Why USA annexed most of Mexican teritories  fallowing Mexican far? Compare it with Gulf war?
107299
That was actually the idea of having the Mexican War in the first place, to get all that territory.
643995
First of all, you have several different events mixed together here.  The United States did not take Texas from Mexico in a war (just or otherwise).  A number of settlers in Texas (primarily Americans who had immigrated to Mexico) staged a rebellion in 1836 to break away from Mexico and form their own independant country (The Republic of Texas).  Although the United States did provide some support for the rebels, it was not a war between the US and Mexico and no US troops were directly involved.  Texas was an independant country separate from the US for almost 10 years before it decided to join the US as a state in 1845.\n\nOn the other hand, much of New Mexico was taken from Mexico following the Mexican-American War of 1848 with the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hildago.  In this war, there is little doubt that the US was looking to start a fight as a pretext for getting land (the reason for the war - Mexican troops supposedly crossing the Rio Grande River - was dubious at best).  \n\nHowever, the lower one third of New Mexico did not become part of the US until it was purchased (along with southern Arizona) in 1856 at a cost of $10 million dollars.  It is true that Mexico was ruled by a dictator at the time, but then it was for most of the 19th century and $10 million was probably a pretty fair price for that time period considering how remote and undeveloped the area was.\n\nAs for if the Mexican-American War (and to a lesser degree the Gadsden Purchase) were just... that is largely a matter of opinion.  The answer is probably 'No' by most peoples standards since the US started the war under somewhat false pretenses.  However, it is worth noting that the Spanish/Mexicans themselves had originally taken the land away from the Native Americans in the first place under even less just pretenses.    \n\nIs one thief stealing from another unjust?  There are very few cultures on this planet (including many Native American tribes for that matter) who did not get their land by displacing or forcing away some other group that was there before.  That does not make it right (and has caused much of the hardship and suffering over the history of the world), but neither is it fair to single out just one group and ignore similar offenses by others.  \n\nLastly, it is worth noting that while New Mexico was heavily populated, most of the land taken following the Mexican-American War (including large parts of Colorado and Utah) had NO Mexican settlements at all, was rarely visited, and really did not belong to Mexico (or any other country) any more than saying the entire moon 'belongs' to the US because a few American astronauts briefly walked on one small part of it 30 years ago.
152567
Because Mexico is south of USA
659136
Hey thewanderer862004.  I think you need to read up on American history.  The US did attack and capture Mexico City, but we gave it back because it was 2 weeks after the end of the Mexican-American war in 1848.\n\nHowever, The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, signed on February 2, 1848, ended the war and gave the U.S control of Texas, California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Wyoming.
1169869
I see your point.  I think that the worst phrase ever created was "politically correct". That phrase allows for any group of any kind to claim bias.  I know you are saying that the Mexicans are being held back, but I think they are winning.  They have made an effort to infiltrate this country and breed.  They are winning when our country is catering to their goal.  There are many Mexican activists that will plainly state that the goal of our southern neighbors is to take California.
1143060
WTF? The Gulf of Mexico is a gulf...of Mexico...
673082
After the Mexican-American War, the United States paid Mexico $15 million (the Treaty of Guadulupe Hidalgo) for what is now California, Nevada, Utah, most of Arizona, and parts of Colorado, Wyoming, and New Mexico.  Texas won its War of Independence from Mexico in 1836, and later joined the United States as a slave state in 1845.\n\nThe United States later purchased the southern portion of Arizona, as well as the panhandle portion of New Mexico, in 1853 (the Gadsden Purchase) for $10 million.
