English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Mexico hasn't been doing well since and before the Mexican-American War, but do you think things would have turned out differently if the outcome had been reversed? Or would everything jjust have remained the same?

2006-11-06 11:11:56 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities History

5 answers

It would be a bigger country, than it is today. But maybe not, the US was determined to control all the North American territory that was (or was likely to become, Engilsh speaking). England protected Canada pretty effectively. US eyes probably would have turned to what became the Southwestern US eventually anyway.

Santa Anna's wooden leg would not reside in a museum in Springfield, Illinois.

Seriously though, I don't think that war was all that important to either Mexico or the US in terms of changing the direction either country was going. Though I'm no expert, I suspect the roots of the problems Mexico faces today were set up during the Colonial period not after independence.

I think the US's support of Benito Juarez and Mexico against the French was more of a historical pivot point for both countries than was that little war.

2006-11-06 11:35:46 · answer #1 · answered by glenbarrington 7 · 0 0

You know that the way the US was expanding and needed territory that conflict was inevitable. If not in 1847, during the French invasion of Mexico, the USA would have occupied several territories. Or maybe during the Mexican Revolution too.

Now, I can tell you what I think would have happened to Mexico if there had been no war or we Mexicans had repelled the Marines and kept California, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Texas, Nevada and Utah. Nothing.

California would be a big desert full of drug deales as Baja California is today. Texan oil would have been dilapilated as the rest of the Gulf basin in the Mexican side has, stolen by corrupt politicians. Northern Mexico would look at its Canadian and American frontier as their benchmark. Las Vegas, Hollywood, Disneyland and Salt Lake City would be located in Missouri or the Carolinas. Tijuana would be a little north, probably 10 miles from San Francisco if not SanFran itself.

The problem with us Mexicans is not the USA, its much deeper than an "imperialist" country in our border. Our institutions were the ones that failed, not luck in war.

2006-11-06 11:36:11 · answer #2 · answered by Historygeek 4 · 0 0

Since Mexico was a newborn country at the time of the Mexican- American war, its economy wasn't stable and it had many problems just how the U.S had problems at the begging, and look at the U.S now!!!

I think Mexico would of still had problems and probably would of lost territory but not as much as it did like in the Mex- Ame war!!!

2006-11-06 11:27:14 · answer #3 · answered by Mia16 3 · 1 0

They started the conflict by potential of refusing to good customary the Rio Grande by using certainty the actual border with Texas (look on the river they used, the Nueces--it would not grant an incredible defined border the way the Rio Grande does. Then, they misplaced the conflict, and contained interior the negotiations, ceded some territory and offered some greater suitable, for a competent fee. The words would have been lots harsher. Mexico desires to prepare its great components to create jobs and wealth, extremely of exporting its unfavorable as unlawful aliens. It has the flair to be good county, extremely of the shi*hollow it quite is.

2016-12-28 14:48:08 · answer #4 · answered by valaria 4 · 0 0

the U.S. became the richest country in the world with the gold, silver, copper and many other minerals found in what was the northern territory of mexico now owned by the U.S.

2015-03-15 06:53:00 · answer #5 · answered by James 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers