The Mongol Empire and the United States have used political and military means to solidify their access to raw materials and trade links. Is this statement valid? Why or why not?
2007-11-30 02:01:06 · 3 answers · asked by Hellogoodbye 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Yes and no.
The US only used military means to secure resources within its own borders. We have actually kept global trade safer by means of our military might (see reports about the resurgence of piracy around the world, followed by its current dropping levels due to US Naval protection).
While in the 1800's we did secure US trade interests abroad by sending troops to protect US citizens and compounds, this is not so much a reality today.
2007-11-30 02:15:36 · answer #1 · answered by Yun 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All world powers share certain traits. You could use this to compare the Roman Empire, British empire, Persia during its Hieght, Mongol Empire, etc, etc. A successful world power does those things, it's not wrong or right just a proven record and generally during those times the world is a better place to live. Its during the times of transition that the world is unstable, violent and is plunged into darkness. Last transition was 1910s to 1945 when the transition went from Britain to the US. Look what happened after the fall of the Roman Empire, the 'Dark ages' where Europe suffered greatly.
2007-11-30 03:04:52 · answer #2 · answered by rz1971 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why not use China, Japan, Nazi Germany, Spain, Netherlands, France or England all these countries have a history. Why the United States?
2007-11-30 02:05:55 · answer #3 · answered by EHS 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