530377
First of all, you twit, Mexico isn't a "back door"... Now... if you look at Oregon... hundreds of miles of border... Pacific beach, and Canadian border, and ONE Border patrol officer. ONE. You are worried about Mexico??? \n\nSecond, I don't think we have to worry about the Mexicans crossing our borders WITH GUNS.\n\nMexico can't KEEP their people in their country, so I don't think they want to TRY to take over the USA, cause as you saw on the news, there are MILLIONS of MEXICANS who will NOT go back. They wanna be here? Let them fight for it.\n\nThird, yes, we are "occupying" Iraq, and Afganistan... Iraq... Well, they say we are trying to "make it better for their people"... If they want it "better" they should have to fit FOR it, like WE did 200+ years ago...\n\nAfganistan... We NEED to finish the job there.\n\nEDIT***********************\n\nRosita, who answers this question after I did, is an IDIOT.\n\nGeorge W. Bush is NOT finishing a war his father started in 1994.\n\nWTF did you come up with THAT crap???\n\nHere:\nThe First Persian Gulf War, Jan.—Feb., 1991, was an armed conflict between Iraq and a coalition of 32 nations including the United States, Britain, Egypt, France, and Saudi Arabia. It was a result of Iraq's invasion of Kuwait on Aug. 2, 1990; Iraq then annexed Kuwait, which it had long claimed. Iraqi president Saddam Hussein declared that the invasion was a response to overproduction of oil in Kuwait, which had cost Iraq an estimated $14 billion a year when oil prices fell. Hussein also accused Kuwait of illegally pumping oil from Iraq's Rumaila oil field.\n\nThe UN Security Council called for Iraq to withdraw and subsequently embargoed most trade with Iraq. On Aug. 7, U.S. troops moved into Saudi Arabia to protect Saudi oil fields. On Nov. 29, the United Nations set Jan. 15, 1991, as the deadline for a peaceful withdrawal of Iraqi troops from Kuwait. When Saddam Hussein refused to comply, Operation Desert Storm was launched on Jan. 18, 1991, under the leadership of U.S. Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf.\n\nThe U.S.-led coalition began a massive air war to destroy Iraq's forces and military and civil infrastructure. Iraq called for terrorist attacks against the coalition and launched Scud missiles at Israel (in an unsuccessful attempt to widen the war and break up the coalition) and at Saudi Arabia. The main coalition forces invaded Kuwait and S Iraq on Feb. 24 and, over the next four days, encircled and defeated the Iraqis and liberated Kuwait. When U.S. President George H. W. Bush declared a cease-fire on Feb. 28, most of the Iraqi forces in Kuwait had either surrendered or fled.\n\nAlthough the war was a decisive military victory for the coalition, Kuwait and Iraq suffered enormous property damage, and Saddam Hussein was not removed from power. In fact, Hussein was free to turn his attention to suppressing internal Shiite and Kurd revolts, which the U.S.-led coalition did not support, in part because of concerns over the possible breakup of Iraq if the revolts were successful. Coalition peace terms were agreed to by Iraq, but every effort was made by the Iraqis to frustrate implementation of the terms, particularly UN weapons inspections.\n\nIn 1993 the United States, France, and Britain launched several air and cruise-missile strikes against Iraq in response to provocations, including an alleged Iraqi plan to assassinate former President George H. W. Bush. An Iraqi troop buildup near Kuwait in 1994 led the United States to send forces to Kuwait and nearby areas. Continued resistance to weapons inspections led to bombing raids against Iraq, and trade sanctions imposed on Iraq remained in place, albeit with an emphasis on military-related goods until the second Gulf conflict.\n1991 YOU IDIOT.\n\nOh... that was probably BEFORE you were born...\n\nLet me explain, HUSSEIN attacked a neighboring PEACEFUL country, overtook it and refused to leave. The UN
574053
The original premise for invading Iraq was the alleged presence of WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction) and possible ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda.  Both allegations have been proven false since the invasion.  Whether Saddam's overthrow has made the region more stable will not be answered for years, possibly decades.\n\nThere are parallels between Iraq and Vietnam.  In both conflicts, our troops were not fighting an enemy which clearly identifies itself.  Another similarity shared by Iraq and Vietnam is the lack of well-defined goals for victory.\n\nWhile it has been speculated oil was the primary reason for invading Iraq, that remains largely unproven.  Statistically speaking, Canada and Mexico provide the largest chunk of imported crude oil to the United States, followed by Saudi Arabia.  It appears the decision to invade Iraq was based more on socio-political reasons (i.e. establishing a Western-friendly regime) than it was for acquiring natural resources.
