Why and why is it justified? What was the mindset of the people that supported or at least tolerated the expansion?..In other words what moral, legal, religious, social, economic and political argument were used to justity this expansion?
213496
There wasn't much of a coherent argument. People were scared because of the Panic of 1893 that the US was running out of natural resources and capital, and businesses feared that they would need to have new land to be able to be competitive in the industrial world. The actual expansion that took place was justified by accusations that Spain was abusing its colonies, and so we had a moral obligation to come to their aid, but that's clearly not why we went to war with Spain.
103270
no it is not justified..the only reson we ewnt to war in the first place was for oil. and i think everyone knows that. This is wat war is all about, thorughout history form ww1 war was about natural resources liek oil. defiantely not justified
411008
What we should do morally and what we should do politically are two different things. Some people seem to have a bad opinion of taking up for people in other countries(Iraq). Personally I would assemble a massive invasion force and decimate any warlord-led regime that preyed on the innocent and then let the people have their government back with promise of a consistent and permanent aid(financial, military, and otherwise). The way I see it whether you believe it is God that has blessed us with these wonderful freedoms we enjoy, or if you just think we're lucky, we have a responsibility to extend our hand to those less fortunate than ourselves.
471587
i ll tell you what i think...\nbecause it is against a lot of people who benefit the non-freedom environment, such as authority religious or governmental etc..\nso when some people gain freedom, sure they had to struggle and pay the price for that because they surely will find lots and lots of powerful opposers..
666233
Good question.  I'd like to hear some good reasons why they think it is acceptable too. Personally I don't think there is ANY valid argument that will fly for coming here illegally.  I'll check back.  Thanks for asking.
239443
wow! Good point.  I think anymore its just an excuse to have a family get together and eat lots of yummy goodies and be with the ones you love. And not so much about the real foundation of ones country.  Who wants to celebrate the slaughter of crude barbarians who just wanted to have the most land?
167536
Certainly has no cause for justification.\nThere is always this fear of Muslims and their capabilities.\nIslam is a Worldwide phenomenon now, all countries of the world (almost) and all tribes and nations(almost) and especially in the USA, Islam is the fastest growing religion.\nIsrael is allowed to flex her muscles anytime and anywhere and no one is willing to reign her in.\nWhen any Muslim country builds-up military strength or starts emerging as a contender in the nuclear arena , as is the case with Iran.\nYou suddenly hear about threat to world peace.\nWhat two faced politics is the west playing with Muslim countries.\nThe repercussions would be irreparable.
556420
Hilers reason were murder, genocide and to get more realestate to expand the German empire, plain and simple, he had no valid reason to march into Poland to rid it of the Jewish people there as he saw it, to save the Polish people from themselves by purification of the race. He did the same to Vienna. Even is our motive to go into IRAq was to secure oil, in getting Sadam out iof power was a good thing, and if innocents are killed by airstrikes or just renegade Marines, then's that non combatant fatalities for you, there are no innocents in war.
393252
There is no ethical reason for Israel to have their own state in the Middle East. Why should they have been allowed to just come in and take land away from the Palestinian people? If every race of people who have lost land in historical wars were allowed to just come back, then California does belong to Mexico; the American Indians own The U.S.; Northern France belongs to England; Greece owns Cyprus, southern Italy, and Bosnia... The difference with this situation is there was no war for land to be won. The Zionists just came in, with some minor support from Europe, and took the land. If the Ottoman Empire had chosen to be against Germany in World War I, Palestine would never have come under British control, and the Zionists could have never pressured Parliament to encourage a Jewish migration. Once the Holocaust happened during World War II, a complete and udder disgrace for all humankind, the Zionists had the upper hand, and with Europe domination in the Middle East, they had no problem setting up Israel as a State. Things could have been alright, but some of Israel's leaders wanted to create an Israeli State that controlled lands owned by Jordan, Syria, Egypt, and of course, Palestine. If they had just stayed within their borders, everything would be a lot less violent. Bottom line is, the land belonged to Palestine before Europe gave it to the Israelis.
212179
Do you think that the govt has legitimate authority?  Based on your rationale it cannot, since it all goes back to property theft and ethnic cleansing.  If you do, then you also have to acknowledge that immigration is a matter which can legally be managed by the govt.\n\nDid we steal the land from the indians?  Maybe some of it.  What gets me is that there are rich people who are rich because of land.  But let's trace this back.  At some point someone claimed ownership of the land and didn't have to pay a dollar for it.  That's a load of BS.  So, now I get screwed because someone arbitrarily claims ownership of land.  I don't know how to fix, I just know that capitalism pisses me off sometimes.
143562
I can't believe the extent that people will go in order to justify illegal immigration.  You guys will find any excuse to justify breaking the law.  \n\nAnd how is Made_in_America's statement racist?  I also saw the news and they stated it was Mexicans, not Americans, bringing in the drugs.  \n\nAs far as the lame excuse about "whites" buying drugs, if drugs weren't here, there would be nothing to buy.  Stating that "Whites" buy drugs is a racist remark in itself.
