In the light of differing interpretations, how convincing is the argument that Hitler's responsibility for the outbreak of The Second World War has been exaggerated

From the instant Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany from January 1933, began to challenge the Treaty of Versailles and adapt an aggressive foreign policy, which heavily contributed to the outbreak of World War Two. Some historians argue that Britain and France were to blame for the Second World War because they did not stand up to Hitler.The historian AJP Taylor argued that Hitler simply continued the aggressive foreign policy but others point out that he did not initially intend to the take back Germany's former colonies, this theory is known as the Functionalist argument. On the other hand the other theory which is the Internationalist argument, these historians such as Gerhard Weinberg argued that Hitler had a master scheme all along and that he had planned the Holocaust.

The functionalist view may argue that Great Britain and France were more to blame as they did not stop Germany, eventually they turned a blind eye. Chamberlain proposed the policy of appeasement which made concessions to the dictatorial powers of Hitler, he had done this because the British armed forces were not ready for a world war with Germany in 1938. However appeasement was wrong because Hitler was a dictator who could not be trusted to keep his word, especially because he had made it clear that he wanted an Empire in the East to give German Lebensraum and would only be stopped by war. Appeasement also made Britain look weak and encouraged Hitler to keep demanding more and more. Not only that but Britain, France, Italy and Germany agreed to meet in Munich to hold a conference to find a peaceful solution to the Sudetenland Crisis because an invasion of Czechoslovakia would tip the balance of power in Europe in Germany's