102939
The Mexican Cession is a historical name for the region of the present day southwestern United States that was ceded to the U.S. by Mexico in 1848 under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo following the Mexican-American War. The cession of this territory from Mexico was a condition for the end of the war. For the 38 years between 1810, when Mexico declared its independence from Spain, and 1848, the region had formed approximately one-third of the territory of Mexico; prior to that, it had been a part – albeit a remote one, largely without European settlement – of the Spanish colony of New Spain for some three centuries.
294411
America does not offer, because they know that they will not accept.  Mexico, though more impoverished, has a common trait with other countries: the desire to be an autocracy or self-governing country.  Also, many people are already against imperialism-immoral, causes more problems for america, etc- so it would be difficult to convince congress to agree with the decision to take over mexico.
508524
The 1st Gulf War between the U.S. and Iraq, after Iraq invaded Kuwait in the early 90s.  The conflict took place in the Middle East, specifically Iraq and Kuwait.  The reasons for the war have been the subject of debate.  Some say the U.S. fought the war along with British allies to liberate Iraq.  Other people say the U.S. fought the war because Kuwait had a lot of oil and they didn't want American oil interests falling into the hands of Saddam Hussein.  The United States and its allies won. \n\nAnother example is the war fought between the Soviet Union and Afghanistan in the 1980s.  The communist Soviet Union, before collapsing and breaking up into many countries, fought a war in Afghanistan in the 1980s.  The Soviets were trying to take over Afghanistan much as they had done with other regions of the world in their brief 20th century existence.  The Soviets lost the war.  Many Russian Soviet soldiers died.  They were not able to take over Afghanistan and make it part of the Soviet Union.
100731
The Mexican Cession is a historical name for the region of the present day southwestern United States that was ceded to the U.S. by Mexico in 1848 under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo following the Mexican-American War. The cession of this territory from Mexico was a condition for the end of the war. For the 38 years between 1810, when Mexico declared its independence from Spain, and 1848, the region had formed approximately one-third of the territory of Mexico; prior to that, it had been a part – albeit a remote one, largely without European settlement – of the Spanish colony of New Spain for some three centuries.\n\nIt includes all of the present-day states of California, Nevada, and Utah, as well as the portions of:\n\nArizona excluding the region later annexed in the Gadsden Purchase \nColorado west of the boundary of the former Republic of Texas \nNew Mexico west of the Rio Grande and excluding the Gadsden Purchase \nWyoming west of the former Republic of Texas boundary and south of the 42nd parallel. \nThe treaty also specified the U.S.-Mexican border as being at the Rio Grande (Río Bravo del Norte). Previously the portion of Texas between the Nueces River and the Rio Grande had remained disputed throughout the existence of the Republic of Texas. The United States had already claimed the area as part of the Texas Annexation in 1845.
367622
No, the Gulf War was just away for the Bush Regime to take over the areas that they deem as the necessary regions to further their takeover for oil domination. Sorry for them they cannot get what they want....
327690
AMERICAN CITIZENS Were Let Go \nbecause Mexicans showed up to take over thier jobs.
536957
The US-Mexican war happened between 1846 to 1848.  As a consequence of the war the United States acquired the northern half of Mexico. This area later became the U.S. states of California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico and Utah.\n\nThe defeat of Mexico was the first time an enemy force occupied the capitol of the nation. The French would also occupy Mexico City in the 1860's\n\nRelations between the United States and Mexico remained tense for many decades to come, with several military encounters along the border.
529911
The Mexican War between the United States and Mexico began with a Mexican attack on American troops along the southern border of Texas on Apr. 25, 1846. Fighting ended when U.S. Gen. Winfield Scott occupied Mexico City on Sept. 14, 1847; a few months later a peace treaty was signed (Feb. 2, 1848) at Guadalupe Hidalgo. In addition to recognizing the U.S. annexation of Texas defeated Mexico ceded California and , New Mexico (including all the present-day states of the Southwest) to the United States.