WWII Quick Notes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

WWII Quick Notes Introduction: World Leaders DICTATOR A person with complete control of a country FASCISM Racist, nationalist government led by a dictator TOTALITARIAN A Government with complete control (oppression) DEMOCRACY A Government by the people (votes and liberty) AXIS POWERS Benito Mussolini Hideki Tojo Adolf Hitler ITALY JAPAN GERMANY ALLIED POWERS Joseph Stalin Winston Churchill Franklin D. Roosevelt SOVIET UNION (USSR) GREAT BRITAIN UNITED STATES Harry S. Truman takes over after FDR dies in 1945. WORLD WAR II TIMELINE Part 1 “Rise of the Dictators” 1922: Mussolini becomes dictator of Italy 1933: Hitler becomes Chancellor of Germany 1936: Germany and Italy create Axis Powers 1940: Japan joins Axis Powers Part II “The Beginning of War” 1938: Hitler annexes Austria 1938: Hitler takes Czechoslovakia 1939: Hitler and Stalin make secret treaty, but Britain forms an alliance with Poland 1939: September 1st - Germany invades Poland…WWII begins! September 3rd - Britain declares war on Germany 1940: Hitler conquers France 1940: Battle of Britain. Held on to beat Germany, but Britain is crippled. Part III “War in the Pacific” (USA enters the War) 1941: December 7th. Japan attacks Pearl Harbor. USA declares War 1941: Hitler invades Soviet Union. Surprises Stalin. 1942: Executive Order 9066. Japanese Americans put in internment camps. 1942: June 3rd . USA wins Battle of Midway. This is the turning point in war with Japan. Part IV “Back in Europe and the End of War” 1942: Allies defeat Rommel in North Africa 1943: Allies invade Italy. Italy surrenders. Mussolini dismissed from office. 1943: Soviets defend Stalingrad. Soviets begin to push Germans back. 1944: June 6th. D-DAY! Allies invade France on beaches of Normandy. 1945: FDR dies. Harry Truman takes over as president. 1945: Allies bomb Berlin. Hitler commits suicide. Germany surrenders. May 8, 1945- V.E. Day 1945: Atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. 1945: Japan surrenders. WWII is over! August 14, 1945- V.J. Day .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

FORMAL ALLIANCES, 1815&Mdash;1939
FORMAL ALLIANCES, 1815—1939 A Quantitative Description By J. DAVID SINGER and MELVI N SMALL University of Michigan 1. Introduction selves. Finally, we will describe as com- Although there are many types of rela- pletely as is possible and necessary the tionship and interaction between and coding and classifying procedures, such among nations, very few of them leave the that others might either replicate the data- sort of ’trace’ which makes them vulner- making operation, or, at least, know ex- able to systematic observation. To ’get at’ plicitly wherein their understanding and indicators of interdependence, interpene- our results differ. tration, hostility, cooperation, threats, or political distance phenomena, for example, 2. The basic sources of information, is a costly and time-consuming enterprise Since our need was for a classified cata- whose results might turn out to be either log of formal alliances that did not, to methodologically unreliable or theoreti- our knowledge, exist, the problem was to cally uninteresting. But one type of inter- identify the sources from which such in- nation relationship which leaves a rela- formation could be compiled for the 125- tively reliable trace and which is full of year period under investigation. Basically, theoretical implications is the formal alli- two types of sources are available. The ance. It is, therefore, surprising that we preferable one, because there is more rele- have seldom gone beyond the anecdotal vant information in a single volume, is treatment of a very few such relationships,
[Show full text]
The Commandant's Introduction
The Commandants Introduction By Michael H. Clemmesen his issue of the Baltic Defence Re- It seems now to have been generally members seem to have realised this fact. view marks a change in the editorial recognized that the Alliance has to be To succeed, the transformation must line that is symbolised by the changed reformed thoroughly to remain relevant take the alliance forward and change it cover. The adjustment is not only caused to the leading member state. The U.S.A., from being a reactive self-defensive alli- by the fact that the three Baltic states have involved as she is in the drawn-out War ance. The outlined new NATO is a po- succeeded in being invited to NATO as Against Terror that was forced upon her litically much more demanding, divisive, well as to the EU and now have to adapt by the 11 September 2001 attacks, is not and risky framework for military co-op- to the new situation. It is also based on impressed by the contribution from most eration. Its missions will include opera- the realisation that the two organisations of the European allies. Only a small tions of coercion like the one against will change their character when the inte- progress has been made in the Yugoslavia with regard to Kosovo as well gration of the new members takes place. enhancement of the force structures of as pre-emptive Out-of-NATO area crisis The implementation of the new editorial the European members since the 1999 response operations military activism line will only come gradually.
