what were mussolini's affects on the war?
358655
Mussolini had not affect on the come of world war 2 because\neverytime he start a fight hilter had to save.  \nAs World War II (WWII) approached, Mussolini announced his intention of annexing Malta, Corsica, and Tunis. He spoke of creating a "New Roman Empire" that would stretch east to Palestine and south through Libya and Egypt to Kenya. In April 1939, after a brief war, he annexed Albania. Mussolini decided to remain 'non-belligerent' until he was quite certain which side would win.\n\nOn June 10, 1940 Mussolini finally declared war on Britain and France. On October 28, 1940 Mussolini attacked Greece. But after initial success, the Italians were repelled by a relentless Greek counterattack which resulted in the loss of 1/3 of Albania, until Hitler was forced to assist him by attacking Greece as well. In June 1941, Mussolini declared war on the Soviet Union and in December also declared war on the United States.\n\nIn 1943, following the Axis defeat in North Africa, setbacks on the Eastern Front and the Anglo-American landing in Sicily, most of Mussolini's colleagues (including Count Galeazzo Ciano, the foreign minister and Mussolini's son-in-law) turned against him at a meeting of the Fascist Grand Council on July 25, 1943. King Vittorio Emanuele III called Mussolini to his palace and stripped the dictator of his power. Upon leaving the palace, Mussolini was swiftly arrested. He was then sent to Gran Sasso, a mountain resort in central Italy (Abruzzo), in complete isolation.\n\nMussolini was replaced by the Maresciallo d'Italia, General Pietro Badoglio, who immediately declared in a famous speech "La guerra continua a fianco dell'alleato germanico" ("The war continues at the side of our Germanic allies"), but was instead working to negotiate a surrender; 45 days later (September the 8th) Badoglio would sign an armistice with Allied troops. Badoglio and the King, fearing the German retaliation, fled from Rome, leaving the entire Italian Army without orders. Many units simply disbanded, some reached the Allied-controlled zone and surrendered, a few decided to start a partisan war against the Nazis, and a few rejected the switch of sides and remained allied with the Germans.\n\nRescued a few days later in a spectacular raid planned by Nazi General Kurt Student and carried out by Otto Skorzeny, Mussolini set up the Italian Social Republic, a Republican Fascist state (RSI, Repubblica Sociale Italiana) in northern Italy. He lived in Gargnano during this period, but was little more than a puppet under the protection of his liberators. In this "Republic of Salò", Mussolini returned to his earlier ideas of socialism and collectivization. He also executed some of the Fascist leaders who had abandoned him, including his son-in-law, Galeazzo Ciano. During this period he wrote his memoirs entitled My Rise and Fall.
1136933
I agree, Hitler was more evil. Mussolini was just a petty criminal who was bent on squeezing everything out of Italy that he could.
