Skip to main content

What should have been the role of the United States in the world in the early twentieth century? Include the Spanish-American War/Filipino...

The answer to this question is, of course, a matter for debate, both for modern historians and for people who actually lived through the period in question. The effects of the Spanish-American War and the First World War led to major questions about the proper extent of American involvement in global affairs. The Spanish-American War ended with the Philippines, formerly a Spanish province, in American hands. Many Filipinos who had welcomed the overthrow of Spanish rule hoped to achieve independence, and the result was a bloody war that pitted American troops against Filipino rebels. The conflict raised obvious issues for the United States, itself a former colony, which was now waging a war to deny other peoples their freedom. With the rebellion brutally crushed, the United States controlled the Philippines, which gave it a major strategic foothold in the Pacific. Many Americans, then and later, viewed this action as immoral and contrary to American values, and it would be very difficult to argue that the United States should have played such a role in the Philippines, or indeed that the Spanish-American War was justified (though Cuba received at least nominal independence from Spain as a result of the war.) 


As for World War I, the United States under President Woodrow Wilson attempted to maintain neutrality in the conflict, but a desire to maintain trade rights with the belligerents, especially Great Britain, led to war due to Germany's decision to attack ships headed for Britain using submarines. After the war, Wilson's hope to achieve a "peace without victory" was scuttled by the harsh terms of the Treaty of Versailles, which punished Germany by imposing massive reparations. The war prompted a major debate in the United States, as the League of Nations, established by the Treaty, raised concerns that the US might be required to participate in foreign wars. The Senate refused to ratify the Treaty, and the United States thus never joined the League of Nations. The peacekeeping body was thus lacking the support of the most powerful nation in the world. In this case, it might be argued that the United States should have maintained neutrality in the war, and that it only entered the conflict to protect business interests. However, some might argue, as Wilson did, that free trade and freedom of the seas had to be maintained. Additionally, the isolationist stance taken by the Senate after the war can also be criticized, as it weakened the peacekeeping body in advance of the rise of aggressive totalitarian dictatorships around the world. Any answer to this question should take a position on these issues.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more