The United States envisioned to avoid soviet expansion, but democratic idealism instead. The United States gave military aid to prevent soviet expansion. Each thought that their own language, views, and ideologies were the only valuable and worthy visions. Initially, the United States mistrusted the Soviet Union after World War I for taking Russia out of the war, opposed of a communist driven state, and did not trust the soviets as an ally of Nazi Germany. Soviets distrusted Americans because of the delayed attack on Germany.
Furthermore, tensions between Mexico and the U.S. halted the plans for a transcontinental railway. A further treaty had to be made, Gadsden Purchase (1853), but resulted in more disputes over the U.S. border and failed to resolve the issues between Mexico and America. The political instability was shown in the reaction to the Wilmot Proviso “the acquisition of any territory from the Republic of Mexico by the United States, by virtue of any treaty which may be negotiated between them…neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any part of said territory”. The North supported it as they thought slaves’ jobs could be given to free workers, and the South opposed it because they saw slaves as their property (under the Constitution) and feared more free states. This is because Free states would mean plantation owners would lose income and political power.
Neither Hitler nor Stalin had foreseen that this would lead to the Western Allies declaring war on Germany on the first of September 1939. In actual fact Hitler and Stalin believed they had prevented the outbreak of war with the signing of the Pact not brought it on (Taylor 1963). The Pact convinced Hitler that the Western Powers could not now intervene to save Poland. To the Western Powers the Pact proved how unreliable the Soviets were. However, Britain had already based their strategy on the assumption that the USSR would remain isolated from the conflict, or even if they did get involved their military would be of little help to anyone, thus had no influence the decision to go to war.
However, it was clear that they had no choice; Germany was obviously incapable of undergoing more war. If Germany were to be invaded by the Allies, it would’ve been very difficult for them to defend themselves since they had been weakened by the war. Furthermore, Germany hadn’t taken part in the Paris peace conference; only the winning countries had been allowed to participate. When Germany had signed the armistice in 1918, they had thought they were accepting the fourteen point peace plan formulated by the USA President Wilson. Since this peace plan was based on fair and democratic ideas, Germany thought the Treaty would also be honest, but when, the 7th May 1919, the Treaty was put ahead of the German government, their expectations were proved
The League’s aims were to stop wars, improve the quality of people’s lives and jobs, to encourage disarmament and to enforce the Treaty of Versailles which concluded World War One. The main aim although was to create a better world by means of peaceful negotiations rather than resorting to violence. All the peace treaties had the Covenant of the League of Nations written into them, and in this way many leaders hoped that the League would be recognized by the most influential countries. This was the case for Britain and France as the both wanted peace and France wanted protection from Germany as they were militarily weaker. However, the United States of America’s unwillingness to participate in the League, even though her
This resulted in the failure to enforce the norm strictly and prevent the conflict. At the dawn of the conflict, Soviet President Nikolai Podgorny sent a letter to Khan stating that the conflict should be solved politically without force, while further mentioning the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in guiding their opinion. This letter exemplifies that the USSR did play an active position in the beginning of the conflict in conveying Khan to stop the genocide. In this way, Soviet interests of the Cold War were put aside to some extent. However, once the geopolitical intentions of the US and China were made clear, the USSR turned towards pursuing their own Cold War interests.
The nation would be more capable of deciding what was best for the other underdeveloped countries in the surrounding region. The diplomacy was based upon the American belief that American ideals were the way of the future for the world; what was good for the US must as well be good for the countries of Latin America. The Hispanic newspaper Regeneración of April 13, 1912, quoted Robert M. La Follette's criticism of the diplomacy. He regarded the diplomacy as an outpost, intervening the nations in Central and South America by imposing the US's method and supervision. The diplomacy often resorted to military power as a solution to the internal conflicts within the region.
Kennedy took a different, more violent approach in confining, and overall stopping the spread of communism. Truman said in his University of Washington Speech that money would be sent to any country that needed financial support in combating communism (Kennedy). In addition to this, he had the same views for military aid. His mission was to support any country fighting communism with the proper weapons if the Soviet Union were to attack (Kennedy). The biggest contrast between Kennedy and the other two presidents was that Kennedy was not afraid of war.
“When the British Parliament turned to its next attempt to tax the colonies, this time by a set of taxes which it hoped would not excite as much opposition, the colonial leaders organized boycotts” (A People’s History of the United States, 1492-Present 62) is an example of how the colonies disobeyed England. Adams stated, he wanted “"No Mobs- No Confusions-No Tumult" (A People’s History of the United States, 1492-Present 63) against the British. He supported civil disobedience with England, but not with the US because he felt that people had a voice in their government unlike the people who had a
In 18th century, before the rise of modern capitalism, the nature of war was very different from the war during the ancient times. War was no longer to defeat someone with the purpose of eliminating another. The aim of war was to determine who should rule the nation. Under the system of the means of production and free enterprise, it is never a concern of citizen whether his/her country is big or not after invading others. Because they will not get any profit from it.