Germany's loss of land in the Treaty of Versailles was fair. How far do you agree explain?

I agree with the statement “The Treaty of Versailles was a fair settlement” to a certain extent. I know that Germany had been unmerciful during the war leading to thirty seven million casualties. Therefore “The Big Three”: Lloyd George (Great Britain), Clemenceau (France) and Wilson (USA), the driving forces behind the treaty, need not be merciful in return. When you put the Treaty of Versailles in perspective against World War I it appears to be fair towards Germany. The war had destroyed most country’s economies and a large area of land. These, among many other things, needed to be restored. Considering that Germany had been defeated and they were largely at fault for the start of the war it was fair to make them pay reparations. After the war Germany was still a serious threat to the world. People believed that they would not give up. Therefore one of the main aims of the peace treaty was to make sure that the risk of Germany attacking again was as low as possible. The treaty of Versailles was fair to take away Germany’s armed forces and colonies as it protected the rest of the world in the short term and punished them.  However, we now know that the Treaty of Versailles failed as the world has seen another, even more horrific war. I believe that the Treaty was unnecessarily harsh and not as fair as it should have been. All of the victorious nations were furious with Germany so at the time very few thought of being fair towards their enemy of four years. This is reflected in the treaty through the reparations Germany was forced to pay. These were outrageously high (£660 million) and later changed. The confiscation of Germany’s territories and colonies and the reduction in their army was also excessively severe. Although this was meant to keep peace in the short term it only angered Germany more, sparking revenge. War Guilt was also an unnecessary condition that publicly humiliated Germany triggering resentment. This was tactlessly done to compensate the victorious public who desired a subject to blame  for the loss of their loved ones. Similarly the rest of the treaty was too harsh because the rulers had to please their countries if they wished to be re-elected. Germany did not get any second chances from the peace treaty. Their pride majorly suffered at the forced decrease in their army and they were not able to improve themselves in their colonies as those were repossessed causing jealousy and anger. The peace treaty unfairly focused too much on punishing Germany for what they did wrong rather than trying to maintain peace. This is because the public was too angry to think intelligently about preventing future losses.   In general I believe that the Treaty of Versailles had good intentions however mainly due to public pressure it was too harsh and unfair. The Big Three had an impossible task and pleasing everyone was not probable but I believe they did the best that they could at the time. However the treaty was largely unfair and too severe contributing to World War II.

Explanation:

the noble might have thought that the system was far because they had lot of things and riches and the serf would have thought that the feudal system was un fair because of the way they were treated.

seeing as no choices were provided, i'll do my best to answer it from knowledge.

job specialization promotes work ethic to the person doing the job. he/she may be strong in the arms and able to lift things, specializing him/her in a job where you lift and carry.