Given what you have learned, what alternatives do you think Chamberlain might have had? Could he have negotiated a stronger peace treaty with someone like Hitler? Should he have refused to negotiate at all? - discuss

Chamberlain did what he could (should not have done it in any other way).

Explanation:

Chamberlain in his position as UK Prime Minister, going to such events as the Munich Conference, Germany was prepared for both options if Hitler refused or not. Hitler only agreed to stall time and his preparations for Czechoslovakia were already underway. If Chamberlain demanded better terms then Hitler would most likely refuse to sign it. It is possible if Britain and France had said something about the Remilitarization of the Rhineland then Hitler would have stopped these moves of aggression. Obviously, this move was a huge gamble for Hitler that paid off since France and Britain lacked the knowledge of a semi-weak Germany; instead, they saw legions of soldiers marching into the Rhineland fearing another war would come. If Chamberlain refused to negotiate, then that throws diplomacy right out the window and both Britain and France did not want to start another war so that is out of the question.

new evidence is discovered.

oversights and errors are corrected,

new technology is applied to evidence.

answer: ensure protection from communism

explanation:

the north atlantic treaty was largely dormant until the korean war initiated the establishment of nato to implement it, by means of an integrated military structure: this included the formation of supreme headquarters allied powers europe in 1951, which adopted the western union's military structures and plans.