Pros And Cons Of The Potsdam Conference

540 Words2 Pages

To end World War II in 1945, two conferences were held between the U.S., the Soviet Union, and Great Britain to discuss how to finish off the war and what to do after it was ended. World War II was one of the deadliest wars in history, with 60 million people dead because of it, and it was a big decision to end it. During the Yalta conference, US president Roosevelt, Soviet leader Stalin, and British Prime minister Churchill met to discuss plans to end the war. Tensions were very high during this conference, and there was an obvious divide, which was made even more evident in the Potsdam conference with Truman and Attlee. While there were positive effects of the Conferences such as the League of Nations being updated by the creation of the United Nations and the countries’ agreement on the punishment of crimes against …show more content…

There were many negative outcomes of World War II and these conferences, but the creation of the United Nations and an agreement to hold trials for crimes against humanity came out of it. The League of Nations clearly did not work to keep peace in Europe, as a second world war broke out while it was in place. The United Nations was similar to the failed League of Nations, but with updated measures put in place to prevent a third large scale conflict. At the Yalta Conference, the US, USSR, and Great Britain decided on specific means to ensure the United Nations success. The League of Nations did not have a way to enforce laws or punish broken laws, which led to its failure, but Europe learned from that and created an improved system. At the Potsdam conference, tensions were still high between the east and west, but what came out of it was an agreement to hold trials for crimes against humanity. People would be held accountable for their actions in the war, and more measures to sustain peace were

Open Document