[Show full text]
Defense of Secret Agreements, 49 Ariz
+(,1 2 1/,1( Citation: Ashley S. Deeks, A (Qualified) Defense of Secret Agreements, 49 Ariz. St. L.J. 713 (2017) Provided by: University of Virginia Law Library Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline Fri Sep 7 12:26:15 2018 -- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at https://heinonline.org/HOL/License -- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text. -- To obtain permission to use this article beyond the scope of your HeinOnline license, please use: Copyright Information Use QR Code reader to send PDF to your smartphone or tablet device A (QUALIFIED) DEFENSE OF SECRET AGREEMENTS Ashley S. Deeks* IN TRO DU CTION ............................................................................................ 7 14 I. THE SECRET COMMITMENT LANDSCAPE ............................................... 720 A. U.S. Treaties and Executive Agreements ....................................... 721 B. U .S. Political Arrangem ents ........................................................... 725 1. Secret Political Arrangements in U.S. Law ............................. 725 2. Potency of Political Arrangements ........................................... 728 C. Secret Agreements in the Pre-Charter Era ..................................... 730 1. Key Historical Agreements and Their Critiques ...................... 730 a. Sem inal Secret Treaties ....................................... 730 b. Critiques of the Treaties .....................................
[Show full text]
Baltic Way 1989 Achieving the Unthinkable - Documentary by Kristine S
Baltic Way 1989 Achieving the Unthinkable - Documentary by Kristine S. At 7pm on August 23, 1989 about 2 million people joined hands forming a human chain spanning 600 kilometres, or almost 400 miles. The inhabitants of the Baltic states, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, joined hands in a peaceful protest demanding restoration of their independence. This became known as the Baltic Way. The Baltic Way in 1989, through leadership and non-violent protests, drew global attention to Baltic struggles and contributed to the eventual renewal of the Baltic states’ independence. The Baltic states - Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania - are small countries in Europe on the Baltic Sea. Before World War II, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia were independent prosperous nations. On 23 August 1939, the Secret Treaty of the Foreign Ministers of the Soviet Union and Germany, known as the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, was signed. It led to the occupation of the Baltic states followed by the war and mass genocide against the Baltic nations. Hundreds of thousands of people, including families with children, were deported to labour camps in Siberia where they were executed, or had to flee their homes never to return. The Baltic nations lived under Soviet rule for 50 years. In the Soviet Union freedom of speech and thought was restricted. The Soviet Union denied the existence of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact for 50 years and insisted that the Baltic states had voluntarily joined the Soviet Union. In the ‘80s people started to gain access to more information. The first protest began in the Baltic states. National movements in each of the Baltic states started to gain wide support of the population.
