Kinzer ends chapter 1 stating, "Stevens acted without explicit orders from Washington. He certainly overstepped his authority...he used his power and theirs to depose the Hawaiian monarchy." Considering this observation, Kinzer's book argues that history does not repeat itself but rather it delights in patterns and symmetry. What does this overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy suggest for American Foreign Policy in the future? (What will it allow American Foreign Policy to do in the future?) Do you agree with the flexibility of American interventions? Why or Why not? What current events can you link to Kinzer's belief that American Foreign policy is not always "explicit" to the American people and can be at times very "subversive?"
*This will be graded*
Sonya Raab
ReplyDeleteWhat does this overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy suggest for American Foreign Policy in the future? (What will it allow American Foreign Policy to do in the future?)
When Hawaii was overthrown it was the first time in History where an overthrow was successful. From this overthrow other people and countries learned that to overthrow a foreign policy it must be run by with the president or leader. For the future people learned what does work and what will not work. This definitely influenced the idea of of overthrowing. If one group of people can succeed in an overthrow then there will be others to succeed. This shows that American foreign policy can be changed and taken over when necessary.
Do you agree with the flexibility of American interventions?
No
Why or Why not?
If the president was to not intervene then tons of decisions would be made without him knowing all the time The president is there for a reason it is his job to make sure everything is in line and to make the decisions for America. But if people go off overthrowing and not letting the president be a part in the decision then he would be unaware of people who have come to power or new states or new decisions or rebellions or revolutions. The president is there for a reason and only under his command and approve is it okay to move forward with an overthrow or any other kind of act.
What current events can you link to Kinzer's belief that American Foreign policy is not always "explicit" to the American people and can be at times very "subversive?"
American Foreign Policy is very subversive right now because we have American troops stationed in Iraq. The troops are not welcome there but they have been there for years anyways. The president has enforced these rules upon American troops. The policy in America may come off as organized and more explicit. However the subversive side shows that they are exposing themselves in Iraq and they are there uninvited. Sometimes the American people are unaware of the situations going on around the world with American policy. The president gives speeches to warn us, and it is on the news a few times a week. But how can we know if we are being told everything thats going on in Iraq. What if we are only being told the explicit part and not the subversive part at all. What if we are only knowing the simple conflicts and not the long-term dangerous ones. Should American citizens have say in the decisions the president is making? Or should we leave it all to the president to deal with on his own?
Margeaux:
ReplyDeleteThe overthrow of Hawaii was crucial in American Foreign Policy because it was the first overthrow for America. It suggests that America in the future will be more advanced and a have more distinguished experience in Foreign Policy. America should get involved when the government steps into another country's government because those decisions should be brought to the president's attention. It is dangerous for the government to make choices without the president’s knowledge because the American people elected the president because we agree with what that person believed and thought. If the president does not know about an invasion and he does not agree with it then most likely the American people will not either. In current day America we are present in Afghanistan. When it comes to that area of the news I feel like if I looked hard enough I could find what is needed to know what is going on and I feel that President Obama did let the people know what is going on I just have to do the research to find out for myself. I can connect the current day Afghanistan conflict with what Kinzer has to say because American Foreign Policy may require research for information and same for in the past.
Mark
ReplyDeleteThe overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy will allow for more overthrows to come. I believe that it will be like a snowball effect, once it starts rolling its hard to stop. I do not agree with the flexibility of American interventions. I don't think we should invade a country because a company wants us to. There should be little to no flexibility of American interventions. We shouldn't use the military for small inconveniences, it should be used for a good purpose for insistence like world war II. If we are going to start a war, then it should be a just war. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm not sure why we are in Iraq and I think that we are in Afghanistan because of terrorism. The government is hiding lots of things from the American people. The politicians want the people to vote for them so they will lie and cheat to get put into office. This is a terrible way to run a country where the people don't know whats going on. How are we supposed to vote if we can't separate truth and lies.
