When assessing President Wilson's conduct of foreign policy from 1914-1917, do you think that he could have...

Question

pursued a different course that would have kept the U.S. out of the war...? Should he have...? Why/not.....?

Answer 1

My views on Wilson are tainted by my early idolizing of WIlson and then the cold realization that he was less than perfect. Once read the views of an oppenent of Wilson and he suggested that Wilson was on a course for Warbut on Wilson's terms. By playing out the war, by pleading to Britain and France and Italy that his hands were tied, by hiding inside 'international law' and reams of legal precedents President Wilson waited until the right moment to strike.
Consider this - - - 1914 was late into the third year of WIlson's term, he barely won in 1916 on the Pledge 'He Kept Us out of War. When Wilson did ask Congress for war, on the basis of a 'spurious; telegram, part of that was a bargain to support Republican/Progressive Legislation inckuding Prohibition.

No there was no need to send Americans into actual war. Wilson could have and actually should have made it clear that American Ships would Protect American Ships and sent them off against the U-Boats without actually declaring war; "hey the ship was defending American property what did ya expect?"
As a Historian who enjoys exciting tales then World War One is Wonderful but as a growing Pacifist yes it would have been nice to avoid world war one. It was a truly stupid war. See 'The Swordbearers' Supreme Command in the First World War' by Correlli Barnett.'
Wilson bashing aside, his time was good - - - the British and the French were in a concillatory mood and gave the American far fewer headaches then they might have in 1915 05 1916. Roosevelt relief a lot upon WIlson's tactics, though he did send the Navy in early tio assist the Allies.

Peace----

PS Keep the smart questions flowing

Answer 2

I think not. Wilson was idealist and also too much tied to loyalties between the AngloSaxon ruling class of North America and the United Kingdom. Also, the expansionism of the United States had taken on so much momentum that just being top dog in the Americas was no longer enough.

America was still "digesting" the acquisitions of the Spanish American War, but it was feeling hungry for more. Then it saw an opportunity in the Great War. And it also felt compelled to defend against the Kaiser and the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Also, I think there were some indications that oil-rich lands could be controlled by gaining influence in the dying Ottoman Empire.

Answer 3

He could've kept the US out. i think the main reason for joining in was to get a seat at the peace table - to whihc Wislon went with the best agenda (the first of only two exanples of good US foreign policy - the other being the Marshall Plan).

The main difference would've been to the US servicemen, especially the fatalities - most of which were killed by influenza.

It would not've made much difference to the outcome of the war, as the French had already won the decisive battle of Verdun, but it may've dragged on a few months longer.

Answer 4

He could have. He could have simply never asked congress to declare war on Germany and stuck to his stance of neutrality. America was officially neutral but was supplying the Allies with weapons and refusing to sell to the Central Powers, which almost in essence made America an Allied belligerent and opened up American ships to German U-Boats.

It's tough to say whether it would have been a good idea or not, the Allies winning the war wasn't such a good thing, as it led directly to the rise of Hitler and World War II. On the other hand what if Germany had won World War I? We can only speculate, but I can not imagine the results being as disastrous as World War II, so I would say, yes, he should have kept the U.S. out of World War I. America didn't win the war single-handedly, but American troops were necessary to win, so no American troops, no Allied victory. No Allied victory and no Nazis.

Answer 5

If he had kept us out of that war, then I think that WWII would never have occurred. Probably by the time that WWII did occur Germany would already have control of the whole of Europe including Russia, and very possibly England as well.