I think so!!! I didn't speak about the Spanish civil war haha, didn't no much about it . I spoke about Manchurian Incident, Abyssinia, Rhineland, Anschluss and CzechoslovakiaYeah it was good!
Spoke about Abyssina, Spanish Civil War, Rhinelands, Anschluss and Czechoslovakia.
You?
I think I spelt Anchluss wrong (with one S at the end) and as I was typing it here, it occured to me that I spelt it wrong lol. Oh well, no biggie.I think so!!! I didn't speak about the Spanish civil war haha, didn't no much about it . I spoke about Manchurian Incident, Abyssinia, Rhineland, Anschluss and Czechoslovakia
And fuck, i realised i spelt Abyssinia wrong D: also, do you think they'll care if half way through the essay i just said LON (League of nations) a lot? I clearly indicated the abbreviation on the front cover of the booklet. Hopefully they won't mind
Hmm... but that's sort of risking it because your assessment should conclude the ineffectiveness of the league of nations. The question didn't ask you to show how it led to appeasement, but then again depends on how it was written - not sure.^I intertwined those issues into appeasement and how the failure of collective security/the league of nations lead to appeasement.
Haha yeah but is it that important? There are plenty of other examples, it was a huge failure lets be honest lol. I was content by the end of it. SO MANY NOTES TO BURN <3!!!Hmm... but that's sort of risking it because your assessment should conclude the ineffectiveness of the league of nations. The question didn't ask you to show how it led to appeasement, but then again depends on how it was written - not sure.
Okay then that's fine. You don't want the marker to think you've prepared for appeasement and that you decided to write that essay instead or something... if you know what i mean.ahh I see but I used that to show how league of nations was ineffective etc etc and yes I concluded the league of nations was ineffective to a significant extent .
that makes me want to cry :/ditto. I didn't go into Anschluss or Czechovakia because the question was "assess the effectiveness of the LON" rather than "to what extent was the failure of the LON and the collapse of collective security..." so you didn't have to weigh it up against others. Rather, i discussed LON failings in detail, with historiography (Manchuria, Abyssinia, Russia and Germany's exclusion) as well as its faults (reliance on internationalism, failed attempts to strengthen, etc.) with a paragraph at the end to explain how this led to conflict.
The two are quite different questions - in a to what extent, you should spend half discussing the proposition and the other half weighing it up against other factors, but this question sought consideration of the LON exclusively.