International+Organizations+and+Crises+1919+-+1936+Guided+Discussion

Failure of the International Community. Class:
 * **Pre - Group Discussion Things Mr. Hinze said** **
 * 1) There is no community
 * 2) Why would one country help another? For security, for the benefit of own country.
 * 3) Why do we cooperate with one another in real life? To gain. In the hopes that someone else will cooperate with us to benefit us in the long run.
 * 4) Won't come to the aid of another country unless they believe they will be that in future. ( want help in future)
 * Group Discussion Questions**
 * 1) What were some common problems facing European States in the post-WWI year? How were they to be solved?
 * 2) Unemployment - they didn’t solve that
 * 3) Great Depression (economic meltdown)
 * 4) Tried to create peace by creating new countries -> failed
 * 5) War Debts solved it with reparations.
 * 1) Debt
 * 2) Unemployment
 * 3) Disarm
 * 4) Territorial Disputes
 * 5) League of Nations Will save us.
 * 6) People want to end war.
 * 7) **Create a time line of the post - Versailles treaties and events that appeared to solidify the idea of a lasting European Peace.**
 * 8) Treaty of Versailles (1919)
 * 9) St. Germain (1919)
 * 10) Neuilly
 * 11) Lausanne
 * 12) Washington Conference
 * 13) Dawes Plan
 * 14) **Describe the weakness of the League of Nations. Which was most important? Explain. ( class discussion)**
 * 15) Had theoretical power. Wasn't able to support its decrees. No man power.
 * 16) No Enforcement
 * 17) No standing army
 * 18) Couldn't force the members to act
 * 19) No USA
 * 20) Member states were still self interested.
 * 21) Pre -WWI culture still dominated European Politics
 * Hypothetical Example** : Italy invades Abyssinia, whose going to stop it, the league of nations, because that’s what its designed to do, deal is that if any state is invaded all states will aid. Unfortunately, nothing happens and no one stops italy.
 * What do states gain from helping others?**
 * NOTHING**
 * United states signed a non genocide act, will prevent any genocide. (ex: Rwanda)
 * Non has happened so far, only "genocide - like acts" (Bill Clinton said a lot)
 * If he had said "genocide" the US would have had to fight, wanted to avoid that, even though a very few would have been able to solve it
 * The heroic bill clinton (sarcastic) sent a few hundred marines sent them in to send "americans and their pets" (literally). The marines left and didn’t take anyone else out. Specific instruction of ONLY americans and their pets. And then they left.
 * The United States did not help even though it is genocide by definition.
 * Bill Clinton acted like he didn't know what was happening. He pretended not to know in his notes. KNEW what was happening.
 * Why?
 * The United States would gain nothing
 * Potential Disaster (somalia)
 * Somalia, were trying to so a humanitarian dicision, Osama was living there at the time. Government supported him, Had civil war, bunch of mairnes were on helicopters, and one of the helicopter was shot down in the capital, marines were cornered by a shady militia, drugged, and kicked through the streets on national television.
 * NO $$$, Rwanda doesn’t have oil, or anything, have dirt farms
 * Would be in Debt. ( war = $$)
 * A lot of risk, do not blame Bill Clinton ( morally yes, Mr. Hinze no)
 * Fear of Cheating: if france germany britiain america nad japan, and the united states goes in, are we concerened that the french don’t.
 * International organizations always fail because they are afraid of cheaters.
 * If there is a risk that your neighbor cheats, then always cheat, otherwise your gonna get cheated.
 * No good punishment
 * Relative gains concerns
 * If one country spends more than another.
 * If one country gains more from the same thing than another.
 * One country gaining more, other is losing