Why was the league of nations rejected by the united states

2 answers:

6 0

<span>The League of Nations had proud aims but was doomed because it was based on the Treaty of Versailles which most nations signed but disliked.</span>

saw5 [17]3 years ago

5 0

Answer: The US Senate rejected the Treaty of Versailles (which included commitment to the League of Nations), fearing it would compromise US sovereignty and could obligate the US to fight in future wars.

Details:

An organization such as the League of Nations was the signature idea of US President Woodrow Wilson. He had laid out 14 Points for establishing and maintaining world peace following the Great War (World War I). Point #14 was the establishment of an international peacekeeping association.

The Treaty of Versailles adopted that idea, but back home in the United States, there was not support for involving America in any association that could diminish US sovereignty over its own affairs or involve the US again in wars beyond those pertinent to the United States' own national security. Because of its objections to membership in the League of Nations, the United States Senate refused to ratify the Treaty of Versailles.

The majority leader of Senate, Henry Cabot Lodge, argued that the commitment to the League of Nations (a part of the Treaty of Versailles) could take away US Congress' constitutional right to declare war and obligate them to military actions initiated by the League of Nations.

You might be interested in

Focus on the last line of this stanza.

Ksenya-84 [330]

Answer:

C. to win the respect of other industrialized countries

Explanation:

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

In three to five sentences, describe how a consumer can use a cost-benefit analysis to decide between buying a concert ticket or

Rainbow [258]

Cost benefit is a term used to describe a person choosing between two or more items and finding out which one is more valuable to the person. In the case of a concert ticket or a new pair of jeans, cost benefit is used in this way: There are two things compared, and they are deciding on whether it is more worth it to buy jeans or a ticket. In my opinion, in the case of the ticket, it is one-time use, and while it gives pleasure for a short amount of time, and maybe some good memories, it does not amount to much, except maybe bragging rights. In buying a pair of jeans, however, we can (if it is a wholesome jean, and not those jeans that are sold with holes already) already know that, depending on the user, it will last a lot longer than a ticket. The cost benefit of buying the jean exceeds the ticket by a lot because it is much more durable, lasts longer, and is a lot more useful. All these will make jeans the better choice

hope this helps

3 0

3 years ago

4. South Carolina responded to the Intolerable Acts by __________. (1 point) holding small “tea parties” in Charles Town and Geo

EastWind [94]

I'm not sure cause i have not finished the test yet. But i do need help with the test too. I'll let you know when i'm done.

4 0

4 years ago

Read 2 more answers

The Answer is D Not b

mihalych1998 [28]

What do you mean ???????/........?

6 0

3 years ago

What is the Ruling in the Supreme Court Case of West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, and how does it defend your

Assoli18 [71]

The resolution of the Supreme Court Case of West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette was a landmark decision reached by the court, which stated that the right of freedom of speech provided by the First Amendment legimated students to refuse to salute the US flag or to spout the The Pledge of Allegiance of the flag if they attended a public school. It is therefore not mandatory, and more important, not considered a criminal offence to refuse to perform publicly patriotic demonstration acts.

The court victory was achieved by the Jehovah's Witnesses who, due to the prescriptions of their religion, could not salute or pledge to symbols. The Supreme Court ruling decided that the state should not have the power to oblige citizens to express themselves in a certain manner. Therefore, it is a clear defense to the right of speech, and it proves how the legal and judicial instruments guarantee it for citizens.

8 0

3 years ago