Anders
ReplyDeleteThis overthrow changed the future of US foreign policy by making it so the US was intervening a lot more. It was an aggressive way for the US to expand using national security as their reason for invading and overthrowing. Because of Hawaii, the US foreign policy made the US able to intervene in any foreign conflict that the saw fit. I do not agree that the US foreign policy should be so flexible. I say this because if the US government is not sharing their plans with every branch, there will be a lot of conflict within the country. If there is a lot of conflict within the country, the government will not be stable and the United States could fall apart. An example that could be linked to Kinzers belief would be the war in the middle east. I do not fully agree that the US government is keeping us in the dark, although there are parts of the war that are unclear. The parts that are unclear might be kept a secret because the government thinks that its better for the country if it remains a secret. If one wanted to learn everything about the war in the middle east there are still ways to find out everything. There are many documentaries and books that can be found that show all sides of the war.
Alexia S.
ReplyDeleteThe overthrowing of the Hawaiian Monarchy, suggests to me that the future of America's foreign policy will be extremely abusive to other countries that have similar attributes to that of Hawaii. What that means is, the U.S foreign policy will continue to abuse other weaker countries to benefit themselves and their people. Selfishly leaving the other countries in an even worse situation. Not only destroying lives of many, but also demoralizing people by stripping them of their religion and beliefs.
I do not believe in the flexibility of American interventions. I don't believe in it because Americans are extremely different from many other countries, and they have different ways of living. When America tries to intervene in other countries they cause nothing but destruction, because they end up causing alot of conflict with the native people.
The war in Iraq is a good example of Kinzer's belief on how Americans foreign policy is not always explicit to American people. Many incidents that happened in the war left many Americans in confusion. Basically, we did not understand why it was completely necessary for the war to carry on. Maybe it was some what the peoples fault because they did not search for Answers, but i still believe that the President and the government should have tried to inform us in any way necessary.
Molly The overthrow in Hawaii suggest that future Foreign Policy might be less about the law and trying to help another country with its government and more about how the US can benefit itself. This would allow American to prosper much more financially, but it would also have very destructive results for any other countries involved. The flexibility that was taken in this case was far too much and I do not agree with it. This overthrow was done without any knowledge of the President. That is not something that should happen because the President gets voted the leader of our country for a reason. The people trust him to make decisions that are good for our country and others, but if the President is completely unaware of what's going on how can he make decision to make ours and other countries better? He can't. A current event that can be linked to Kinzer's belief is the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Many of the American people do not know what is going there because they choose not to but for the most part our current President, Obama, seems to try and keep everyone who wants to be informed, informed. The people who choose not to be informed because they either honestly don't care about what is happening to the people around them and around the world or they don't understand it. Just because information is provided to you does not mean that it makes sense to everyone.
ReplyDeleteMark
ReplyDeleteThe overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy will allow for more overthrows to come. I believe that it will be like a snowball effect, once it starts rolling its hard to stop. I do not agree with the flexibility of American interventions. I don't think we should invade a country because a company wants us to. There should be little to no flexibility of American interventions. We shouldn't use the military for small inconveniences, it should be used for a good purpose for insistence like world war II. If we are going to start a war, then it should be a just war. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm not sure why we are in Iraq and I think that we are in Afghanistan because of terrorism. The government is hiding lots of things from the American people. The politicians want the people to vote for them so they will lie and cheat to get put into office. This is a terrible way to run a country where the people don't know whats going on. How are we supposed to vote if we can't separate truth and lies.
Rene- The overthrow of the Hawaiian government was the first American overthrow. The American Foreign policy should have rules about overthrowing other countries government. It will allow the policy to have to be a lot more powerful and demanding to other countries. I feel as if the Foreign policy will be determined on the president and his beliefs. I believed in the the flexbility of interventions because Americans could feel threatened at the point or see a future problem for themselves. The only time the Americans didn't need to overthrow a government if it's not affecting them in no kind of way. I feel as the Americans back home are not really informed on the war in Iraq. The President really doesn't talk about what the foreign policy is. Most Americans usually know about the violence only. I think the president should inform us more about the policy.
