4 ms·

> American entry into World War I is partly because of the Zimmerman Telegram Do you really think, existed any tiny chance, US would not enter World War? From

by simne 4y ago

> American entry into World War I is partly because of the Zimmerman Telegram Do you really think, existed any tiny chance, US would not enter World War? From geography, it is obvious, US is on the middle between EU and South America. In such position, you should become active subject, or you will be used by anybody as object, for just transit or as base for one side (borderland). As example, Ukraine hundreds years was borderland, and this costs ocean of Ukrainian blood.

Apocryphon 4y ago
Prior to the sinking of the Lusitania, there was no guarantee that the fairly isolationist U.S. had any interest in getting entangled into Europe’s wars.
- simne 4y ago
  You know, Ukraine conducted policy of self isolation, before war. Now running to EU and NATO, because isolation costs too much, concessions don't give security. And for US, entanglement in world policy is matter of existence, because of how Union born. If federal govt will not protect allies, federation will fall, because states will get out and do all themselves. Imagine, Scottish, or Irish, or Italian people, ignoring what happen in their motherland - this is impossible. and if feds will entangle in ANY european activity, they will in short time have to deal with all most powerful currents. South America different, because nearly all countries have mostly native people, or totally cosmopolitan, so for them european currents are just performance, nothing more.
  - Apocryphon 4y ago
    The difference is that the U.S. is separated from Europe by an ocean, has no countries with revanchist claims upon it, has a New World vs. Old World distinction, etc…
    - simne 4y ago
      Partially agree. But if you look into principles of federation, things are much more complicated.
saghm 4y ago
> From geography, it is obvious, US is on the middle between EU and South America It's super jarring to see a reference to the EU as a reason for pretty much anything WWI related. I know this presumably means Europe, and maybe being used to "EU" referring to the European Union and not Europe in a general geographic sense, but I'm not used to seeing that abbreviation used for anything historically for around another half a century.
- simne 4y ago
  You can believe it, or not, but EU is creature of most powerful Western Europe countries (Germany and France). Other countries are passengers in this train, they have rights, but economy and geography are too powerful.
  - saghm 4y ago
    That doesn't really clear up my confusion here at all. If anything, it's even more of an argument not to refer to the continent geographically as "EU" instead of "Europe" in modern times, and certainly doesn't make it more obvious why it be referred to that way when talking about the 1910s.
    - simne 4y ago
      So you really think, it will make much difference for context, if we mix together two sides of WWI? - If you know history, in 1910s, edge lies not on continent borders, but on totally different matters.
happyopossum 4y ago
> From geography, it is obvious, US is on the middle between EU and South America. No, that’s not obvious and highly debatable. The same ocean that you cross to get from Europe to the US can take you straight to South America without touching US soil.
- simne 4y ago
  Here is nothing to debate. If you know geography and history and little sailing or (sail)planes - from Europe it is much-much easier to reach US than South America, because exists line of islands, approx from England to Canada, directly, which even have built infrastructure of airfields and ports from 1940s, and sure, there is civilization, govt and civil services. For South America, none comparable exists, even more, on the way you will meet extremely unfriendly zone of equatorial weather, and no services.
- simne 4y ago
  That's obvious, if you know little more, than your keyboard and monitor, that it is very convenient and comparable safe, to use very populated and civilized path through line of islands, where you could meet lot of small ships, small planes, even helicopters, than go through open ocean.

by simne 4y ago

Apocryphon 4y ago

Prior to the sinking of the Lusitania, there was no guarantee that the fairly isolationist U.S. had any interest in getting entangled into Europe’s wars.

simne 4y ago
You know, Ukraine conducted policy of self isolation, before war. Now running to EU and NATO, because isolation costs too much, concessions don't give security. And for US, entanglement in world policy is matter of existence, because of how Union born. If federal govt will not protect allies, federation will fall, because states will get out and do all themselves. Imagine, Scottish, or Irish, or Italian people, ignoring what happen in their motherland - this is impossible. and if feds will entangle in ANY european activity, they will in short time have to deal with all most powerful currents. South America different, because nearly all countries have mostly native people, or totally cosmopolitan, so for them european currents are just performance, nothing more.
- Apocryphon 4y ago
  The difference is that the U.S. is separated from Europe by an ocean, has no countries with revanchist claims upon it, has a New World vs. Old World distinction, etc…
  - simne 4y ago
    Partially agree. But if you look into principles of federation, things are much more complicated.

saghm 4y ago

> From geography, it is obvious, US is on the middle between EU and South America It's super jarring to see a reference to the EU as a reason for pretty much anything WWI related. I know this presumably means Europe, and maybe being used to "EU" referring to the European Union and not Europe in a general geographic sense, but I'm not used to seeing that abbreviation used for anything historically for around another half a century.

simne 4y ago
You can believe it, or not, but EU is creature of most powerful Western Europe countries (Germany and France). Other countries are passengers in this train, they have rights, but economy and geography are too powerful.
- saghm 4y ago
  That doesn't really clear up my confusion here at all. If anything, it's even more of an argument not to refer to the continent geographically as "EU" instead of "Europe" in modern times, and certainly doesn't make it more obvious why it be referred to that way when talking about the 1910s.
  - simne 4y ago
    So you really think, it will make much difference for context, if we mix together two sides of WWI? - If you know history, in 1910s, edge lies not on continent borders, but on totally different matters.

happyopossum 4y ago

> From geography, it is obvious, US is on the middle between EU and South America. No, that’s not obvious and highly debatable. The same ocean that you cross to get from Europe to the US can take you straight to South America without touching US soil.

simne 4y ago
Here is nothing to debate. If you know geography and history and little sailing or (sail)planes - from Europe it is much-much easier to reach US than South America, because exists line of islands, approx from England to Canada, directly, which even have built infrastructure of airfields and ports from 1940s, and sure, there is civilization, govt and civil services. For South America, none comparable exists, even more, on the way you will meet extremely unfriendly zone of equatorial weather, and no services.
simne 4y ago
That's obvious, if you know little more, than your keyboard and monitor, that it is very convenient and comparable safe, to use very populated and civilized path through line of islands, where you could meet lot of small ships, small planes, even helicopters, than go through open ocean.