Did the United States act appropriately and properly when she declared war on Germany in April of 1917?
373082
Yes, because Germany used submarine warfare against our friends, Great Britain. They also used the Zimmerman Note to make Mexico against us.
400914
its complicated.\nUK and US were allies. US helped with industry, which it sailed to UK. germany sunk some ships with US citizen eg the lusitania.\nmostly beacuse a lot of it allies, canada, australia, UK etc were fighting and US interests rested more with them than with Germany
1140373
I've never heard that question posed so succinctly and eloquently before, but yes, that's exactly right.  Europeans knew we would defend them against attack, so they were free to act irresponsibly.  They didn't have to be realistic.\n\nThis article is only peripherally related to your question, but you'll love it:  \n\nhttp://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,343378,00.html
618764
Actually, some of your assertions are just incorrect, specifically the idea that the combatants in Europe were ready to give up and have a victor-less peace. I have read in at least two different places that, had the USA not brought in fresh troops, the Western Allies were willing to last until at least 1921 before another major offensive.\n\nThe impetus that brought the USA into the war, the resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare, was ordered by Field Marshall Hindenburg over the objection of both the Kaiser and the Reichstag. This was not a 'few petty ships' but had serious loss of life and was a direct challenge to the concept of both the rules of war on the sea and the rights of neutral nations (this is applicable even today, note the United States re-flagging of Kuwaiti tankers).\n\nIf Germany was ready for a victor-less peace as you suggest, they were in a perfect position to lead by example at Brest-Litovsk. Instead, Germany had set up a system of puppet governments along Russia's western frontier with the intention of the war lasting many years longer. The terms at Brest Litovsk were far more harsh than the terms at Versailles, regardless of what anyone claims, and if the Germans had spent less money and energy on cheating (yes, cheating before Hitler came to power!), Germany could have met its obligations with much fewer repercussions. The entry of the United States did not make German defeat a certainty because the amount of troops the United States would put into the field (2 million) would not replace the amount of soldiers withdrawn from the war with the surrender of Soviet Russia and the crushing of Rumania and Serbia. Ludendorf had ordered the 1918 offensive out of panic, and had directed it just as badly. If, instead, he had rescinded the order for War Socialism and allowed German industry to make windfall profits off of the war again as they had before 1916, Germany would have been fine.\n\nIn 1914, Russia had not yet declared war on anyone, but had instead issued an order for a partial mobilization supporting Serbia which freaked everyone out. When Nicholas refused to back down, that was when Germany declared war on Russia, not the other way around.\n\nHowever, three German judges in 1923 could have averted World War II, and they had all the evidence they needed to do it. Hitler had repeatedly said that the Weimar Republic had to be destroyed, and he took action in his Putsch. The first charge leveled against Hitler in the aftermath was treason, which as an Austrian national would have required Hitler to be deported immediately. By his words and by his actions, he was most certainly guilty, but one of the three judges was an admirer of Hitler's.
479295
DJ Noek has it right.  Germany was Japan's ally. We declared war on Japan immediately, so Germany declared war on us.  So then we declared war on Germany.
175271
The United States had a policy called isolationism where they felt it was best for the country to not be binded to any treaty with Europe 9 this was from Washingtons early warning to stay out of conflict in his farewell address). The whole country wanted to stay neutral at all costs and it was only when Germany started taking out our ships with u-boats and also when they sent the Zimmerman Telegram to Mexico tell the mexicans that if they helped Germany would help them take back texas..\nfactors such as those made it too hard for us the stay out of war.
716058
The President does not declare war it is the job of Congress.\nAmerica has declared War 11 times. The last time was the Second World War. June 5, 1942 against Bulgaria et al.\nIn modern times the phrase used is Authorization of Force.\nInternational Law allows self defense and the military support for sovereign governments that request aid.\nInternational Law and Treaties limit the legal use of force and protect civilians from abuse by armies.\nDrawn up in the 19th & 20th centuries as the armies of Europe carried out mass slaughter on the fields of Europe and worldwide.\nThese treaties do nothing to address the current situation where states carry out warfare using terrorists imbedded in civilian populations.\nThis modern slaughter will continue until a way is found to make these states and their civilian supporters accountable for their actions.\nStop blaming Clinton. It just divides us.\nOur need to play party politics is their greatest weapon against us.\nThe foreign policy beauocracy, the intelligence services, US and world public opinion were asleep.\nWe have still not woken up.\nPakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran Syria need to be held responsible for the wars, terrorism and assassinations that they finance and support.  \nGET SMART
18705
the Gulf between us - 1917
653820
President Woodrow Wilson actually had a hard time struggling with this issue. The fact of the matter is that even though the US was technically neutral (and it did go far in making sure that it did not appear otherwise- often to Britain's disadvatage), there was probably a greater cultural as well as economic affinity for Great Britain. Keep in mind the following facts:\n-Britain had naval superiority and maintained a naval blockade that made it difficult for the US to actually be neutral; it was much more likely that US shipping made its way to Britain than to Germany.\n-Germany did not announce unrestricted submarine warfare until late 1916/early 1917.\n\nThe US was committed to staying out of the war but Germany's decision to attack any and all ships- including neutral American ships- made it almost impossible for Wilson to sell the public on the idea of neutrality. After several months of German submarine warfare in early 1917, Wilson and Congress decided war was the last viable option (and the public opinion had also shifted in favor of war).\n\nGermany's submarine warfare in 1916-1917 was the equivalent \nof Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941: it removed peace or mediation as viable alternatives, leaving only the possibility of America's entrance into the conflict.