ReplyDeleteElinor Baker Brelis:
ReplyDeleteThe Hawaiian overthrow was the first of its kind, but not the last of it. Stevens and other sugar planters, along with Blane, went behind McKinley's back and started a war of wealth. Thurston, Dole, and Stevens were not thinking about the better of their country, they were thinking about their plants. They wanted more land, more power, and no taxes. They went to Blane and asked for help. McKinely never knew until after the overthrow, that there had been an overthrow. The rules should not be broken. When government members create an organization to overthrow a country, and the President is not informed, then the people are not informed. America is for the people and by the people. The people should get a say, and the president is the peoples say. He is elected by the people so he can speak for the people. When government members overthrow a country, they are also overthrowing America. They are defying the government, and in that the constitution which is the fundamental foundation of America. Today, we face similar issues with the war in Iraq. In my opinion we are not informed about decisions being made with the war, and the war itself. I feel that we are sometimes informed about the war and the governments actions. Other times I feel we have no clue what is going on. I guess I do agree with Kinzer but also disagree a little bit. The government is confusing and a fifteen year old doesnt always know every single thing that is happening. So, I can only speak from my point of view. I feel that we are not informed as much as we should be, but also I take some responsibility for that. I could seek out answers and pay more attention. If I want to understand more of what is happening in the war, I could make more of an effort to. I still do believe that America is for the people by the people. Rite now I am not sure what it is. Hopefully I will find out soon.
Lucas
ReplyDeleteTo me the overthrow of the Hawaiian government set the stage for other political interventions throughout the course of the next hundred+ years. The mere sight of 60 marines and other sailors all armed and wheeling artillery and machine guns through a city street was enough to cause 550 Hawaiian policemen in an easily defensible government estate. This was the first time this had happened in American history, but would certainly not be the last time. As was seen throughout the course of the century and in 5 continents, an American display (and threat) of force was enough to cause surrender of a government without a single shot being fired, although this would not always be the case. As was happening with the Spanish American War with yellow journalism and misinformation to the general public is happening now with the war in Afghanistan, and people being misinformed or misled by the media.
The overthrow of Hawaii was the first of many overthrows initiated by the American government. Hawaii started the pattern seen up to today in American foreign policy. The pattern to overthrow weaker, less stable countries for raw materials and new naval bases. Since 1893 the United States government has been invading countries for their goods and prime locations for naval bases. When we conquered Hawaii we took over its giant sugar market in similar respect to Cuba during the Spanish American war in 1898. When we overthrew the Philippines we got a prime location for a naval base since it is close to Asia. In 1903 we established Guantonmo Bay, a naval base in Cuba. Recently the United States was in a war with Iraq. The public was told that the United States initially invaded Iraq for suspicion of weapons of mass destruction but while we were there we took large sums of oil, a raw material. When you succeed at something you tend to continue to do it and thats exactly what the Unites States does. The United States overthrows non-stable governments that are in convenient locations to take over their raw materials and prime locations. To the American public the media makes our invasions seem necessary for the good of common people, as if we are going into to save them because they can not function with out us. Within the United States government the plan is always to inherit recourses and become a bigger empire. Morally this is completely incorrect and wrong. On the other hand this what makes the United States what we are today, a strong and stable country with an Empire watched around the world.
ReplyDeleteThe Overthrow of Hawaii was a critical in American Foreign Policy since it was the first successful overthrow for America. Before conquering Hawaii, Thurston, Dole, and Stevens were only wasting their energy on the desire for more land, more authority, and no tariffs. However, in the late 1800s Hawaii was a weaker country, which gave people the urge for new fleet bases and raw materials. Yet, after the U.S overthrew Hawaii, we took control over their sugar industries. In the future, this will allow American Foreign Policy has the ability to be adjusted since if a group of people have the power to overthrow and get the presidents approval, then the idea have overthrowing can be a huge impact on society. Even though the U.S were able to triumph over Hawaii, the flexibility of American interventions only proves that the U.S are not fit to rule themselves and need more help. Today, U.S troops have been in Afghanistan for five years and have not made much improvement to make Iraq a peaceful and secure land. However, in todays world, in order to find out important information about the Iraq War, I find myself searching on the internet with no knowledge of what happening to our troops. The President of the United States should be one of the most informative people in the U.S. and should have more respect for our soldiers fighting for our country. I agree with Kinzers statement about the Foreign Policy because I sometimes wonder if the Government and president are sometimes only giving us basic information and hiding the true facts?
ReplyDeleteThe overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy asserts for the U.S. the right to overthrow foreign governments in the future. It does this in much the same way that by allowing someone to get away with something once, they are much more likely to do it again. Personally, I do not agree with the flexibility or frequency of American interventions. We are no better than anyone else and our interests are not worth more than theirs, especially not in their country. Often, People don’t really want our “help” with revolutions. Would we have liked it if the French or Spanish had come in and tried to “help” our revolution and then take over our fledgling country? In many countries, propoganda is often used to make people believe and support a certain view point, often one that agrees with what the government supports. By not defining exactly what a plan of action is meant to accomplish, one can make people support it who normally would not.
