked and they were able to stop Hitler. This proved it should have been their first choice initially. If the League of Nations used collective security, then it would have been harder to take over those nations because they could have nutrialilized them at the beginning and they could have prevented the war from
It was obvious from the beginning that Hitler wanted to take over the territory, especially for the reason of reuniting all of the Aryan people by the use of violence that he expressed in his book Mein Kampf. Instead of being mad at Hitler for forcefully taking control of the nations, leaders like Neville Chamberlain were sympathetic and thought they were too hard on Germany. Therefore, this attitude allowed them to keep defying the Treaty of Versailles. If the league of Nations was a little bit harder on Germany, it would make Hitler feel less safe and have him hesitate to take over more land. Because they were not assertive, this puts smaller nations at risk because they did not have enough military power to protect themselves from Germany. This later became reality when Hitler invaded and took over smaller countries that were defenseless to stop him. However, when the Allied powers began to use collective security and declared war on Germany after they invaded Poland it worked and they were able to stop Hitler. This proved it should have been their first choice initially. If the League of Nations used collective security, then it would have been harder to take over those nations because they could have nutrialilized them at the beginning and they could have prevented the war from