280804
Travis, forgive me if you're right in principle you're may not be right in the form nor in the general reasoning.\n\nAccording to your thought you own that country because you went there, colonized it with the force, made it yours and now you're there and rule. \nIt's right for that reason that, just like you did, anyone else could go there, kick your butt and settle a brand new type of civilization (It will happen eventually but i think you'll be too old or dead to see it happening). \n\nBut that is not the point!\nThe point is simply that the reasoning WE ARE ALL IMMIGRANTS greatly sucks in general for the following reason.\n- It's true the US are a nation of immigrants. But it is also true that, leaving natives aside, it was originally colonized by WHITE CAUCASIANS OF ENGLISH ORIGINS. Therefore, if US are what they are in terms of economy, living standards, etc, that is MAINLY DUE to the organization inprint provided by those ENGLISH WHITE CAUCASIANS. No one is saying that African slaves or Chinese didn't do their part. But we are are not talking about the workers but rather about the neural system that shaped the US as they are today. That was due to WHITE CAUCASIAN ENGLISH PEOPLE (It's not a case if UK is still a power to reckon with economically, while the rest of Europe is going down). That measn that allowing too many illegals or even legals of any nation whose traditions and habits are very different from yours, could or would (longterm) an uneven balancing of the racial groups. In short one new racial/religious group could begin to gain power and exert more pressure to dominate. The thing appears ridiculous untill the amount of WHITE CAUCASIANS is still majority (and strenghtened by the amount of immigrates who share your own values) but it's not said that will always be so, if the US keep allowing in "PIGS AND DOGS" just to show up how democratic they are (Even though after they let in all those people have to control some 200 million telephones to be sure no one is misbehaving). \nOne thing the US and Europe as well should begin to think about, in the light of the recent events is:\n\n1) Stopping immigration flows; especially those relating to some specific ethnic or religious groups.\n2) Begin to expel all illegals, no matter what and regardless of any diplomatic issue \n3) Ensure the racial balance will always be on the white caucasian with afros (whom in good and bad seem to be those who better adapted to the real US values)\n\nSee, i am not an American citizen; I am an Italian who lives in Italy but i see my country infested with immigrants who kill, scrounge, steal jobs, ask for rights they would never give us in their countries, try to force us to ply to their wills (Muslims in particular), organize in gangs (Latinos in general), rape whole families, rob and kill people with a smile and then laugh (Romanians, Albanians), kidnap kids, steal and scrounge off the government (ROM Gipsies). And all this happens despite our unemployment rate ranges between 8 and 50% in some areas, which should let you understand we DO NOT NEED IMMIGRATES in Italy. I think you don't need many of them in the US either as in most cases all what they do is working for 1/10 of what any american would do, killing the job market.\nWhat a pity your reasoning was based on FORCE, while the actual problem is much more complex. But i do see your point and your rage (Which is shared by many others around the world)
312377
This is just one of many ideas that people can misuse.\n\nI believe that Christians are supposed to obey the laws of the land unless and until those laws contradict God's laws.  Currently there aren't any civil laws that fall under that category for me.  It's one of those hypotheticals.  This is the first case I've heard of that used that idea as a defense.\n\nI don't know enough about both sides to speak to whether he was justified or not.  The courts unfortunately, because they are so overloaded, often send children back into homes that are really still unfit.\n\nStill, based on what they showed on the segment I saw, he didn't seem justified to me.
645700
no war can ever really be justified ,unless youre invaded and have to defend yourself.\nbut this does not deter politicians who can justify everything including ,genocide
536799
It was built primarily on justice and equality FOR ALL.\n\nAnd separation of Church and State - allowing religion, just not letting it get dominant.\n\nIt is morally wrong to impose on religion on everyone.
494713
The basis for the modern American economy came from the arrangements made between (large) businesses and government after WW 2.  It has been argued that this relationship has been maintained with varying degrees of "coziness" for the last 60+years and that to maintain the growth of it, and our lifestyles, wars are intentionally created and fought so as to maintain/sustain our economy.\n\nI think it is a valid argument, primarily because Capitalism demands growth, particularly corporate growth, through either an expansion of markets or aquisition of cheap products and/or raw materials (i.e. oil, minerals) thereby assuring low costs of energy and production.  You might want to look up the book, "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" to find out just what methods are used to obtain these cheap materials.  The author has been interviewed on DemocracyNow! with Amy Goodman various times...  (The author used to work for the CIA.)\n\nFurther along the idea, the military is a very profitable industry and shareholders, millions of them, demand that their investments maintain their value.  If there's no NEED for military systems, no wars to fight, the value of their investments fall.\n\nLook into the Carlyle Group and their relationship with the military-industrial complex.  This is but one of many, many examples of how war is good for some - particularly the Bush family...  which I think, is an absolute disgrace for any American.\n\nLastly, there are many good characteristics regarding Capitalism, no doubt - However the *unrestrained* Capitalism we have today in the USA, IMHO simply isn't generally good for America nor the rest of the planet despite the billions of people who are involved for their personal benefit.
664240
"The past formation of the country doesn't matter. " ROFL!!!!!!!  Another one who wants to abolish the consititution. \n\nI understand the original poster's point, because I took the time to understand it rather than jump to emotional irrational arguments.  The point is that humans will always have some group that's 'different' that they will pick on and blame for their problems, rather than looking internally.  It's that easy answer/instant gratification syndrome.  \n\nI'm not going to debate the pros and cons of immigration and illegal immigrants.  We all have our opinions and most people don't care to see reason on either side.  It's just a hot button on a forum like this.