united states participation in world war one
how was the participation of the united states in world war one surprising or strange?
kln08 Tue 13/05/08 20:51
To subscribe to this question you need to
sign in to the AnswerBank or register
if you are not already a member. All you need is a valid email address to register.
|
|
It was'nt either of them.
The U.S had followed a policy of "isolationism" but the sinking of the Lustitania put the weight of public opinion against Germany. Britain had huge debts to America because of the conflict so American interests lay in Britain ending the war on favourable terms. Although part of Wilson's election success was based on keeping them out of the war.
On the day war broke out a British cable laying ship cut Germany's only telegraph wire to America this meant it had to send all it's diplomatic mail via unsecure routes, British inteligence broke the German codes and deciphered the Zimmerman telegram (which we stole from Mexico to protect our cover) this guaranteed German materiel support for a Mexican attack on Texas (to help keep America out of the war) when we handed this to the U.S Wilson declared it as an act of war and the rest is history.
|
|
|
as123everton states it was niether.
the sinking of the lusitania in 1915 was a mythical reason,
as the US only came in to the war in 1917, when the russians went home to have their revolution as they did not want to give the impression of being on the side of a communist country, which would have been strange
|
|
|
steve5's answer I don't understand - The sinking of the Lusitania was real, not mythical. The fact that some of the dead were Americans was real, not mythical. What is "mythic" about the story is the way in which the sinking (which took place in 1915, 2 yrs before the USA entered WWI) is seen as the one and only reason for America going to war - it wasn't, but it was a factor especially in the court of public opinion.
At the start of WWI Russia was not a communist country, so by steve5's argument, the USA would have had no reason not to fight on the same side. In fact America declared war in April 1917 following the sinking of 5 American ships by German U-boats and 6 mths before the Russian Revolution.
The entry of the United States into a war in Europe was surprising and strange. America had spent a lot of time in the early 1900s arguing that the Americas were its sphere of influence and interest and that Europe should keep out of its backyard. It had intervened in the dispute between the UK and Venezuela over the boundaries of British Guyana, to the UK's disadvantage. The corrollary was that America had 'no interest' in Europe. Given the enourmous influx of European refugees in the 19th century and continuing into the 20th, America had a potential problem if disputes in the 'old countries' spilled over into the US. German-American organisations were particularly effective in arguing that the US should stay out of WWI. Much of the press agreed with them. Wilson was elected on an anti-War ticket. The Republicans were divided. Big business saw profits in keeping out of the war and supplying both sides, and only risk by joining in.
Even the Zimmerman telegram on its own would not have provided the catalyst for a US entry into the war. People were (and still are) arguing about its authenticity. If the U-boat campaign hadn't tried to be quite so effective, Congress might still have kept America out of WWI.
|
|
|
dundurn, you are correct that the sinking of the Lusitania did occur. But that was not what I stated.
The sinking of the Lusitania was a wrongly percieved mythical reason why the US entered WW1, because of the timing 1915-17
|
|
