Was America's entrance into WWI justified?

[minionofmidas]

The treaty of Versailles has got a terrible press. For instance, there were still as many Poles in Germany as Germans in Poland after that treaty, so that border must be considered as fair.
Although the treaty didn't stipulate the exact amount of reparations to be paid by Germany, and the British and French demands were grotesquely high, Germany ended up paying about 5 Billion pounds - only slightly more, controlled for inflation, than the one billion we forced the French to cough up after the war of 1870/1 - which didn't destroy anything in Germany.
I for one am thankful the Americans entered this war as well as the one before. Might've come a bit earlier though, that would have been even cooler.

[angus]

First, evidence indicates that the Lusitania was carryin contraband war goods to the United Kingtom.

we had already decided who we thought were the good guys and who we thought were the bad guys, no doubt.  I think that may be the point of the whole question.  I vote yes on the basis that our economic interests better served by picking a side and making sure that side won.  Which side we picked doesn't really matter, does it?  As long as you are on the winning side you have a say in the outcome.  I think it's a stretch, though, to assume fascism wouldn't have become fashionable in Italy and Germany if they hadn't suffered such a humiliating defeat.  As Laloo points out, the Versailles treaty is overrated.  Somebody would bitch and moan about the terms, no matter what.  If you have some knowledge about the stock market crash of 1929, then I think you could say something about the rise of nationalism and fascism in Europe and Asia.  That is, I think Hitler's rise had as more to do with continent-wide poverty than with hurt feelings.  If I'm fat, I'm happy.  If I'm skinny, I'm going to steal from you.  Kill you if that's what it takes to feed my family.  That is how successful life forms operate, and we are the most successful species of all.

[Brambila]

Had we not entered the war in 1917, the war would have ended in 1917 and not been available as the excuse that Lenin used to depose Kerensky.  Unfortunately, Wilson thought like you do MarkDel.  He tried to be both Machiavelli and st. Augustine ("The purpose of all war is peace.") and failed at both.  Without a doubt, Wilson was the worst two-term president we;ve had.  Its harder ro judge one tern or part term Presidents simply because they have less time to do harm, so I'm not prepared to say that Wilson was the worst President of all time, but he certainly is a candidate.

Good show!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, that's incorrect. Germany had few Poles, and Poland had large populations of Germans, Ukrainians, and White Russians, with the majority of the population being Polish and White Russian.

[MarkDel]

Had we not entered the war in 1917, the war would have ended in 1917 and not been available as the excuse that Lenin used to depose Kerensky.  Unfortunately, Wilson thought like you do MarkDel.  He tried to be both Machiavelli and st. Augustine ("The purpose of all war is peace.") and failed at both.  Without a doubt, Wilson was the worst two-term president we;ve had.  Its harder ro judge one tern or part term Presidents simply because they have less time to do harm, so I'm not prepared to say that Wilson was the worst President of all time, but he certainly is a candidate.

Ernest,

OK, this should be worth some amusement...please explain to me how you believe the War would have ended before the end of 1917 if the US had not gotten involved, who would have won and why, and what would have happened in the post-war world to countries like Russia, France, Italy and Germany? Then based on what you claim would have happened, I'll be glad to break that down step by step and explain why it was still the right thing to do to enter the War.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Angus, I will agree with you on one point.  If we were going to get in on the side of, we should have done so sooner.  1915 after the Lusitania would have been an excellent time.  Not only would the war have ended sooner so that we could have avoided the Bolsheviks, but the US could have gained some of the German pacific colonies such as Western Samoa and either the Marshall Islands or the rest of the Marianas.  At a little over 250,000 (about half of Wyoming's) , the combined population of Western Samoa and American Samoa, combined with the fact that most of the population is bilingual in English and the Samoan dialect of Polynesian, would make it possible for Samoa to be admitted as our 51st state.

[angus]

Angus, I will agree with you on one point.  If we were going to get in on the side of, we should have done so sooner.  1915 after the Lusitania would have been an excellent time.  Not only would the war have ended sooner so that we could have avoided the Bolsheviks, but the US could have gained some of the German pacific colonies such as Western Samoa and either the Marshall Islands or the rest of the Marianas.  At a little over 250,000 (about half of Wyoming's) , the combined population of Western Samoa and American Samoa, combined with the fact that most of the population is bilingual in English and the Samoan dialect of Polynesian, would make it possible for Samoa to be admitted as our 51st state.

I was thinking along those lines, but I became a little ashamed because I'm always bitching about US imperialism.  So it seems a little contradictory to what I thought were deeply help principles.  But yes, at the risk of sounding too Rumsfeldesque, that's pretty much the sort of thing I was referring to with "economic interests."

"The problem with the samoans is that they do not respect the basic decency of the white man's culture."
      --- Hunter S. Thompson, in "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas"

[Dr. Cynic]

WWII was justified because we were attacked by a foreign country that was part of the war, therefore, our entrance was justifed. WWI, however, was not justified. I believe we would have ended up in it anyway, because I believe Germany would continue destroying our ships, and taking American lives, but it was not justified at the time.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Hell no.

[Psychic Octopus]

Wow, Republicans used to "own" this site. I think more Republicans then Democrats posted on this.

[12th Doctor]

Wow, Republicans used to "own" this site. I think more Republicans then Democrats posted on this.

The old Republican core was alot stronger, back in the old days.  We had about a dozen really strong Republican posters.  Over the years, most of those guys have left do to the Liberal takeover, or just the fact that they got lives, and no offense to anyone in particular, but the Republicans who replaced them are of lesser quality.  It's not that there were more Republicans than Democrats, really, just that the intelligent Republican pretense was stronger.

[12th Doctor]

In reality, this forum has just mirrored the country as a whole, over the last six years.

