Explain Why Did War Break Out In 1642

Froissart as a clerk in the English chancery was always going to praise the English king. Given that Scotland was going through a period of continuous war with the English at the time it would be likely that Bower would be prone to exaggerate things. It, therefore, seems likely that although Edward III was not the immoral King that Bower said he was that he was also not the chivalrous leader that Froissart claimed he was. This once again shows us Froissart 's viewpoint of chivalry. It demonstrates to us that it is likely that he was

Conclusively, the battles created more struggles in the English Throne than before the conflict began. There have been other family feuds in history that are just like The Wars of the Roses. Even though they are all different, each feud proves that fighting doesn’t resolve disagreements. The Wars of the Roses involved an unnecessary family feud for the English Throne that caused after effects following the wars. Both houses claimed to have a right to the English Throne, which started the inner rivalry between the families.

The King was worried that without a son, other countries could overthrow the kingdom easily. Since Catherine was originally married to King Henry’s brother, the king believed that he was being cursed with no sons as a punishment for going against the bible. King Henry also wanted to divorce Catherine of Aragon because he was in love with Anne Boleyn during his marriage. Because the Catholic doctrine did not allow for a divorce at the time, King Henry asked the pope to annul Henry’s marriage instead. This clearly did not work, but the king found another way to get what

Government officials agreed with the Espionage and Seditions Acts. The Acts were passed so that people could not say any statements that could interfere with the success of winning the war. People in the United States wanted to win the war, so they were willing to give up some of their rights. In 1918, Charles T. Schenck was convicted because he violated the Espionage Act.

Some say he was an honourable hero while other say he is a vicious villain. Many Puritans and supporters believe he is a hero due to the fact that he abolished the monarchy, which was most despised at the time. He also won the civil war for the Roundheads, and although he was offered the crown, Cromwell refused because he had to intention to be a dictator like the King.

Lincoln felt certain that he would not be reelected because he had received a torrent of criticism throughout the war. Most recently, with the controversial Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln had earned the ire of several. And then when people, specifically Northerners, grew to understand the Proclamation as a way of speeding up the war, (something that had indeed been Lincoln's intention) the frustration against Lincoln only mounted once it appeared that the war was not going to be ending anytime soon. At the same time, Lincoln was rarely being regarded for certain strategic victories, such as the removal of the Confederacy from Tennessee. Lincoln's more realistic goal and Reconstruction plans were met with mixed feelings.

This means that despite the impacts of the war, many in America still believed that America’s role (and the best way to achieve its interests) was by leaving other nations alone. This is because the war was extremely unpopular. Many Americans did not trust that President Wilson campaigned for reelection on a platform of anti-war, but then got the United States involved. They also distrusted that he had promised a just peace in his fourteen point plan, but ended up with secret land deals and a punishing Treaty of Versailles, as opposed to a rehabilitory treaty. As a result, the irreconcilables in Congress voted multiple times to strike down the League of Nations.

With these causes, war is chosen more than peace, and often found as a noble and justified thing to do; however, it can be concluded that war cannot be justified and is not a noble deed. War especially cannot be justified if the option of peace is never explored nor ever acted upon. Although war is not a noble deed, in the time period for the warrior societies in Beowulf, war often lost its nobility because of the wreaking of havoc when a nation suffers a lost and the breaking of pacts and peace agreements, due to a nation’s being in weak state, especially after the loss of a leader. War is a force to be reckoned with and a force that in Beowulf prevailed over all other options of negotiation between clans of

Banquo, who had trusted Macbeth and promised to serve him forever, becomes suspicious and is killed by Macbeth’s hired murderers. His best friend’s betrayal of him is not the only backstab in the story. Another disloyalty happens with the “kings” death. Malcolm, the previous king’s eldest son, knew that the trust has been broken, so he and his brother flee to England in order to survive. So when Macduff goes to Malcolm and asks him to take his rightful place, Malcolm answers, “Boundless temperance in nature is a tyranny; it hath been Th’untimely emptying of the happy throne and the fall of many kings” (4.3.

Many Americans began to despise monarchy and began to call the actions of the crown unjust. Leading to riots of the actions of the British Government and beginning the sparks for the American Civil War. As we can see the French and Indian War was a long and complicated war. This war caused the final sparks needed to stir up a rebellion by the Colonists in America.

Henry took control of the situation by demolishing the illegal castles built in Stephens’s reign the barons saw this as an attack on baronial power but the king was asserting his authority and keeping the barons on a tight leash to prevent them from becoming too powerful. Furthermore Henry had the problem of resolving the splits in the country which had caused confusion. During Stephens reign there were resentments from supporters. Henry had to regain the support of his people as he would not have been able to

Because the Civil Wars of the 1640’s involved all three Kingdoms they are sometimes referred to as the British Wars. The Royalist

Knowing that Meighen would become Prime Minister if he did not intervene, he believed that Arthur Meighen would not be able to govern. But only he himself would be up to the task. Julian even warned king of trying to gain the seats the progressives had, saying, “ See the position, you will be at the mercy of the progressives, you will have to go to them, or be at their bidding, the country will say you are caring only for the office, and the fruits of office, they will tear at you.” Even after hearing this remark King still believed that Arthur was incapable of carrying on his Majesty’s government. To see Arthur unable to take office and usurp his government King was willing to go to almost any length to remain as or become Prime Minister.

History is all about inspiring speeches, gruesome wars, and unexpected events that decide the course of the future. The Cold War is not an example of a war, but a highly important event, considering there was no actual fighting. The Cold War started because the Soviet 's wanted to spread communism, but America was getting in their way to stop it. Three major factors also contributed to the conflict of war, the most obvious one being the U.S. wanted to stop communism, another being both the Soviet Union and the United States were afraid of each other, and finally competition, because everyone needs some good competition. These factors are both reasons why the war started, and "weapons" that were used.

The validity of the above arguments is predicated on the assumption British strategy failed because they did not understand the true nature of the war combined with incoherent strategies led by singular field commanders making poor decisions. In fact, the British were engaged in a world war and had to shift gears toward other war torn parts of the world such as the West Indies and France. (Weigley, p. 24) The above paragraphs also fail to mention the superior tactical performances by brilliant field commanders such as Clinton and Cornwallis in major battles such as New York and Charleston. They were not inept commanders but lacked the personnel and resources necessary to decidedly defeat the far less capable forces of the Americans.