Was Appeasement Justified? Appeasement is an issue that raises a great deal of discussion and many have diverse opinions about how this effected history. For instance, countless historians have gone back and forth in conflict debating on whether this was an appropriate move for Neville Chamberlain to make back before World War ll. Even though appeasement wasn’t the prime decision, for it left Britain in weakness, appeasement was justified because there was no other approach, appeasement was the only way, and it was the mature way to handle the past events in a way to find if peace was possible .
In all honesty, others need to look at how this method was a well-intended plan to see if a peaceful agreement was able to be obtained instead of a costly war. I believe that this was a mature act on Chamberlain's part, for he was able to achieve the ability to comply with Hitler first to see if “peace was possible” (Charmley). This shows how reasonable and thought out his plan truly was. It is important to acknowledge the fact that they could have headed directly toward war, but instead Chamberlain thought that maybe we have a chance of avoiding a major battle. I recognize this as a way of effort to mend bonds with Hitler and steer…show more content… To tell the truth, I don’t regard any other solutions besides war. It was “common sense to make this decision”(Stone). Reason being, since there was no further desire other than war, so I see no sense of why it was so terrible to at least undertake a chance at the opposite. For those who claim that shame was brought toward this leader and his country I’d have to disagree. That is to say that alternatively, he showed courageous bravery. In fact he was the only man that didn’t look toward war, but rather hope. Sure war was bound to happen, yet who is to say that one cannot try to salvage his country and others by the elimination of a higher
