Spanish-American War: Amazing Podcast

[Anung Un Rama]

Isolationists because the Monroe Doctrine made Europeans not really want anything to do with the continent.

Not exactly. We said we wouldn't tolerate European meddling in the colonies and we agree to not entangle ourselves in their bullshit.

 

[catchwrestle1]

Cool post. I'll be looking into these productions, thank you.

 

[gspieler]

Spain was past its prime but ze Germans weren't.

In both world wars, the U.S. came in against the Krauts when they were already warring with the Brits and Ruskis, among others.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Agreed, but as far as empires go, we were a never was up until this point.

I guess if you consider it an empire only if it crosses an ocean.

But if you don't, the US was imperialistic and predatory from the very beginning. Leaders were eyeing expansion down into Cuba and Mexico as early as the mid 1700s

INTIMATIONS OF EMPIRE

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/books/chapters/colossus.html

To George Washington the United States was a "nascent empire," later an "infant empire." Thomas Jefferson told James Madison he was "persuaded no constitution was ever before as well calculated as ours for extending extensive empire and self-government."

 

[Anung Un Rama]

In both world wars, the U.S. came in against the Krauts when they were already warring with the Brits and Ruskis, among others.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

I guess if you consider it an empire only if it crosses an ocean.

But if you don't, the US was imperialistic and predatory from the very beginning. Leaders were eyeing expansion down into Cuba and Mexico as early as the mid 1700s

INTIMATIONS OF EMPIRE

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/books/chapters/colossus.html

Imperialism is probably the more correct term.
Cuba is a different story in that it held a very strategic value. Also, we hoped to buy Cuba from Spain, we weren't looking to conquer new lands since 1823 (Monroe Doctrine), until this situation developed.

 

[Rod1]

Not exactly. We said we wouldn't tolerate European meddling in the colonies and we agree to not entangle ourselves in their bullshit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLane–Ocampo_Treaty

But it did, America served as a strong supporter of American independence in the continent thats why Europeans never managed to set a foothold.

 

[Lanx]

wrath of the khans for the thx giving day drive

 

[Anung Un Rama]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLane–Ocampo_Treaty

But it did, America served as a strong supporter of American independence in the continent thats why Europeans never managed to set a foothold.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

You said Europe had no interest in the Americas because of the Monroe Doctrine.
I'm saying their interest in the continent is moot, the Monroe Doctrine states that we will stay out of ea other's business (ours being America, their's being Europe and their colonies).
I don't understand what the Mclane-Ocampo Treaty has to do with this?

 

[Rod1]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

You said Europe had no interest in the Americas because of the Monroe Doctrine.
I'm saying their interest in the continent is moot, the Monroe Doctrine states that we will stay out of ea other's business (ours being America, their's being Europe and their colonies).
I don't understand what the Mclane-Ocampo Treaty has to do with this?

I think you misunderstand what the Monroe Doctrine means when it claims "America for Americans" its talking about the continent of America no the country of the United States of America, which was seen as a federation not as a single country called America.

Monroe Doctrine clearly stopped Europeans powers from meddling in the entire continent, when America calls itself isolationist, it meant isolationist in the sense of not meddling with the old world.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

I think you misunderstand what the Monroe Doctrine means when it claims "America for Americans" its talking about the continent of America no the country of the United States of America, which was seen as a federation not as a single country called America.

Monroe Doctrine clearly stopped Europeans powers from meddling in the entire continent, when America calls itself isolationist, it meant isolationist in the sense of not meddling with the old world.

I understand what the MD meant.
And I agree with you re: isolationism = the old world (and its colonies), but also Asia and non-North American countries.

edit: I actually didn't know the MD included South America.

 

[tramendous]

Spain was past its prime but ze Germans weren't.

90% of german losses on eastern front. Germany was injured.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

The US was like the 11th best economy in the world entering WW1, behind such stalwarts as Belgium (remember they had the Belgian Congo and other colonies), and that was w/ us still having Cuba, Guam, Puerto Rico and Phillipines as colonies from the Spanish American War at the time.

It was really that event, w/ no fighting on our land, and our industrial capacity then used for mass production in the 20s that led the US into global dominance, but this podcast had some good parts to it about the period just before this.

War was absolutely started over a false flag event w/ the USS Maine 'attack' or whatever too

 

[RockstarChris]

Remember the Alamo.

 

[Rational Poster]

The Genghis Khan one is the best, followed closely by the WWI one.

 

[mygoddotcom]

Didnt the Spaniards lose their empire way before the Spanish American war?

Their american colonies revolted not long after the 13 colonies broke away from England. They were independent long before American Civil War. Lot of time between Murican Civil War, and Spanish Murican war. They were using guns with cartridges, and repeating arms in the later as opposed to muzzle loading in the former. And the navies had steam power.

Philipines and Cuba were the last nails in the coffin...

 

[Possum Jenkins]

The US was like the 11th best economy in the world entering WW1, behind such stalwarts as Belgium (remember they had the Belgian Congo and other colonies), and that was w/ us still having Cuba, Guam, Puerto Rico and Phillipines as colonies from the Spanish American War at the time.

No way, the US was at or near the very top from almost the beginning.

It was a minor power in military and political influence until WWI. And in scientific innovation and culture until WWII.

But in economic production and output it was always at the top.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

I worded that wrong, looking at imports and exports not GDP

We exported alot (cotton, tobacco) but absurd tariffs prevented much import trade till the 20s and 30s

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Philipines and Cuba were the last nails in the coffin...

They also still have some possession in North Africa. I forgot to mention. I always wonder what world be like had the Spaniards not lost their colonies or at least kept it longer. If Britain can hold on to what they had for so long, I dont see why the Spaniards could not.

 

[Pecker123]

They also still have some possession in North Africa. I forgot to mention. I always wonder what world be like had the Spaniards not lost their colonies or at least kept it longer. If Britain can hold on to what they had for so long, I dont see why the Spaniards could not.

Many factors. Spains decline was already in progress before Britain took off. The 17th century was one of almost continuous warfare for them and also due to plagues their population actually declined. Spain continually defaulted on its debts and internally it was a mess with poor administration and tolls and tariffs hindering its economic development.

During this period of Spanish decline Britain underwent an agricultural revolution, population growth and the industrial revolution. Perhaps if the Spanish monarchy had been able to reform the country they could have kept hold of what they had for longer however they did not and the economy did not progress leaving them comparatively poor and backward

By the 19th century they really hadn't progressed much from their heyday basically with an overtaxed rural peasantry while Britain became the work shop of the world, an industrial and financial powerhouse and the foremost naval power.

The differing conditions allowed one empire to progress while the other stagnated. Probably many other reasons as well. The Spanish under the Hapsburgs were the most powerful of the European nations at one time but eventually they declined like all Empires and were overtaken by the French and British. In turn Britains industrial might which underpinned its Empire was eroded by the rise of other nations and it has been argued Britains leaders in turn were slow to recognize these changes leaving them as some calls it 'the weary Titan struggling under the massive orb of their fate'.

By the late colonial era Spain was still effectively a nation of peasants which had been in state of relative decline for centuries while Britain had completely transformed from an island on the edge of European affairs to the worlds leading industrial nation and naval power so the situations weren't even comparable. Spains prime was in the 1600's, Britains was the 1800's. I think what I'm saying is the British hung on longer because both Empires were in completely different stages of their development Britain had the industry and population to project their power and retain their Empire at a time the Spanish did not.