Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Instructions
1. Choose a question to which you want to respond. Each question is attached as a post. Your post of 250-300 words goes as a "comment" to that post.
2. For your comment of 100-150 words, in the title put your name and to which student's post you are responding. For example, "Valerie commenting on Zlatka's Post". Put it in the section labeled "Comments to Question #__ ". Do NOT put your comments in the same section where you put your original posts.
ALSO... do NOT go back to previous questions. I will no longer look at those.
2. For your comment of 100-150 words, in the title put your name and to which student's post you are responding. For example, "Valerie commenting on Zlatka's Post". Put it in the section labeled "Comments to Question #__ ". Do NOT put your comments in the same section where you put your original posts.
ALSO... do NOT go back to previous questions. I will no longer look at those.
Grading Periods
6th six weeks...last set!
Choose ONE question (#13-15) to answer in a 250-300 work post. Due Friday May 24.
Choose ONE question (#13-15) to answer in a 250-300 work post. Due Friday May 24.
Comment to Emerald‘s Post:
ReplyDeleteI agree with you when you choose the League of Three Emperors, Nationalism and the Balkan Wars as reasons for the Balkans to be referred to as the "Powder Keg of Europe“ rather than a "Chessboard“.
In my opinion, Macedonia can be seen as an important reason as well for referring to the Balkans as the Powder Keg of Europe.
Macedonia can be regarded as a ticking time bomb. Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece each had the desire to add Macedonia to their territory. The Ottoman Empire wanted to keep Macedonia, as it has traditionally belonged to them. Macedonia caused a lot of tensions, and the fight over Macedonia occurred as a natural consequence rather than in any planned manner: Every country just looked out for themselves and their own interests.
It is therefore true to regard the Balkans as "the Powder Keg of Europe".
(Juliane, 144 words)
Destiny commenting to Tatyana
ReplyDeleteI understand your conclusion that the Balkans should be considered a Powder Keg because all of the Great Powers created tension there that caused wars and a myriad of conflicts that set-up a “flammable” atmosphere. On the other hand, without the interference of the Great Powers, the Balkans could have remained a strategic region with a plethora of people, resources, and land useful to everyone. This is why I think that your answer should be modified to read, “The Balkans themselves were a Chessboard, however tension and involvement by the Great Powers led it to convert to a Powder Keg.” The difference between the two conclusions is that mine addresses a contrast between the Balkans themselves versus the Balkans intertwined with the Great Powers.
Word Count: 126
Brittany commenting to Eric:
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that the term “Powder Keg,” indicates the area needed only a tiny spark to initiate an explosion, however, you state that, the term “Chessboard” is more fitting in this description. For me, it’s the opposite. The evidence you provided in regards to Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece attempting to gain land by strategically using Macedonia as a pawn, is less logical than the fact that these nations were simply newly formed, and trying their best to increase their power. Each nation knew that land equaled power, and they were scrambling, with no strategy to support their movements. If strategies were used, Serbia would have been able to gain Bosnia, and each nation involved in Macedonia would have gotten what they wanted without conflict. This tactic of scrambling implies that these nations were scrambling for power, and any minute incident could send the entire area into great havoc.
(Brittany, 150 words)
Jacquelinne commenting on Jay's post:
ReplyDeleteI agree that the Balkans was explosive; however I believe that the best description for the Balkans would be a chessboard rather than a powder keg. In chess both opponents are striving to capture the king and obtain the win. This can also be said for the Balkans; each nation had different agendas and would do anything to achieve their goals. Also if you have beaten an opponent before then you are more confident and will not have a problem challenging them to play again. These ideas can be seen in the first Balkan war. If it had been a powder keg then they would have all scrambled to attack and it would have been a mess, but from the Italian war, they had noticed that they could defeat the former “king”(Ottoman Empire) of the Balkans if they united and that’s exactly what they did.- Thus making it a Chessboard.
(Jacquelinne, 150 words)
Rodolfo commenting on Alfredo’s post:
ReplyDeleteI agree with you in that the Balkans should be considered more of a “powder Keg” than a “Chessboard”. The depiction of a “Powder Keg” being an area that is ready to explode in any moment with the ignition of a spark more accurately depicts what exactly happened in the Balkans. Tensions in the Balkans occurred due to territorial gains and independence from other nations. After the Treaty of San Stefano, as you said, gave countries a growing feeling of nationalism and fueled by that they began to rebel against other central powers trying to influence them in any way. The Balkan Wars increases the depiction of a “Powder Keg” as we see countries like Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia fighting against the ruling power of the Ottoman Empire as they fought against them for influence in Macedonia, territory. As tensions grew the assassination of Franz Ferdinand sparked WWI.