[Show full text]
Congressional Record-Sen Ate
1917. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 55 Also, a bill (H. R. 7196) granting an increase of pension to By Mr. FUL.LER of Illinois: Petition of Tuthill Spring Co., James Brooks; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. of Chicago, Ill., against repeal of law concerning second-class Also, a bill (H. R. 7197) granting a pension to William J. postage; to the Committee on Ways and Means. Nash; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. .Also, petition of Woman's American Baptist Foreign Mission By Mr. GOULD: A bill (H. R. 7198) granting a pension to Society, favoring prohibition; to the Dommittee on the Judiciary. Susan :U. Gregory; to the Committee on Pensions. Also, petition of Hod Carriers, Building and· Common Laborers' Also, a bill (H. R. 7199) granting a pension to Albert C. Executive Council of Chicago and vicinity, relative to Iegtslation Schuman; to the Committee on Pensions. to facilitate building. industry; to the Committee on Interstate Also a bill (H. R. 7200) granting an increase of pension to and Foreign Commerce. - Charle H. Lakey; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. By Mr. HAMILTON of Michigan: Petitions of sundry citizens By ~fr. HAYDEN: A bill (H. R. 7201) granting a pension to of the State of Michigan, favoring woman suffrage; to the Com Adelbert Lewis; to the Committee on Pensions. mittee on Woman Suffrage. By Mr. KELLEY of Michigan: A bill (H. R. 7202) granting By 1\Ir. KEN.l\TEDY of Rhode Island: Petitions of S. Raymond an increase of pension to James G. B. Lamb; to the Committee Hawthorne, Mrs.
[Show full text]
Wilson's Fourteen Points and the Treaty of Versailles
Sample Lesson from Exploring History World War I Era Please visit Teacher Created Materials website for information or more samples. www.tcmpub.com/socialStudies Simulations and Activities World War I Wilson’s Fourteen Points and the Treaty of Versailles: Background President Woodrow Wilson addressed a joint session of Congress on January 8, 1918. In this address he stated his “Fourteen Points,” a plan he considered to offer the best opportunity for peace after World War I. Wilson’s speech exemplified his visionary idealism and his practical politics. If taken as a statement of America’s war aims, Wilson was letting the world know that the United States would not be a party to a narrow, vengeful peace settlement. He was providing the belligerent nations with a template for an actual peace accord, and he specifically sought to encourage Germany and her allies to end the war and the horrid bloodshed. By the end of the summer in 1918, Germany and the Central Powers were war-weary and exhausted. Germany’s great offensives launched in 1918 did not result in the hoped-for and long-anticipated victory and breakthrough on the western front. German armies were in disarray and in full retreat all along the front. Panic seized the German Military High Command, and it urgently called upon the government to come to terms with the Allies. The Germans asked for an armistice and a peace settlement based on Wilson’s “Fourteen Points.” The fourteen points are outlined in the student handbook on pages EA-46 through EA-48 and EB-46 through EB-48.
[Show full text]
Ÿþe L E V E N T H R E P O R T O N S U C C E S S I O N O F S T a T E S I N R E S P E C T O F M a T T E R
Document:- A/CN.4/322 and Corr.1 & Add.1 & 2 Eleventh report on succession of States in respect of matters other than treaties, by Mr. Mohamed Bedjaoui, Special Rapporteur - draft articles on succession in respect of State archives, with commentaries Topic: Succession of States in respect of matters other than treaties Extract from the Yearbook of the International Law Commission:- 1979, vol. II(1) Downloaded from the web site of the International Law Commission (http://www.un.org/law/ilc/index.htm) Copyright © United Nations SUCCESSION OF STATES IN RESPECT OF MATTERS OTHER THAN TREATIES [Agenda item 3] DOCUMENT A/CN.4/322 AND ADD.l AND 2* Eleventh report on succession of States in respect of matters other than treaties, by Mr. Mohammed Bedjaoui, Special Rapporteur Draft articles on succession in respect of State archives, with commentaries [Original: French] [18,29 and 31 May 1979] CONTENTS Page Abbreviation 68 Explanatory note: italics in quotations 68 Paragraphs Introduction 1_5 68 Chapter I. STATE ARCHIVES IN MODERN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND IN THE SUCCESSION OF STATES 6-91 71 A. Definition of archives affected by the succession of States 6-24 71 1. Content of the concept of archives 8-19 72 2. Definition of archives in the light of State practice in the matter of succession of States 20-24 74 B. The role of archives in the modern world 25-39 75 1. The "paper war" 25-32 75 2. The age of information 33-39 77 C. The claim to archives and the protection of the national cultural heritage 40-56 78 1.
