Should the United States have joined the League of Nations?

[Joe McCarthy]

http://ustoworldpower.yolasite.com/s...of-nations.php

With the end of World War One in sight, the leaders of all the major world powers prepared for the first major peace conference; a forum to discuss ways to build lasting peace. President Wilson had prepared what he thought would become the foundation for a lasting reign of world peace. He called this plan his Fourteen Points, and believed them to be foolproof. Others however, were more skeptical. “God gave us Ten Commandments and we broke them. Wilson gave us his fourteen points, and we shall see.” (Georges Clemenceau, the representative of France in the Paris Peace Conference.) In fact, many of these fourteen points were not ever put into action. Wilson conceded many in order to push through what in his eyes was the world’s best hope for peace: the fourteenth point, or the League of Nations. The League of Nations was an association of nations created to promote international cooperation and peace. It was meant to be an international discussion forum designed to address diplomatic crises like the ones that had started the war. At the time, the League of Nations was the best option for preventing war and setting the foundation for lasting world peace. It was imperative that the US join the League upon its creation in 1920.

The whole underlying idea supporting the creation of the League of Nations was that countries should convene and solve major issues through discussion rather than warfare. Its purpose was to strengthen international relations and improve cooperation among foreign powers, ultimately creating an atmosphere fostering world peace. This system would help prevent wars before they started without any lives lost or money wasted. Had there been such a system in place before the start of WWI, It would have greatly helped in preventing conflict, and war.

Before the onset of WWI, many different countries were fighting over the Balkland Peninsula. Russia wanted access to the Mediterranean sea, Germany wanted access for a proposed railroad, while Austria Hungary had taken control of Bosnia in 1878 accusing Serbia of subverting its rule over the Bosnians. Finally, with the assassination of the heir to the Austria-Hungarian throne, by a radical group of Serbian Nationalists, the ‘Powder Keg’ of Europe exploded sparking the start of WWI. (Elson, 1976) At that time, the League of Nations would have provided the European powers a place to discuss their claims over Serbia, and come to a peaceful decision. This world wide symposium could very well have been a key factor in he prevention of this war.

The creation of a League of Nations would not only have promoted peace, but strengthened collective security so much so that were any of the nations in the League threatened, the entire League would have been ready to respond. Although this “joint military and economic action against aggression” was a voluntary action, it remained one of the key objections to the League voiced by the US Congress. But had the US joined the league in 1920, this joint action could have greatly diminished the devastating effect of WWII. (Trueman) By the time every major world power was actually involved in the war, too many lives had been lost. Instead of joining the League of nations, the US signed a separate treaty with Germany in 1921, which as history shows, had no real lasting effect.

One of the main objections that congress had to the idea of the League of Nations was the fact that it threatened the US foreign policy of isolationism. They believed that the League would threaten sovereignty and pull the US into foreign wars. US senators Henry Cabot Lodge and William Borah were two of the most adamant opposers of the league. Borah was adamant that by becoming a part of the League, our foreign policy would be destroyed. Henry Cabot Lodge however, took issue with the joint military and economic action against aggression. He wanted the congressional right to declare war at any time included in the treaty. This joint action against aggression was in fact voluntary.

However, the major concern, and fear of the US government, was that the League of Nations would nullify the Monroe doctrine, or the policy of US opposition to any European interference in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere (1823). They thought that it would limit “the right of our people to govern themselves free from all restraint, legal or moral, of foreign powers,. Wilson assures congress that the League would hold no such power of restraint, and argued that the League was “not a straightjacket, but a vehicle of life.”. However, congress remained unmoved, and despite Wilson's best efforts, failed to ratify the League of Nations.

The League of Nations was the world’s best option for forging the foundation of a lasting peace. Unfortunately, the US Congress did not see it as such, but rather as a threat to our nations policies. They even took it as far as stating that the League would repeal the Declaration of Independence. Had the US joined the League of nations, they, along with the rest of the major world powers, could have prevented war, and created a both peaceful and cooperative society. Instead, the US created (in the words of Wilson) “A punitive peace that left a sting, a resentment, a bitter memory upon which the terms of peace would not rest, not permanently, but as upon quicksand.”

[Logan]

[YOUTUBE]XaJ72E05W5o[/YOUTUBE]


'It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.'

Theodore Roosevelt

[Birka]

No. The League of Nations was one of the three great sins of Woodrow Wilson. The other 2 were the creation of the Federal Reserve System (which was going to end all market fluctuations) and the Federal Income Tax.

Those three actions during his administration put him in my list of worst 3 presidents.