ReplyDeleteSteven's order to overthrow the Hawaiian monarchy foreshadowed that U.S. would unjustly annex many weaker countries. After America had successfully taken over Hawaii their confidence as a country sky rocketed, sending them into a mentality that any country they wanted was their for the taking. This state of mind is called social darwinsim which meant that the U.S. genuinely believed that they were superior to all other countries. America was hungry for an empire and they were ready to surely trample any country that got in their way. I do agree that in many cases the annexation of foreign countries was in Americas best interest for example if the country was in no shape to run itself, or if it could greatly stimulate the U.S. economy. However many of Americas were completely unjustified and gave the U.S. little to no gain, but merely the feeling of power. One instance of foreign policy gone wrong is the war currently taking place in Iraq. We entered the war with the goal of capturing Sadam and putting an end to his cruel dictatorship. The U.S. did manage to accomplish this goal but in return were left with serious consequences. Those consequences being we have thousands of young American soldiers fighting in a battle that they surely cannot win. If is often questioned if storming into this country is worth all the bloodshed and constant fear of terrorist attacks.
ReplyDeleteThe overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy was absolutely crucial to American foreign policy because it was the very first time the United States overthrew a nation. Whatever methods were used to overthrow the Hawaiian Monarchy set a precedent for every other time that the United States decided to intervene in the affairs of another nation. These precedents are dangerous to set. For example, you do not want future policy makers to think it is okay to act on their own just because Stevens did so with Hawaii. Policy makers have an obligation to go through the correct channels before making critical decisions. Fortunately, not many policy makers in our society are acting like Stevens, but there sometimes is a gap between the actions of the U.S government, and the actions we are told the government will take. To put it simply, the United States government will sometimes choose to tell the American people a fraction, or none of the truth about action they will be taking against another country. The former conflict between the United States and Iraq is a perfect example. In 2003, the United States, as well as other coalition forces, invaded Iraq with the first 21 days of conventional and clandestine operations. Seeing that the United States was also in the midst of the War in Afghanistan, the American people wanted to know why we were sending troops to another country in the Middle East. The answer came from our President and Commander and Chief, George W. Bush. President Bush received credible intelligence that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, or WMDs. After he eventually learned that Iraq did not have WMDs, he still told the American people that they did. Why? We may never know for sure. Possibly because Iraq was under the rule of Saddam Hussein; and he was someone who needed to be removed from power. What about North Korea? Same exact thing. The consequences of the action President Bush took is the fact that now many Americans can't fully trust him. The similarity between Iraq and Hawaii is that during both events there was a lack of trust between the American people, and within the government itself.
ReplyDeleteIt is true that American foreign policy is not always explicit to the American people. This is most likely because diplomacy is usually most effective when it is conducted in secret. Just the people making a business deal can negotiate best in private, so governments can more easily reach agreements in private than in public. This does not mean that the public does not have a right to know but it does provide a better chance for resolving differences. Because of this it is absolutely necessary for our country, America, to have the flexibility to intervene when it is essential to out interest. The threat of military intervention can be an important element in achieving a diplomatic goal.
ReplyDeleteOur current interventions in the countries of Iraq and Afghanistan are an example of the need to intervene in areas where our interest are important. The Middle East is very important for many reasons. As the world's only super power we cannot allow other countries in this region to threaten their neighbors or support terrorism that puts us in danger. We are currently leaving open the option of using force to stop the country of Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. This threat is believable only because of the other interventions in Iraq Afghanistan by the U.S.
Our history includes past interventions in far off places such as Hawaii. We have done so when we felt it was in our interest to do so. This type of intervention may not seem fair or just, but it is not unusual for powerful countries to act in such a way. The American public should expect its elected leader to be honest with them but they also expect that the same leaders act in their best interests in protecting the country.
The overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy by the United States set a precedent in foreign policy by giving justification to decisions made without the consent or knowledge of the entire US government. In the 20th and 21st century, many controversial decisions in the realm of foreign policy were hidden from the general public and sectors of the government in order to decrease criticism and opposition. An example is the US agencies support of Manuel Noriega, known drug trafficker and dictator of Panama to gain control in Central America. The America’s loose take on foreign policy has been essential to its growth and development, for agreements to be reached secrecy is key. The American public’s animosity towards the handling of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is mainly caused by the news coverage/yellow journalism reported to American citizens. The Bush administration used the potential threat of nuclear weapons supposedly in Iraq as a cover to take advantage of Iraq’s wealth of oil and infiltrate their government. The US government consistently uses secrecy to its benefit in foreign policy to obtain power, resources, strategic points, and others valuable to the US.
ReplyDeleteTravis Block
ReplyDeleteThe overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy allowed many more to come. I believe that it acted as a domino effect. I believe that America should stay out of these conflicts unless they are asked to help. I don't think we should invade a country because a company asks us. There should be little to no flexibility of American interventions. the Military shouldn't use for small inconveniences, it should be used for a good purpose for conflicts like the World Wars. If we are declaring war, then it should be a just war. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan were not just wars. We went in there for weapons of mass destruction thats was not there. The governments hiding much info from the American people. The politicians want the people to vote for them so they will lie and cheat to get put into office. This is a terrible way to run a country where the people don't know whats going on and it leads to distrust in the government.
What does this overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy suggest for American Foreign Policy in the future? (What will it allow American Foreign Policy to do in the future?)
ReplyDeleteThe overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy suggests that America will try to overthrow the monarchy of a different nation for economic reasons. The Hawaiian monarchy was overthrown because Queen Lili wanted to create a new constitution that reduced the power of the sugar farmers.
Do you agree with the flexibility of American interventions? Why or Why not?
I do not agree with the flexibility of American interventions. Overthrows should not happen without the consent of the president. Decisions should not be made secretly. This happened when the orders were given to overthrow the Hawaiian monarchy without the president knowing. President Bill Clinton did not know about the orders to overthrow the Hawaiian government.
What current events can you link to Kinzer's belief that American Foreign policy is not always "explicit" to the American people and can be at times very "subversive?"
Obama said that he would withdraw the soldiers from Iraq; however, 50,000 Americans are staying behind as military advisors. Saying that we are withdrawing is not very explicit because there are still many Americans that are very involved in Iraq’s military.
Peter: The overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy suggests many things for future American Foreign policy. It has not been the last time a government official went behind the chain of command to usurp a foreign government. Furthermore, it shows a precedent for future American intervention in other countries’ sovereignty, creating an almost chain reaction in which America sets itself as an “evaluator” or “judge” of other countries’ due process. I do not agree that our government’s interventions in other countries are always “right” but many have been important for the development of this country. In fact, several of these “acquisitions” led to new economic and political opportunities, for example, acquiring Hawaii gave America a US base in the Pacific. However, these interventions must always be constitutional! We need to follow our own due process first. Therefore, I do not support any intervention that is acquired in less than admirable means. Lastly, a current example of where the American government has acted covertly is with the War in Iraq. Former president Bush told the American public that Iraq possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). However, no WMDs were ever found. Another current case remains Cuba. Cuba gives us a long-lasting example of government interference and public deception. The most recent of which being the detainees of Guantanamo Bay. Prisoners have been held for years without official charge. Families have testified that their loved ones just vanish. They are given no additional information. Many detainees have been denied fundamental human rights in the name of “national security”. This is not acceptable for many reasons, but one of which being the government denies the American public knowledge and any course of redress. In conclusion, the American people must continue to hold our elected officials accountable for all their actions.
ReplyDeleteJherson-
ReplyDeleteIn the annexation of Hawaii, Stevens, an ambassador, acted with out permission of the president. He also abused his authority. This shows that the American Foreign Policy's rules should be more demanding in the future to make sure an act like this does not occur again. The overthrow of Hawaii's monarchy suggests that overthrowing a country's leader and or queen is wrong. In the future when taking over a country, the two country leaders should work together for the better of the country in my opinion. This is because the people of Hawaii didn't want a foreign county running their home land. Learning from the Hawaii incident, this will allow the U.S to work more successful with countries for the better and the liking of the people. I don't agree with the flexibility of American Interventions because in expanding your country you would need to respect other countries. Not like the Americans did to Hawaii. I believe rules should not be broken and the people who do break them should be penalized. An event similar to the annexation of Hawaii is the war in Iraq. I believe these situations are similar because the people of Hawaii didn't want the Americans on their land, as the people of Iraq do not want the Americans in their land today.