Skip to main content

What were the consequences for the USA for rejecting the Treaty of Versailles and the League of nations?

The United States did not suffer any immediate aftermath for rejecting the Versailles Treaty and the League of Nations.  The United States signed a separate peace treaty with German in 1921, thus formally ending the war.  The United States was unable to alter the level of blame leveled at Germany since the chief negotiator, Woodrow Wilson, contracted Spanish Influenza while in Versailles--this gave the British and French more power at the treaty table as they could always point to their losses and say that they deserved reparations more.  As news leaked from the treaty conference that the victorious Allied powers were using the war as an excuse to add to their already-impressive empires, the American people also lost patience with the treaty negotiations, thus giving Senate Republicans more power to go against Wilson and his internationalism.


 The United States started to suffer for its isolationism during the 1930's.  Since the U.S. did not join the League of Nations, there was no country powerful enough to force Japan to abide by the Kellogg-Briand pact which denounced war as a method of settling disputes.  Japan left the League of Nations during its initial invasion of China.  The British and French were too busy with their own economic crises at home to notice German militarization.  While America was not truly isolationist, as it did host the Washington Naval Conference in 1921 and it led the Kellogg-Briand pact, its failure to join the League of Nations was a strong contributing factor to WWII, which was far more costly in terms of blood and treasure than WWI.  

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