1975
Following is the beginning of the President’s message to the 65th Congress concerning that war.  The complete message may be found at the source link:\n\nGentlemen of the Congress: \nI have called the Congress into extraordinary session because there are serious, very serious, choices of policy to be made, and made immediately, which it was neither right nor constitutionally permissible that I should assume the responsibility of making. \nOn the 3d of February last I officially laid before you the extraordinary announcement of the Imperial German Government that on and after the 1st day of February it was its purpose to put aside all restraints of law or of humanity and use its submarines to sink every vessel that sought to approach either the ports of Great Britain and Ireland or the western coasts of Europe or any of the ports controlled by the enemies of Germany within the Mediterranean. That had seemed to be the object of the German submarine warfare earlier in the war, but since April of last year the Imperial Government had somewhat restrained the commanders of its undersea craft in conformity with its promise then given to us that passenger boats should not be sunk and that due warning would be given to all other vessels which its submarines might seek to destroy, when no resistance was offered or escape attempted, and care taken that their crews were given at least a fair chance to save their lives in their open boats. The precautions taken were meagre and haphazard enough, as was proved in distressing instance after instance in the progress of the cruel and unmanly business, but a certain degree of restraint was observed The new policy has swept every restriction aside. Vessels of every kind, whatever their flag, their character, their cargo, their destination, their errand, have been ruthlessly sent to the bottom without warning and without thought of help or mercy for those on board, the vessels of friendly neutrals along with those of belligerents. Even hospital ships and ships carrying relief to the sorely bereaved and stricken people of Belgium, though the latter were provided with safe-conduct through the proscribed areas by the German Government itself and were distinguished by unmistakable marks of identity, have been sunk with the same reckless lack of compassion or of principle.
413727
The US started this war?  Where do you get your facts from?  I thought it was because S.H. wasn't playing by the rules set forth from the U.N.
977125
G'day A B,\n\nThank you for your question.\n\nThe end of World War I saw the US recognised as a major power for the first time. It became the world's greatest creditor unlike today. It had relatively few casualties with 53,402 battle deaths and 63,114 other deaths in service.\n\nI have attached sources for your reference.\n\nRegards
456349
Definitely not. The country as a whole was not culpable for WWI, and for that matter, the leaders of Germany were not culpable. The whole thing could have been solved diplomatically, but as soon as Archduke Ferdinand was killed, Austria demanded certain things, Serbia refused, and there was a cascade of declarations of war. It's absurd to say that Germany was responsible for all of this. At the very least, Britain and France should have mediated the conflict between Austria and Serbia BEFORE it came to declarations of war.\n\nThere's also the fact that the reparations were not about keeping Germany from doing it again, they were about punishment. All they really needed to do after the war was establish monitoring systems to make sure Germany was not rebuilding a military, the one thing they didn't do.
330213
FDR wanted to get into the war to assist Britain but the public wanted no part of it.  The U.S. provoked Japan into an attack and sacrificed Pearl Harbor (U.S. intelligence knew they were coming) so the public sentiment would change and support our efforts to wage war against Germany.\n\nJohnny
639227
Of course it wasn't...\n\nThey had to nuke 2 cities? Killing INNOCENT women & children?\n\nIn response to an attack on a military installation...\n\nI think today that would be considered a war crime.
1061557
The US did in 1803 when we fought our first over seas war in Monazuma. We were trading with other countries in the Med. sea and we did not pay the "priates" monet to not attack our trade ships. They were called terrorist then. The US went to a short war with the terrorist and won. The Congress adopted a "no negotiation" standard then.
485751
In the note the Bernstorff announced a re-opened German policy of unrestricted submarine warfare (initially introduced and then rapidly abandoned in 1916 owing to U.S. protests), to take effect the day following the date of the note (i.e. 1 February 1917).  The German Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg spoke before the Reichstag on the same day to explain the reasons for the policy.\n\nIn effect the policy set in place a blockade of Britain and her European allies, to be applied to belligerent and neutral shipping alike.  The German government argued that such a policy was implemented only as an aggressive form of defence.\n\nReaction to the policy was rapid; the Allied powers inevitably decried its aggression, as did the U.S. government, which broke off diplomatic relations on 3 February 1917.  On the same day President Woodrow Wilson appeared before Congress to announce his reasons, receiving virtually unanimous support in doing so.