1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
kvasek [131]
4 years ago
13

b. The Monroe Doctrine expressed the idea that new countries should be allowed to develop without interference from stronger nat

ions. In your opinion, does the United States still follow this policy? Do you think that such a policy should be followed in the modern world? Cite news events and recent historical incidents to support your opinion.
History
2 answers:
SSSSS [86.1K]4 years ago
5 0

(This would have to be in your own opinion, "develop without interference from stronger nations" or a conclusion/ reasoning from the stronger nations to develop.) (Do you think that they still follow this in the United States? Treaties signed during and after the World war 2 reflecting a policy of greater cooperation between North and south America colonies. The United states continued to use Monroe Doctrine to justify its interference in the affairs of its southern neighbors.)(do you think such a policy should be followed in the modern world? This is also your opinion so it's up to you but the policy was made to warn Europe that the United states would not tolerate further colonization. The latian American countries already won their independence from Spain and Portugal but they were worried that the powers of continental Europe would make future attempts to restore colonial regimes in the region.) And depending on your opinion you can find cities and evidence for it. I'm sorry if this is confusing but I hope it helps you understand a little more

Alborosie4 years ago
4 0

Answer:

The Monroe Doctrine expressed the idea that new countries should be allowed to develop without interference from stronger nations . In my opinion, no, the United States does not still follow this policy . I personally don't think that such a policy should be or could be followed in the modern world. I believe this for a few reasons. One being that all these countries  now are being much more independent, so they wouldn't need to have any higher power or nation to tell them when and how to develop a country.  Second reason being that there are barely any more new developing countries, once again no need for higher countries or nations. And lastly, 'the United States has been involved in different acts around the world that would suggest that the Monroe doctrine should only be applied when the country was a new or weak country, now that it is a strong country, it does not consider that doctrine applicable .' We don't have any current events that proves that the Monroe Doctrine is still in effect because our old enemies are Allies or chill with the US.                                                                                                                      

 

     I don't think that the Monroe Doctrine policy should be or could be followed in the modern world, because of the independence and strength that the countries have accommodated. It wouldn't be able to be followed, because since the Monroe Doctrine policy would only really target weaker or newer countries it still wouldn't really even apply to the pre existing countries that we already have . The United States still likes to intervene though regardless of its position. Some  examples of the United States intervening would be 'the coup d'etat of Pinochet in Chile under the government of President Nixon in 1973, the coup against Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala in 1984. and suppressing protests in foreign countries as happened in Panama in 1964 under the mandate of President Johnson in 2016 .'

                         

   Another reason why the Monroe Doctrine Policy shouldn't or couldn't be followed in the modern world is because there are barely any new or developing countries popping up on Earth . The Monroe Doctrine policy couldn't apply to a newer or weaker country if it doesn't exist . And if it isn't there that's another reason why the United States couldn't intervene . An example of the United States intervening with an existing country would be the constant invasion of Middle Eastern countries in the search for nuclear weapons or terrorist groups that could threaten US sovereignty, as well as the recent friction with Iran.                                                                                                                                        

  And the last reason being that the Monroe Doctrine Policy only applies to newer and Weaker countries. Since the United States isn't one of those., it being one of the bigger and more stronger countries , they are definitely not going to follow that and just d o whatever they want to do as a country because they wouldn't see it as applicable to them, deeming the Monroe Doctrine Policy useless.                                                                      

    'Therefore, the inclusion of the United States of America as a powerful country by alternative countries is simple and demonstrates that the Monroe Doctrine, dispensed by President James Monroe, is not any longer applied by the country, at a time once more than ever countries ought to exercise their own government and be architects of its future.' So no, the United States does not still follow this policy, and it shouldn't be used in the Modern World periodt.                                

You might be interested in
In general, you would expect the platform of a political party to
lubasha [3.4K]
In general, you would expect the platform of a political party to C) guide the political issues of the party's candidate. Party platform is defined as "a list of the values and actions which are supported by a political party or individual candidate, in order to appeal to the general public, for the ultimate purpose of garnering the general public's support and votes about complicated topics or issues."
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Read the Impact of World War I article.
Brut [27]

One of the worst ways that impacted the country with it's involvement in the world war I was adverse impact on the economic condition.

<u>Explanation:</u>

One of the most important impacts of the involvement of the United States of America in world war I was adverse impact and effects on the economic conditions of the country.

To finance the war and get money to protect the country from any kind of external attacks, the government of the country borrowed money from the public of the country in the form of liberty bonds. A lot of money was used to produce defense material like bombs and other equipment and other goods and materials were produced in lesser amounts.

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Answer the following question in one to two well-written paragraphs. Which of the following have the greatest impact in determin
Alisiya [41]
Reporters and news editors deny that they are the most powerful political actors, that is all I know. If this doesn't help. I'm sorry.
8 0
4 years ago
What was the prime reason behind the failure of the Constituent assembly - 1. give one reason ​
melomori [17]

Answer:

Historically, the demand of the Nepalese people for a Constituent Assembly (CA ) dates back to Rana regime; however, this demand was only fulfilled on May 28, 2008, when the CA formally met for the first time and also took a historical decision on the abolition of the monarchy. In February 1947, Rana Prime Minister Padma Shamshir had also introduced a grotesque prototype of a CA, which consisted of 12 elected and 12 nominated members to initiate constitutional reform in the country (See Geri, Pradeep (Ed.), (2009). Political Documents of Mr. Bishweshwar Prasad Koirala, Kathmandu: Student Book Store. p. 38.). However, the so-called 1947 CA lacked four important features of a Constituent Assembly. They are: A fully representational institution An autonomous body with authority to develop constitutionalism and promulgate a constitution A supreme body able to work without interference of any individual or institution An efficient public forum for constitutional discourses.

8 0
3 years ago
How were the trans-Saharan trade routes different from the Silk Road?
erastova [34]

Answer:

The Silk Road traversed Asia, while the trans-Saharan trade went across Africa

8 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • What was Canada's role in WW1? I NEED HELP PLS
    9·2 answers
  • How can early greek democracy, such as athens, be classified?
    9·1 answer
  • What series of events and ideological conflicts prompted the cold war? how did the cold war reshape ideas of american freedom? w
    10·1 answer
  • How did the minoan people become wealthy?
    12·2 answers
  • Which process by both a historian and archeologist in their work
    6·1 answer
  • Which continent can be considered the most vital part of the Trinagular Trade system because of the labor it provided?
    8·1 answer
  • What waspone important effect of Charlemagne's rule as Holy Roman
    15·1 answer
  • "do you need something from my daughter." What are the TWO errors in this sentence?
    14·2 answers
  • Mesopotamia, Sumer, and Babylon developed in the Fertile Crescent. Identify two reasons why humans settled in this region.
    12·1 answer
  • When Texas gained independence, part of its transformation into a republic required that other countries of the world recognize
    6·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!