355397
Mussolini\n-Fascist Italy\noNever entirely controlled\n-Embittered war veteran, from working class\n-manipulates way into power\nobullies way and forces Victor Emmanuel to concede power to him\noappeals to disgruntled veterans\noanti-communist and initially anti-liberal\noappeals to conservative, powerful bourgeoisie elite\nodoesn’t ever make it completely state run economically for this reason\nogood speaker/propagandist \noRaises political awareness for party\nItaly’s Fascist party\n•Anti communist\n•Bitter about not getting territory in Africa for trade from Treaty of Versailles\n•Idea of reinvigoration, revitalization of Italy\noUses Ancient Roman propoganda\n•Blame on socialists, communists, and those who slighted them at Versailles\n•Appeals to Catholics (agenda of the Vatican), conservatives, landowners, industrialists\noPromises jobs, restore ancient glory, patriotic nationalism, economic progress, industry, formidable military\noNot completely totalitarian\nAllows some bourgeoisie independence to maintain support\nIe) economic freedom\noRelationship with Hitler\nHitler needs alliances/ports there\nBoth need African territory\n-March on Rome, 1922\noPropaganda \noPolitical act\noSeizes capital of country to compel King to support fascist party\n-Black shirts\noMussolini’s thugs, not systematic, just beat up people\noComponent of terror, vigilanty \n-Lateran Agreement, 1929\noCreates Catholic state\noVatican support of fascist agenda\noWise political alliance\n-Invasion of Ethiopia, 1935\n\n\nMussolini and fascism in Italy\nMussolini hated liberalism; his movement was the first fascist movement--a halfway house between conservative authoritarianism and modern totalitarianism.\nThe fascist seizure of power\nPrior to 1914, Italy was moving toward democracy but with problems: Catholics, conservatives, and landowners hated liberalism and the country was divided.\nOnly in Italy did the Socialist party gain leadership prior to 1914.\nThe First World War and postwar problems ended the move toward democracy in Italy.\nWorkers and peasants felt cheated because wartime promises of reform were not carried out.\nNationalists felt cheated by the war settlement.\nThe Russian Revolution energized Italy's socialists into occupying factories and farms.\nBy 1922, most Italians were opposed to liberal, parliamentary government.\nMussolini's Fascists opposed the "Socialist threat" with physical force (the Black Shirts).\nMussolini marched on Rome in 1922 and forced the king to name him head of the government.\nThe regime in action\nMussolini's Fascists manipulated elections and killed the Socialist leader Matteotti.\nBetween 1924 and 1926, Mussolini built a oneparty Fascist dictatorship but did not establish a fully totalitarian state.\nMuch of the old power structure remained, particularly the conservatives, who controlled the army, economy, and state.\nThe Catholic church supported Mussolini because he recognized the Vatican as an independent state and gave the church heavy financial support.\nWomen were repressed, but Jews were not persecuted until late in the Second World War.\nOverall, Mussolini's fascist Italy was never really totalitarian.\n\n\nthose are my AP euro notes on Mussolini
745029
The U.S. Civil War was the eventual impact of States Rights on the North and South.\n\nThe South claimed that slavery was a State rights issue, although the war was more about States rights than slavery.  The South seceded due to State rights.
387269
World War II: The Impact at Home\n\nThe quick fall of France to the German army in 1940 shook the strong pacifist sentiment of the American public. Suddenly, Great Britain alone stood between Nazi Germany and the United States. Once the United States was fully committed to the war in December of 1941, patriotism soared in American society. Americans' willingness to carry out blackout and civil defense drills; to recycle metals, paper, and even cooking fats; to work longer hours, but to have fewer consumer goods to buy with their salaries demonstrated the nation's strong support for the war. There were political changes as well, as the country began to shift to the right. \n\nhttp://us.history.wisc.edu/hist102/lectures/lecture21.html\n\nWhat effects did WWII have on women in America?\n\nWomen began to do the jobs that the men used to do. They worked in factories, steel mills, and on fighter planes. A woman who worked in an industrial or manufacturing job was refered to as "Rosy the Riviter".\n\nWomen married earlier in life, had more children and relied much less on their husbands after the war. The divorce rate in the United States and Britain skyrocketed, compared to previous years. Women held higher paying jobs than in pre-war years, and this caused some conflict when men were discharged from the military and wanted their old jobs back, which were now held by women.\n\nWomen went into the workplace and never looked back. They took over factory jobs, drove trucks, flew military aircraft across the Atlantic Ocean to England, and numerous other jobs that had traditionaly been open only to men. Once the men returned from the war the women were more independant than ever and would never be content to sit at home again.\n\nWomen played the role of helping fabricate weapons and bombs and all the equipment the soldiers would need. Women never set foot on the battle field but they also were nurses and assistants and that helped alot since they needed medical treatments\n\nhttp://www.faqfarm.com/Q/What_effects_did_WWII_have_on_women_in_America
363145
Mostly opportunity. Italy was heavily populated and had few jobs at all. Employment was the main concern.