[Show full text]
HE LITTLE ENTENTE and ROMANIA from the PERSPECTIVE of T LITHUANIAN DIPLOMACY in the 1930S
Revista Română pentru Studii Baltice şi Nordice, Vol. 3, Issue 2 (2011): pp. 265-274 HE LITTLE ENTENTE AND ROMANIA FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF T LITHUANIAN DIPLOMACY IN THE 1930s Dalia Bukelevičiūtė Vilnius University, Faculty of History, E-mail: [email protected] This paper has been presented at the Second International Conference on Nordic and Baltic Studies in Romania: Black Sea and Baltic Sea Regions: Confluences, influences and crosscurrents in the modern and contemporary ages hosted by the Romanian Association for Baltic and Nordic Studies, Târgoviste, May 20-22, 2011 and is prepared as part of postdoctoral fellowship research funded by European Union Structural Funds project entitled ”Postdoctoral Fellowship Implementation in Lithuania”. Abstract: The first diplomatic contacts between Lithuanian and Romanian representatives started in the aftermath of World War I when Lithuania was looking for the protection of her inhabitants who were still refugees in Russia. As Russia became entrenched with Bolshevism and Civil War, the Lithuanian citizens were evacuated through Romanian territory from South Ukraine and Crimea. Lithuania and Czechoslovakia established diplomatic relations in December 1919 and eventually an attempt was made to set up ties also with Romania. As a member of the Little Entente and an ally of Poland, Romania attracted the attention of the Lithuanian government. Romania recognized Lithuania de jure on August 21, 1924 and Dovas Zaunius was appointed as the first Lithuanian envoy to Bucharest. Nevertheless, during the next decade no political or diplomatic contacts between Lithuania and Romania were recorded. With the growing influence of Germany, the Soviet Union and the Little Entente on the international arena, Edvardas Turauskas was appointed on August 27, 1935 as envoy to Romania residing in Prague and later in the year Romania accredited Constantin Vallimarescu for the position of envoy to Lithuania residing in Riga.
[Show full text]
The Secret Serbian-Bulgarian Treaty of Alliance of 1904 and the Russian Policy in the Balkans Before the Bosnian Crisis
Wright State University CORE Scholar Browse all Theses and Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 2007 The Secret Serbian-Bulgarian Treaty of Alliance of 1904 and the Russian Policy in the Balkans Before the Bosnian Crisis Kiril Valtchev Merjanski Wright State University Follow this and additional works at: https://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/etd_all Part of the History Commons Repository Citation Merjanski, Kiril Valtchev, "The Secret Serbian-Bulgarian Treaty of Alliance of 1904 and the Russian Policy in the Balkans Before the Bosnian Crisis" (2007). Browse all Theses and Dissertations. 96. https://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/etd_all/96 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at CORE Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Browse all Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of CORE Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE SECRET SERBIAN-BULGARIAN TREATY OF ALLIANCE OF 1904 AND THE RUSSIAN POLICY IN THE BALKANS BEFORE THE BOSNIAN CRISIS A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts By KIRIL VALTCHEV MERJANSKI M.A., Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”, Bulgaria 2007 Wright State University COPYRIGHT BY KIRIL VALTCHEV MERJANSKI 2006 WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES Winter Quarter 2007 I hereby recommend that the thesis prepared under my supervision by KIRIL VALTCHEV MERJANSKI entitled THE SECRET SERBIAN-BULGARIAN TREATY OF ALLIANCE OF 1904 AND THE RUSSIAN POLICY IN THE BALKANS BEFORE THE BOSNIAN CRISIS be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS.
