Kmad

The reasoning behind the Constitution of the United States is presented as 'based upon the philosophy of Hobbes and the religion of Calvin. It assumes the natural state of mankind in a state of war, and that the carnal mind is at enmity with God.' Throughout, the struggle between democracy and tyranny is discussed as the Founding Fathers who envisioned the Constitution in Philadelphia in 1787 believed not in total democracy, but instead saw common man as selfish and contemptuous, and therefore in need of a 'a good political constitution to control him.' Being a largely propertied body, with the exception of William Few, who was the

The Mexican War was viewed as one of the most controversial wars in United States history. Originating from the annexation of Texas, or the lack thereof in Mexico’s eyes, the final spark to cause the war was an incident between soldiers of both countries in disputed land. Both Mexico and the US claimed to have been provoked by the other, and that they were only protecting their country. Many US citizens argued the war, as it appeared President Polk was using it for reasons other than self defense. By going to war with Mexico, the US faced the possibility of gaining much more of Mexico’s land and extending slavery in the country. The United States' decision to go to war with Mexico was based on a desire to extend slavery, to gain land they had

According to Charles Sumner, from “Objections to the Mexican-American War”, he states, “Our (American) Newspapers excited the lust of territorial robbery in the public mind.” This quote shows that even a state legislator from Massachusetts admits that the United States stole land from Mexico. In another quote from Charles Sumner’s “Objections to the Mexican-American War”, he states “Certainly Mexico might justly charge our citizens with disgraceful robbery.” This evidence shows that the United States already stole land from Mexico and that it was unjust to go to war with

The Mexican American war was greatly beneficial to the U.S., but was it worth the cost of nearly 38,000 lives? The war lasted two years, with America emerging victorious and taking more than half of Mexico’s land. Although the conflict resulted in the U.S. gaining her most valuable land, nevertheless the war itself was unjust due to a multitude of reasons, such as the unwarranted Texas revolution, the selfish belief of Manifest Destiny, and the illegitimate intentions of President Polk.

Lincoln believed that Polk had invaded Mexico based on a lie. So he questioned the President Polk’s intent of going to war which was based on Mexico crossing national borders in order to draw first blood in the US soil. He challenged Polk in the House floor to prove the claim of waging the Mexican war by providing evidence and facts in a fair and just manner. Lincoln emphasized that Polk should not resort to rhetoric, evasions, and arguments and should be precise and transparent in presenting the facts that led to the war.

The perception of history is often crafted by the information given and the information available, however, almost too often the facts accessible are warped by the viewpoints of others before they can be properly assessed. Differing outlooks thus explicate the controversial nature of historical events and why the motives and conclusions behind certain occurrences are called into question. The Mexican American war as many American historians would call it ushers a contrary tone in Mexico as their own historians would claim the “war” as United States invasion; the difference in referral is based on the different perceptions of the conflict. In the American viewpoint, the Mexican American War was driven by economic, social and political pressures to bolster United States territories, through the annexation of Texas. In the converse, it could be argued that Mexico did not declare a formal war against the United States but rather was interested in defending their country’s territorial integrity and resisting United State’s invasion. In a Mexican viewpoint then, the war was not a result of arrogance but a consequence of defending Mexican territory from United States invasion. Nonetheless the aftermath of the war produced immense repercussions, furthering American exceptionalism, slavery, and disregard for international borders prompting the inquiry of not only the unjust methods applied but the unjustified results.

James Polk felt that it was his duty to take it by force and took the matter under his control. Since John Tyler’s decision to hold off the war until Mexico made the initial attack, Polk took it upon himself to provoke the Mexicans. To accomplish this, he sent troops to the Rio Grande and marched them along the border until the Mexicans made their attack. After the report of the attack was delivered, Abraham Lincoln proposed the “Spot Resolutions” to find the exact location of the American bloodshed on “American soil”. However, the Spot Resolutions were built upon false statements; the Mexicans’ attack was premeditated and actually took place on Mexican land. Polk was successful in starting the desired Mexican War which ultimately led to the defeat of the weaker adversary Mexico and the attainment of California.

The Mexican War of 1846-1848 was one of major importance to U.S. history, but has since fallen into annals of obscurity. It was the nation’s first war fought on foreign soil: a war that advocated the concept of “manifest destiny”, the United States God-given right to claim territory for the establishment of a free democratic society (Stevenson 2009). Even though many historians claim the war was forced on Mexico by slaveholders greedy for new territory, President John Polk viewed the war as an opportunity to defend the annexation of Texas, establish the Rio Grande as its border, and to acquire the Mexican territories of California and New Mexico (Stevenson 2009).

2.) Answer the following questions based on a reading of the above document and material from your textbook.

The Mexican-American war fought between 1846 and 1848 remains a topic of much contention amongst modern historians. Differing accounts and conclusions of the war are often presented and one must remain pragmatic when analysing both primary and secondary sources regarding the war. There is a clear time line of events that led to the outbreak of the war, but there is one major event, and one minor action, which directly resulted in the declarations of war on both sides of the conflict between Mexico and the United States. Most scholars agree that the annexation of the Republic of Texas by

Dr. Henderson’s purpose for writing A Glorious Defeat: Mexico and its War with the United States is to explain the causes of Mexico going to war with the United States in 1846, and the reasons Mexico suffered severely from it. Dr. Henderson’s focus throughout the book is not solely on the military tactics, but rather on the political and diplomatic maneuvering. This approach to the book is to provide to the reader the conflict’s real significance, as to the how and why the United States and Mexico went to war. This book does not point blame at either side, but tells the war from the Mexican point of view. Furthermore, Dr. Henderson explores Mexico’s weaknesses at the time and how those weaknesses led to the war with the United States.

The Mexican War of 1846 was not a justifiable war based on the Just War Theory of jus ad bellum principles. The Just War Theory addresses the political leaders that are in charge of initiating war with another entity. The rules of applying the jus ad bellum to a war are based on six areas that address whether a war can be considered a just or unjust war. The most important rule is examining Just Cause as it sets the way for the rules that follow. Right Intention to go to war based on their Just Cause, Proper Authority and Public Declaration to determine if they could declare war and Last Resort being the final decision made if all other outlets were exhausted. As well as determining the Probability of Success in the

Question #1 – As we are just beginning the course, what are your definitions of:

In this book, Timothy J. Henderson examines the origins, outcomes, and modern-day consequences of the Mexican-American War (1846-1848). A Glorious Defeat is organized around two central questions: why did Mexico go to war with the United States in 1846 and why did the war go so badly for Mexico? Henderson does provide the answers to these questions, based on the reader having some knowledge of the expansionist history that the US partook in with its southern neighbors, but who are “far less certain why Mexico went to war with the United States” (xviii).

The Articles of Confederation, a written agreement that ensured each state’s sovereignty, freedom and independence, led America to victory over the British centralized government. During the late eighteenth century, the empowered government terrified the Americans, hence the thirteen colonies decided to spread governance powers equally to all functional states. The states had absolute dominance over the Congress due to the Articles of Confederation. While the localized power of states seemed to be promising, the system posed great threat to the major components of a democratic government, which are coercion, revenue, and legitimacy (Lecture 1 - The Roots of Government). The system of localized power did not ensure legitimacy, which referred to people’s recognition of national government. Congress’s lack of power to control each state’s actions caused great chaos. Eventually, national government’s lack of power and inability to unify the states exposed multiple flaws in the Articles of Confederation; consequently, a new supreme law, the Constitution was established by the founding fathers. The new supreme law successfully altered the imbalanced system into a novel democratic government.