Question

Evaluate the following argument: "World War l and World War ll should really be considered one continuous conflict, with a brief cease-fire, that was not truly resolved until the 1940s."

Be sure to include a clear thesis statement, argue in favor of one point of view, and respond to any possible opposing arguments.

Answer 1

No it was not one continuous conflict with a brief cease-fire, In ww1, we created a peace treaty called the Treaty of Versailles in the Paris Peace Conference that ended the war between Germany and the Allied Powers. The treaty had many Provisions, such as germany taking full responsibility of WW1, Another article of the treaty made Germany Disarm its Armed Forces and Majorly restrict it's armed force's power.  It also stripped Germany of it's Territories and most of all, one article made Germany pay reparations in certain countries. All these provisions ultimately path a way for Hitler to take power, promising changes to the struggling German people, later Hitler invaded Poland triggering Britain and France to declare war on Germany. Starting a different war. WW2.

Answer 2

Although World War I and World War II are closely related, I do not agree that it is fair to consider the two of them to be the same conflict. To a certain extent, the two conflicts shared some characteristics, some causes, and some ideas. Nevertheless, after WWI was concluded, a peace treaty was signed. The Treaty of Versailles was signed on 28 June 1919, and it put an end to World War I. This was signed by Germany and the Allied Powers and registered by the Secretariat of the League of Nations.

Someone who disagrees with this statement might claim that Germany's aspirations were catalysts during both wars. While this is true, I do not think it warrants treating both wars as one, as Germany's ambitions took very a very different form in each one. Moreover, the racist and eugenic theories that dominated the second war were not particularly relevant in the first one.