The Parkus Empire wrote:Sanctissima wrote:
I... can't really disagree since I'm both Canadian and nationalist as all hell, but at least from the American perspective, I can't rightly condemn a nation for seeing what appears to be low-hanging fruit and attempting to snatch it, only to get mauled by a passive-aggressive beaver.
As for supposed Republican passivity prior to the 70's, remind me which party was running the show when these events happened:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish%E2%80%93American_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_Panama_from_Colombia
Nevermind the events of the American Civil War or the handling of the Cold War during Eisenhower's presidency.
I don't really see how the party could rightly be considered pacifistic pre-1970's.
Fortunaty I never said they were pacifists.
No doubt Roosevelt was a very abnormal Republican, which is why he broke with the party.
You said they were anti-imperialist, when clearly they were nothing of the sort.
More "anti-European imperialist, pro-American imperialism" than anything.
As for Teddy, he broke with the Republican Party because it was straying from progressivism, and he had a bit of a grudge with Taft, not because of imperialism, foreign intervention or anything of the sort.