408659
"In July 1923, Mussolini was able to secure a new electoral law from the parliament. The new law provided that any party, having 25% of the votes in a general election, should receive two-thirds of the seats in the Chamber of Deputies. Mussolini immediately arranged for elections to the Chamber of Deputies in April 1924. In an atmosphere of intimidation and violence, with the Fascist Militia using strong-arm methods, the 'National List' presented by the Fascists obtained 63% of the roses."
1025286
I don't think it was Mussolini, but then again because of him, so many Italian mafiosi fled to America. I would have to say Mario Puzo, and the reason for that is his book and movie "The Godfather." They were kind of like a guide to being a mobster. Its kind of funny because even though what happened in the book and movie would never happen in real life, mobsters would try to copy the images in "The Godfather", which in turn made Hollywood copy from the mobsters.
290464
Ok.....a full answer to this would take 200 pages minimum.  This is the stuff graduate thesis are made of....but to summarize.........\n\nYou have to change how you view what WW2 was.  It was essentially a late and last ditch effort for a newly resurgant Russian and German empire to expand territory.  Both countries have always had flexible borders (borders that often change) over their histories.  And Russia in particiular has always sought expansion for warm water ports.  If you look at the geography of it......Germany and Russia are natural rivals.  This is why Russia so distrusted any form of a unified Germany following ww2....Russia has always seen invasions from German territory...even before there was a Germany.  In the early-mid-late 30's both countries were already expanding.....but the Germans were bogged down with Yugoslavia and Poland, and the Russian expansion was bogged down in Finland.  Both leaders also distrusted their militaries....and had to consolidate domestic power at various times.  The alliance/non-agression pact was always meant to be a temporary measure.  Hitler rose to power screaming about communism and socialism.  He was always a direct rival of Stalin.  Stalin and the communist party in Russia saw Hitler as an enemy of the proletariat...and historically feared Germany.  In other words both Stalin and Hitler knew that they were going to be fighting at some point.  The non-agression pact was a mutual agreement to take care of other concerns before this happened.  Germany over came it's problems/obstacles before the Soviets did (they had a 70 year advantage on industrialization, and a more centralized/homogenous population) and broke the Warsaw Pact first.  Stalin's reaction was simple disbelief....and when he did find out the invasion was real he hid for days inside of a bunker and Russia was in chaos.  He finally emerged...and ww2 was fought on the the plains of Russia.  To say that ww2 was a land war between Germany and The Soviet Union would not be too far off the mark.  Both sides benefited from the non-agression pact....but Germany was quicker to take advantage.  As far as appeasement.....the initial German expansion was more bluff than anything else.  THe german war machine could quickly have been stopped in places like Czeck.  To understand appeasement you have to understand the Versailles treaty (the treaty/surrender that ended ww1).  The German State lost territory, had to make reparations, etc.  They had limited military production.  The French (who suffered the worst of ww1) were the primary driving force behind the humiliating (to German thinking) Treaty of Versailles.  The English always felt the sanctions on Germany were unfair and unenforcable.  Because of this....when the Germans entered areas like the Sudatland......the British saw it as fair.  The french lacked the strength or will to fight...especially without international support.  By the time that Germany entered Poland (a mutual invasion with Russia actually), their war machine and industry was far greater...and Hitler's domestic power was far more consolidated.  The Germans already had a huge buffer zone.  Appeasement lead to the inevitable and eventual war with a stronger Germany.
484118
They all thrived in situations during economic difficulties.  Stalin's communist party wasn't making much progress, but continually said things would get better.  Mussolini helped turn around the economy with things like having women turn in their gold rings to government in exchange for strong iron rings.  Shows strength and loyalty ot the state. Hilter came in after WWI reparations and the depression had taken its toll.  He blamed the allies and Jews for all of Germany's problems and encouraged people to rise up and be proud to be German.\n\nAll three also silenced critics of government.  If you complained about anything you could be killed by all three governments.  All had secret police working for them to crush any other political parties and opposition.