[Show full text]
Memory of the World Register
MEMORY OF THE WORLD REGISTER The Baltic Way Human Chain Linking Three States in Their Drive for Freedom (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) Ref N° 2008-05 PART A – ESSENTIAL INFORMATION 1 SUMMARY The documentary heritage proposed for inscription in the Memory of the World Register by Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania includes significant and carefully selected documents reflecting the history of the 600 km long human chain - a unique and peaceful demonstration that united the three countries in their drive for freedom on 23 August 1989, the 50th anniversary of the German-Soviet non-aggression pact of 1939 and its secret protocol. On 23 August 1939 foreign ministers of the USSR and Germany - Vyacheslav Molotov and Joachim von Ribbentrop- as ordered by their superiors Stalin and Hitler, signed a treaty which affected the fate of Europe and the entire world. This pact, and the secret clauses it contained, divided the spheres of influence of the USSR and Germany and led to World War II, and to the occupation of the three Baltic States - Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. 50 years later, on 23 August 1989, the three nations living by the Baltic Sea surprised the world by taking hold of each other’s hands and jointly demanding recognition of the secret clauses in the Molotov- Ribbentrop pact and the re-establishment of the independence of the Baltic States. More than a million people joined hands to create a 600 km long human chain from the foot of Toompea in Tallinn to the foot of the Gediminas Tower in Vilnius, crossing Riga and the River Daugava on its way, creating a synergy in the drive for freedom that united the three countries.
[Show full text]
DEFENSE of SECRET AGREEMENTS Ashley S. Deeks
A (QUALIFIED) DEFENSE OF SECRET AGREEMENTS Ashley S. Deeks INTRODUCTION............................................................................................ 714 I. THE SECRET COMMITMENT LANDSCAPE ............................................... 720 A. U.S. Treaties and Executive Agreements ....................................... 721 B. U.S. Political Arrangements ........................................................... 725 1. Secret Political Arrangements in U.S. Law ............................. 725 2. Potency of Political Arrangements........................................... 728 C. Secret Agreements in the Pre-Charter Era ..................................... 730 1. Key Historical Agreements and Their Critiques ...................... 730 a. Seminal Secret Treaties ....................................... 730 b. Critiques of the Treaties ...................................... 732 c. Treaty Registration Requirements....................... 735 2. Covenant of the League of Nations .......................................... 736 3. U.N. Charter ............................................................................. 737 4. Seeds of Non-compliance ........................................................ 737 a. Textual Challenges .............................................. 738 b. Practical Challenges ............................................ 739 II. DEFENDING SECRET COMMITMENTS IN THE CHARTER ERA .................. 740 A. Categories of Commitments ........................................................... 741 1. Intelligence
[Show full text]
THE LITHUANIA BUFFER PROBLEM of 1920 Česlovas Laurinavičius (Lithuanian Institute of History)
LITHUANIAN HISTORICAL STUDIES 23 2019 ISSN 1392-2343 PP. 59–83 https://doi.org/10.30965/25386565-02301003 THE LITHUANIA BUFFER PROBLEM OF 1920 Česlovas Laurinavičius (Lithuanian Institute of History) ABSTRACT The Curzon Line is usually identified as the line of 8 December 1919 (similar to the current eastern border of Poland), running to the east of the Daugavpils-Vilnius-Hrodna railway. Typical historiographical texts state that the Soviet government decided to ignore the Curzon Line after 17 July 1920. But in fact, the Red Army crossed the Curzon Line on 13–14 July and continued to occupy Vilna (Vilnius). Another inaccuracy follows from this one. The prevailing trend is to in- terpret the Lithuanian state’s situation in 1920 as facing one of two ideology-based alternatives: either Lithuania is sovietised, or it is ‘saved’ by Poland, which occupies Vilnius and separates Lithuania from contact with Soviet Russia. But this raises a whole swathe of questions: how should the Lithuanians’ struggle for Vilnius dur- ing the whole interwar period be viewed? How should assistance to Lithuanians from other countries, such as Germany, the USSR and Great Britain, be assessed? Finally, how should the return of Vilnius to Lithuania in 1939 be viewed? There is no answer to these questions, but the possibility of Lithuania as a buffer zone thanks to the Curzon Line, is ignored or hardly analysed at all. Using historical documents from Lithuania, Great Britain and Russia, and referring to the studies by Alfred Erich Senn, this article aims to find an answer to the question, why was the idea of Lithuania as a buffer state not realised in the summer of 1920? The idea that it would be more appropriate to call the line alongside Lithuania established at the Spa Conference ‘the Lloyd George Line’ is also discussed.
[Show full text]