[Psychic Octopus]

Wow, Republicans used to "own" this site. I think more Republicans then Democrats posted on this.

The old Republican core was alot stronger, back in the old days.  We had about a dozen really strong Republican posters.  Over the years, most of those guys have left do to the Liberal takeover, or just the fact that they got lives, and no offense to anyone in particular, but the Republicans who replaced them are of lesser quality.  It's not that there were more Republicans than Democrats, really, just that the intelligent Republican pretense was stronger.

I wish some would return. The entire Rightist group on the site seems to always be fighting a losing battle because of the large leftist group. This site actually used to be competitive in terms of idealogy, after reading the old posts. This site was probably far superior back in 2004/2005.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Wow, Republicans used to "own" this site. I think more Republicans then Democrats posted on this.

The old Republican core was alot stronger, back in the old days.  We had about a dozen really strong Republican posters.  Over the years, most of those guys have left do to the Liberal takeover, or just the fact that they got lives, and no offense to anyone in particular, but the Republicans who replaced them are of lesser quality.  It's not that there were more Republicans than Democrats, really, just that the intelligent Republican pretense was stronger.

I wish some would return. The entire Rightist group on the site seems to always be fighting a losing battle because of the large leftist group. This site actually used to be competitive in terms of idealogy, after reading the old posts. This site was probably far superior back in 2004/2005.

03/04 were good. 05 was a long period of decline. 06 and 07 were pretty bad too. Then it started picking up last year.

[Mechaman]

No.

We had no business being involved with a war of the Big European Egos.

[ChrisJG777]

No.

We had no business being involved with a war of the Big European Egos.

Big European Egos?

Gross understatement.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

As soon as Germany invaded Belgium, the US was justified.  While this may not be the same as in WWII, Germany and Austria-Hungary were certainly not morally good.  The Central Powers were for the most part morally abhorrent regimes; at least Britain and France were liberal democracies, something none of the Central Powers can claim.  Austria had actually spent the last 100 years prior to WWI trying to stifle democracy at every opportunity.  It's a pity the US had not entered in 1914/1915; we could have spared Russia from the Bolsheviks.

[Bo]

Yes. Germany's pursuit of unrestricted submarine warfare threatened American lives, commerce, and interests.

[Хahar 🤔]

As soon as Germany invaded Belgium, the US was justified.  While this may not be the same as in WWII, Germany and Austria-Hungary were certainly not morally good.  The Central Powers were for the most part morally abhorrent regimes; at least Britain and France were liberal democracies, something none of the Central Powers can claim.  Austria had actually spent the last 100 years prior to WWI trying to stifle democracy at every opportunity.  It's a pity the US had not entered in 1914/1915; we could have spared Russia from the Bolsheviks.

The Allies were not the good guys in the First World War.

[The Mikado]

As soon as Germany invaded Belgium, the US was justified.  While this may not be the same as in WWII, Germany and Austria-Hungary were certainly not morally good.  The Central Powers were for the most part morally abhorrent regimes; at least Britain and France were liberal democracies, something none of the Central Powers can claim.  Austria had actually spent the last 100 years prior to WWI trying to stifle democracy at every opportunity.  It's a pity the US had not entered in 1914/1915; we could have spared Russia from the Bolsheviks.

Wait a sec.  You talk about how the Central Powers were abhorrent regimes, then you call on us to get into the war to save Tsarist Russia?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Wait a sec.  You talk about how the Central Powers were abhorrent regimes, then you call on us to get into the war to save Tsarist Russia?

Not Tsarist Russia; save Russia from Bolshevism.  We could have helped stabilize and maintain a more democratic regime; given Kerensky time to create a new, more liberal Russia.

[Bo]

Wait a sec.  You talk about how the Central Powers were abhorrent regimes, then you call on us to get into the war to save Tsarist Russia?

Not Tsarist Russia; save Russia from Bolshevism.  We could have helped stabilize and maintain a more democratic regime; given Kerensky time to create a new, more liberal Russia.

What makes you so sure that the Bolsheviks would not have come to power later in Russia if the U.S. entered WWI?

[Хahar 🤔]

Wait a sec.  You talk about how the Central Powers were abhorrent regimes, then you call on us to get into the war to save Tsarist Russia?

Not Tsarist Russia; save Russia from Bolshevism.  We could have helped stabilize and maintain a more democratic regime; given Kerensky time to create a new, more liberal Russia.

Whatever came under Kerensky would not be liberal or democratic.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Wait a sec.  You talk about how the Central Powers were abhorrent regimes, then you call on us to get into the war to save Tsarist Russia?

Not Tsarist Russia; save Russia from Bolshevism.  We could have helped stabilize and maintain a more democratic regime; given Kerensky time to create a new, more liberal Russia.

The US did occupy Murmansk  and Arkhangelsk in Russia in 1919.

[Bo]

Wait a sec.  You talk about how the Central Powers were abhorrent regimes, then you call on us to get into the war to save Tsarist Russia?

Not Tsarist Russia; save Russia from Bolshevism.  We could have helped stabilize and maintain a more democratic regime; given Kerensky time to create a new, more liberal Russia.

The US did occupy Murmansk  and Arkhangelsk in Russia in 1919.

Yes, but the amount of troops that the U.S. sent to Russia (13,000 I believe) was way too small to topple the Bolshevik regime.

[Free Palestine]

No.  Had we remained completely neutral (no aid to the Entente) there would be no Lusitania, no Zimmerman Telegram, and more importantly, no Hitler or World War II (as we know it).  The outcome of World War I led directly to World War II.  It's interesting, it's like a historical domino-effect.  World War I led to World War II, which led to the Cold War, Korea, Vietnam, and eventually Iraq and Afghanistan.  And what caused this all was our intervention.