433985
I don´tt know if i can give you six for each, and it depends where you live to determine it. It played a role in trying to prevent Germany from further invasions, acts of war... but mainly to redistribute territories to european allies and to see who was going to pay for reconstruction. Most the Allies would say:\n\nStrengths:\nGave peace to a long war.\nDemilitarization of parts of Germany\nGeographical Redistribution of Germany\n\nWeaknesses:\nThey treated Germans so bad, that they felt cheated. The established Weimar Republic failed misserably (no work, hyperinflation) and that led to the rise of Hitler to power. Germans found a lost national pride with Hitler speech.
685742
My most educated guess is that it was Italy's invasion of Ethiopia in the 1930's. There was no opposition to the event by the other European countries.
981400
The Question is great.\nIn 1936/9 the French and English let Franco take over in Spain with Hitler and Mussolini's support. It kept the Communists out of Europe. It had little strategic consequences.\nThe choices now are much more serious and the consequences nuclear. \nStay tuned to see the results of the greatest challenge to the worlds future.\nWestern public opinion has it's head deeply buried in the.........
1178386
As a result of WWI, Germany got trampled politically and economically.  Germany was forced to pay huge monetary remunerations since it was blamed for causing WWI.  Internally their money was undervalued and inflation was rampant.  One of the parties trying to gain control in the government was the Nazi party.  Hitler came to power in I believe 1933 with promises of a better quality of life, prosperity and (a big factor) a plan to regain Germany's status on the world stage.  He violated conditions set down in the Treaty of Versailles of June 28, 1919.  He built up the military beyond the treaty's limits i.e. built ships bigger than allowed, more tanks than were allowed, planes, etc.\n  Also, he had the idea that someone had to be blamed for the general poverty of the populace.  This was deemed the "Jewish problem".\n    The possible precursor to WWII was his being given the "Sudetenland" in Czechoslovakia.  Instead of the rest of Europe standing up to his aggressive invasion plans, it was thought if he was given some land he'd be happy and go back to his trampled nation.  Well, as we all know, that didn't happen.
18136
I don't think Germany ever felt that way.  The feelings of humiliation that developed due to the loss of WWI and the requirements for Germany under the Treaty of Versailles contributed to the fall of the Weimar republic, the rise of Hitler and thus to World War II.
527283
In my view, nothing he did pre-war was particularly noteworthy.  The economy lifted out of depression due to the government's exorbitant defense (correction: offense) spending.  So the great economic turnaround of 1930s Germany was thanks to the mass-production of war materiel that could (and would) cause the deaths of millions of people.  Not exactly what I would prefer to spur the economy, and I say that not just because he's Hitler, but because I deplore it when any civilization or nation (including my own) gains in wealth and power at the expense of the lives of innocent people.\n\nAs regards national pride, I believe that national pride contributes to an unhealthy militaristic spirit.  Throughout history, pride in one's nation and one's own kind has led to fear and hatred of that which is foreign or alien.  Only when a people's "national pride" has sufficiently been whipped into a frenzy are those people capable of committing acts of war on that which is foreign to them.\n\nI grant that the German war machine was among the mightiest in history - but so what?  All that effort - the enormous amounts of economic and human capital that went into developing that war machine - wasted in wars of aggression and acts of brutality against those who look or talk or act or believe differently.  Germany could be one of today's superpowers and could have averted the Cold War and the subjugation of millions of people by Communism in Eastern Europe and the misery of millions more in "domino theory" wars around the globe had Hitler not wasted the best and brightest of a generation.
419707
The Germans were severly oppressed after their defeat in WW1 and the civil unrest allowed Adolph Hitler to win their confidence, promising to restore Germany's power and dignity.  \n\nHitler then set about a world conquest program that included the other Axis powers.  He lost.  So did Italy and Japan.  So did everyone else in many respects.  The Baltic nations were swallowed into Communism by the USSR, England was devastated and blood ran deep in most of Europe.\n\nJohnny