(Rodolfo, 148 words)
DanThi commenting on Dorian’s post
ReplyDeleteI agree that the Balkans can be seen as a “Power Keg” rather than a “Chessboard” because by fighting over the area, it led to wars in Europe such as the two Balkan Wars and open hostilities between countries such as Serbia and Bulgaria. These countries were constantly fighting over areas in the Balkans like Macedonia and it led to tensions between them. Serbia declared war on Bulgaria, and, although they had with Austria’s help, Serbia still lost to Bulgaria. Ultimately, due to all the fighting over the Balkans, it is a power keg because caused wars, and, because of the alliance system, was one of the causes to WWI. The Balkans is not a chessboard because while countries pick and choose which section to take, they often do not take turns like one would in a chessboard. Instead, they grab and fight over it, resulting in a power keg.
Word count: 150 words
Bilal commenting on Alfredo's post
ReplyDeleteI completely agree on the Balkan's being seen as a "Powder Keg". It was not at all a “Chessboard” because any moves made by European countries in the Balkans were only reactions to events; not completely thought out towards what was happening around them, instead of actions towards a final main objective like in chess. I like the metaphor of European countries adding to the powder within the keg through tensions in the Balkans, nationalism, and territorial disputes. Also each country may not have wanted to necessarily “outfox” the other, but did want to have an edge over rival countries such as Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece’s desire of Macedonia which could give useful coastline for trade; each country having their own claim on the territory. The whole powder keg was sparked, but by the small assassination of Franz Ferdinand which catalyzed it into a huge reaction, causing WWI.
Word Count:148
Emma Weathers responding to David Kassir –
ReplyDeleteWhile I do agree with the main point of your answer, that the Balkans were a “powder keg” rather than a “chessboard”, I disagree with the idea that Balkans had “political instability”. The Balkans were only politically unstable because they were never allowed to be politically stable. The countries were never fully made autonomous, and leaned heavily on larger countries, which gave them a higher likelihood of being politically influenced to represent a view that was not fully independent. If nationalism was as strong an influence as you suggested in your response, then countries would have each formed completely different political views that represented the largest ethnic group. Had the Balkans been able to govern without international influence, we can reason that they may have been able to become a chessboard rather than a powder keg.
word count - 136 words
Daniela Cedillo commenting to Sandra Reyes
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on the “Powder Keg” being a more useful description of the Balkans before World War I.
Countries were fighting over areas in the Balkans like Macedonia and it led to all the conflicts.
Serbia declared war on Bulgaria.Serbia lost this war. I see it being a Power keg not only for war but also because of the alliance system.
The Balkans were also politically unstable.
It was not at all a “Chessboard” because moves made by European countries in the Balkans were only reactions and in chess you take turns and in this case its a "power keg" because you "grab and take."
Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece each had the desire to add Macedonia to their territory. The Ottoman Empire wanted to keep Macedonia. As we know Macedonia caused a lot of problems. The fight over Macedonia was just an effect.So yes i do agree with you that Balkans is a Keg vs a chessboard.
word count :165
Marre commenting on Jay's post
ReplyDeleteWhile I can see your point that the Balkans may have been a Powder Keg, I view the ordeal as more of a Chessboard because of the fact that initially many nations were strategizing and finding ways to step around one another and somehow still get what they wanted. It was incredibly important for countries to consider one another’s current policies and wishes, and after Bismarck stepped down from power it somewhat marked the beginning of the actual game play, while prior it could be described as the stage in which the players were planning out moves to make in response to various situations that could occur.
Word count: 107
Although Just like jay and many others that commented yes it could be said that the Balkans situation was a “powder keg“ ready to “explode” at any minute but looking at it from another point of view, the chessboard is a very good representation of what the Balkans situation was, all main powers had a same goal in mind and it was to gain territory and through gaining territory they would gain power and this would increase the possibilities of them having a greater economy and would show economic and social prosperity. The chess board basically represents the land the pegs are the main powers, what all of the countries have in common is that they all thought they had a “strategic” play to be able and “win” but when you play on a chess board you also have to keep in mind the many possibilities that your opponent might play.
ReplyDeleteWord Cont:150
Eric commenting on Ally’s post
ReplyDeleteI disagree Ally’s view that the Balkans is a “Powder keg”. One reason for the Balkans being a chessboard is because of its unique diversity and coalition of individuals that live there. Many of the nations’ feuds were because they each believe they are entitled to several other territories based off said territory's population. This is extremely evident in the second Balkan War. Serbia fights with Bulgaria, Greece, and Montenegro because each nation thinks the conquered land has more of their own peoples that the other (since Macedonia has Bulgarians in it, Bulgaria believes it should have Macedonia). Along with nationality, the chessboard is also evident in what portions of the territory each nation wants. Serbia aims to claim seafront territory in order to acquire a port, while Bulgaria simply wishes to expand.
Word Count: 133
Note: I'm posting for Eric because he doesn't have access to a computer and did not want to post his blog comment late.