Overseas Intervention Dbq Analysis

666 Words2 Pages

Despite President Woodrow Wilson’s belief that the US had a responsibility to “make the world at last free,” many Americans felt overseas intervention was not justified (Document 3). Wilson thought the US to be the ultimate example of democracy and freedom. He and others supported overseas intervention without thinking of the consequences the intrusion might cause. The many instances of American intrusion overseas from 1870-1920 have evidenced my understanding that US intervention was not justified, in any context.
Ted spoke for many people when he declared himself against American domination over the Philippines (Document 2). Somewhat arrogantly, America claimed sovereignty over the Philippines and that their intrusion was for the good of the world, but Ted realized the sentiment of the people being intruded upon. Recognized …show more content…

Dubbed the “Irreconcilables,” a group of Senators spoke out against the Treaty of Versailles. Senator William E. Borah accurately illustrated the US’ circumstance by indicating “we are sitting there dabbling in [foreign] affairs and intermeddling in [foreign] concerns” (Document 5). He, like myself and others, understood that intruding upon nations overseas was unnecessary and unjustified. Senators who supported the Treaty of Versailles were named the “Reservationists.” They believed that the US was the catalyst of change and, with the failure of the US comes the loss of “the best hopes of mankind” (Document 5). They neglected to understand, however, that the US had no business interfering in the innocent lives of the masses, and that their only accomplishment would be fighting futile and “savage wars of peace” (Document 1). Consequently, there would be no reward, no champion of the world; only destruction, hostility and resentment toward the US, and “the judgment of [our] peers,” across the globe (Document

Open Document