[Joe McCarthy]

No. The League of Nations was one of the three great sins of Woodrow Wilson. The other 2 were the creation of the Federal Reserve System (which was going to end all market fluctuations) and the Federal Income Tax.

Those three actions during his administration put him in my list of worst 3 presidents.

Do you have any reasons why the US shouldn't have joined or is this just reflexive isolationism at work?

A credible American military deterrent as part of collective security would have done much to prevent fascist aggression from even being considered. The US refusing to join the League just encouraged the bastards to attack. We wound up joining the UN anyway to ensure peace from world war, which has worked. It would have been smart to do it before the Second World War got started. D'oh!

[Logan]

No. The League of Nations was one of the three great sins of Woodrow Wilson. The other 2 were the creation of the Federal Reserve System (which was going to end all market fluctuations) and the Federal Income Tax.

Those three actions during his administration put him in my list of worst 3 presidents.

They failed to participate in the first, the remainder have fault more with their implementation. None would have been, had...

[Birka]

Do you have any reasons why the US shouldn't have joined or is this just reflexive isolationism at work?

A credible American military deterrent as part of collective security would have done much to prevent fascist aggression from even being considered. The US refusing to join the League just encouraged the bastards to attack. We wound up joining the UN anyway to ensure peace from world war, which has worked. It would have been smart to do it before the Second World War got started. D'oh!

Can you prove a UN would have stopped Hitler?

[Joe McCarthy]

Can you prove a UN would have stopped Hitler?

The question is: would Hitler have invaded Poland with an international police force composed of France, Great Britain, other member states and the United States ready to squash him as soon as he made a move?

I don't think he would have dared.

[BeerBaron]

No. The League of Nations was one of the three great sins of Woodrow Wilson. The other 2 were the creation of the Federal Reserve System (which was going to end all market fluctuations) and the Federal Income Tax.

Those three actions during his administration put him in my list of worst 3 presidents.

Of course americans are quick to forget the banking issues of the 1800s when bringing up the fed. Also forget that you can run a public bank, like in North Dakota that operates independent of the fed as its own central bank. 10 states have legislation to open them.

[Oreka Bailoak]

There's a whole slew of things I strongly dislike about American foreign policy around this era. But this isn't one of them.

I'm in the middle of rereading the book- Hitler, Churchill and the Unnecessary War by Patrick J. Buchanan- the biggest mistake that comes to mind about the League of Nations was when Eden (British Empire) decided to ally with France to punish Italy with sanctions because of the Italian expansion into Ethiopia (The British Empire were total hypocrites- the British controlled over 25% of the worlds land and condemned Italy for taking a small backward slavery country. It surely wasn't worth losing an ally, which was very difficult to finally get Italy to ally with France in the first place!, over the such a stupid little issue as British support for the slavery kingdom of Ethiopia! rather than an Italian governed Ethiopia without slavery)

Prior to this point Italy strongly disliked Germany but the hypocritical sanctions against Italy imposed by Britain and France drove them into the political nation that didn't condemn them- Germany- and along with the other country that pointed out the hypocritical policy of the British Empire and France and felt double crossed when the British discontinued the Japan-British alliance with their strongest East Asian WW1 ally- the tipple pact with Japan and Germany was created.

America was more or less used by the Allies in WW1 to fight a sham "war for democracy" while they were allied with the British Empire (who ruled without consent of their territories) and got literally no gains out of the war.

America played little role in European politics at this point. Their joining wouldn't have made a difference in the case of WW2.

The question is: would Hitler have invaded Poland with an international police force composed of France, Great Britain, other member states and the United States ready to squash him as soon as he made a move?

The United States doesn't enter military alliances in this period. The public overwhelmingly didn't want to be dragged into another war. It would have been a serious scandal to broker a military alliance under the table like Churchill did with France prior to the First World War (which both the British public and the British government strongly would have condemned at the time he made the alliance).

I think a bigger question is why did the British Empire and France declare war over Poland? They couldn't protect their interests in Poland, not only that but the Soviet Union also invaded Poland. It makes no sense other than Churchill's outdated strategy of "ally all the weakest states against the strongest continental power in Europe". It was a war to give Poland over to the Soviet Union for 50 years. All in the idea of "Balance of Powers", Total insanity.

Peace should have been pursued by both sides more- not just from the Axis powers.

I could talk all day about this topic. I recommend this book.

[Logan]

Wilson was I believe a University Professor, Osweo correct me should I error, his ideas were not so good in actuality. I greatly doubt that the States would have made a very great difference within the League.