The French and Indian War was important to the American Revolution because the debt from the war was the reason that Parliament started taxing the colonists. Also, the French and Indian War made Britain very weak, making the colonists’ actions work a whole lot better. Since France was not happy with the outcome of their war with Britain this was a main reasons for France’s interest in helping the now Americans throughout the Revolutionary War, which was very important to the colonies’ victory. The reason why Britain started to tax the colonists was because of the debt resulting from the French and Indian War. The first tax was the the tax on sugar, which was put on the colonists to help pay off the war debt.
I seek to explain the onset of World War I, World War II Europe, and World War II Pacific by using a systemic level of analysis, particularly dynamic differentials theory. Dynamic Differentials Theory states that war is likely when a dominant power is facing deep and inevitable decline. These dominant powers are more likely to wage war against another power because they suspect their own power is fleeting and want to prevent their decline by any means necessary. This theory also states that war is only likely in a multipolar system when the declining state has substantially more military power than the others, and will only declare war when the declining power believes its military strength has reached its peak. WORLD WAR I: Germany waged World War I in 1914 due to their increasing fear of the rise of Russia.
Another reason the French and Indian war helped start the oncoming American Revolution was all of the boycotts as a result of Britain trying to increase its revenue from the colonists and crawl out of debt. The boycotts of British products - hurting the British mercantile system- were much more effective after the French and Indian War and the fact that the French lost the war made France more interested in helping the colonists in the American Revolution (Brinkley, 112-113). The money France offered proved to be a key piece to the colonies gaining their independence from Britain. Without the French and Indian war it’s doubtful the American Revolution would ever have
The British allies – the Hessians –had little commitment to victory, which was a major disadvantage for the British since the Hessian soldiers weren’t motivated like the colonists. Hessians were mercenaries, which means they were fighting for pay. Colonists were fighting for American independence and much more. Colonists were sometimes hopeless and depressed, but after winning a battle or reading something inspiring, they were motivated to win. For example, Thomas Paine’s pamphlet American Crisis gave hope to weary soldiers and gave them strength for what was to come
It was when Ferdinand and his wife were leaving that their driver made the wrong turn and was going by when Gavrilo Princip a member of the terrorist group them and killed Ferdinand and his Wife Sophia. This was not the cause of world war 1 by the spark the three main causes of world war one was militarism, alliances, and imperialism. Militeralism was one of the three main causes of world war 1. It is revered to as an “arms race.” It is revered as that because Britain had a large navy, and Germany wanted a large navy too. France and germany competed to build larger armies.
The military activities and innovations after World War I (WWI) greatly influenced the military operations and outcome of World War II. France and Britain were victorious, but the effect of the previous war persuaded these countries to shift their focus on smaller militaries rather than the art of war. The Treaty of Versailles imposed many requirements and restrictions on the Germans, but this did not stop the Germans from being a military force to be reckoned with during the late 1930s and early 1940s. As a matter of fact, this imposement forced the Germans to be innovative as they pursued to increase their military prowess in the 1930s. All of the countries involved in WWI had the same experience and knowledge about the war and military capabilities and limitations, but the level of input they individually invested in their military were very different.
The diplomatic tendencies of many prominent leaders invited war. Their diplomatic efforts consisted of building a larger military, and expanding their military alliances. World War 1 is considered a diplomatic failure due to this perspective. These leaders did not believe diplomacy’s main purpose was to prevent war, or serve as “the business of peace.” This is due to how war was handled after the Napoleonic Era. Furthermore, diplomacy was often times directly
It could be said that every European country involved was partially to blame. Each country, at the turn of the twentieth century, built up their militaries and raced with each other for colonial power. Each country made poltical and military alliances with others and were expected to uphold those promises when war began. Many countries went to war to achieve something for themselves. While Germany and Austria-Hungary are easily blamed for the war because of their pro-war ideals and actions, no country in Europe can escape the blame for a war that lasted much longer than a couple weeks and caused the loss of so much
War only brings pain to people’s lives and brings money to the people with power. When a nation declares war, people should always question. If people feel uncertain about war, they should always look for factors before deciding if war is unacceptable or not. People should always consider why they are going to war because if they do not, they are literally walking blindfolded into the unknown. For example in the documentary "Why We Fight," it stated, " 'Lots of people think we fight today for freedom.'
Now here are the reasons Rome fell. The first reason Rome fell is because there was too much corruption and people like the guards would do anything for money. If they hired loyal guards that actually wanted to protect their country Rome may not have fell. Another reason that Rome fell is because it was too large to control and to communicate with the generals, kings, and other officials that were on the other side of the empire. To fix this they could have more generals and officials at one place at all times or split up to protect other parts of the country and meet up once a month or every 2 months.
Nationalism lead to war due to how it changed the people 's perception of their own country, as well as how these countries want to have more control/power. Nationalistic propaganda was a major influence on the war, mostly due to how entire populations would base their opinions on what they read and/or saw. This propaganda would discuss how the country was powerful and deserved much more power, leading the people into thinking they could easily win a war, and how fighting a war was important for the growth of their country. Source 1.A describes having a strong sense of nationalism by explaining how the only nations that have become more powerful are those that "do not flinch from war". This directly links nationalism to war since countries that
Room 40 understood the coded message which mentioned this battle so the UK deployed its forces in time and and Germany lost the surprise effect. The royal Navy had 151 battleships and the German Navy 99. At the end of the battle, Britons lost more men and ships than Germans; however the Royal Navy was bigger than the Geramn navy so this battle had aminor effect on it. The Geramn Navy could not send battleships in the Atlantic easily to put Britain on its knees and destroy American battleships coming from the USA the following year, so this helped Allies to win the
American’s always say “don 't tread on me” but should we stop treading on them? Our nation is in debt by millions of dollars due to paying for supplies and other things less important than things such as our children 's education. The troops overseas may be at more risk because of diseases than they are with bullets. In addition, Our nation’s security would be improved with people fighting here, we don 't send our police to one place if the threat is in another. They say our nation is in trouble with our security, although are are we in so much trouble we need to keep our troops overseas, costing our nation’s debt and our troops health.
The Emperor should take a militaristic approach with Xiongnu because it is very costly to keep the tribute system going and our tributes may empower them, the Han should attack while they are still bigger than the Xiongnu, the Xiongnu also already proved themselves untrustworthy. As chief foreign policy adviser to the illustrious Emperor of the Middle Kingdom, I humbly recommend that the Emperor should instead take a militaristic approach because it will be very costly to continue sending tributes every year, if continued with diplomatic approach the Xiongnu could grow bigger than us and take over. For the past 50 years I have been keeping track of the price for the tributes we send to the Xiongnu, the cost rises every couple of years, we should have stopped sending tributes after they invaded us in 166 BCE, we never know when the Xiongnu will stop wanting our tributes. The cost of sending tributes to the Xiongnu rises every couple of years. (Doc 10) 51 years ago it only costed 6,000 jin to send tributes to the Xiongnu now it is 5 times more expensive, 30,000 jin.