US of AmericaS

>>3174122
But they fucking did? Do you think california and texas were initially under U.S. sovereignty or something? They even tried invading canada but got promptly btfo by the local militias.

File: Golden_Circle_(Proposed_Country).png (5KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 320x240px

>>3174122
> Why didn't USA never expanded into the rest of the Americas, formally annexing more countries/regions as states?

Here's the thing - it very well could've. Indeed, the Confederacy had a plan in the case of victory to proceed and go and annex a large chunk of Latin America, creating the so-called "Golden Circle", to create a new economy powered by new slave states.

The path the Northern United States was headed on, the development of industry and manufacturing, was far less reliant on miltiary expansion for economy growth. There was not such an intense need for land to be tilled - because the economy increasingly diverged from agriculture.

The Americas was saved from cruel, harsh, Southern "Gentleman" penises by virtue of Northern, industrial, Neo-puritan pride - a change in the economy.

>>3174146
The Golden Circle was such a fucking retarded idea

>>3174122
1. They did. The Mexican-American war ended with acquisition of much of the west coast and the center of modern day America. The Spanish-American war ended with the acquisition of a few of Spain's Carribean colonies, like Puerto Rico and Cuba, as well as the Phillippines. America also conquered Hawaii.

2. They tried. The war of 1812 was an attempt on the acquisition of Canada.

3. They bought land instead of warring for it. The Louisiana purchase, Alaska, Florida, and a small part of New Mexico were all purchases made by the US government.

4. They found that to reap the benefits of a land as if it was owned, formal ownership was not necessary. This is referred to as "neocolonialism" or "economic imperialism." As aggressive land acquisition has become increasingly looked down upon in today's pacifist world, the benefits of this kind of trade domination become greater.

5. They had other things on their minds. The US has been almost constantly at war since its inception. It is rumored that the Spanish-American war began merely because there had not been a war in a while — see all of Theodore Roosevelt's commentary on the conflict. If you can find a time in American history when they were not currently fighting a war and not immediately recovering from a war, then we can have a deeper discussion about why they chose not to go to war at that time. But, generally, they WERE involved in expansion much of the time.

>>3174143
half of the defending army were British regulars you stupid fucking canadian

>>3174223
Give him a break anon, he only has that and Vimy Ridge to wuz about

>>3174207
t. Spaniard
You blew up our boat and then convinced the American populous that you didn't do it even though all the evidence points to Spain.

Also the only reason it's true that we've been to war most of the time was because Indian wars dragged on for years and years with no real battles taking place. Just frontier conflicts.

File: article-2414528-1BAB24B3000005DC-214_638x367.jpg (56KB, 638x367px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 638x367px

>>3174223
>>3174226
absolutely anally annihilated

>>3174231
D.C. was just recently the capital and at that point no one in the country, not even the president gave a shit about it. It was barely even defended.

>>3174231
not to mention that the brits only held D.C. for a matter of an hour or so, before getting chased out of the city by a fucking tornado

>>3174235
>>3174236
completely buttfrustrated

>>3174227
>Act like a cunt about Cuba
>Threaten if there are any more anti-American protests you'll be forced to intervene
>Send a ship on a ""friendly"" visit to provoke exactly that reaction
>Boat explodes in a harbor
>Head of the USN says no naval mine exists that could do it
>Congress, who don't know anything about naval mines, says fuck you it was a naval mine
McKinley really was a cunt

File: spanish american war.png (44KB, 239x639px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 239x639px

>>3174246
Aww is the Spaniard mad that they lost a war to a country less than 100 years old?

File: 1473415182864.png (358KB, 466x1036px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 466x1036px

>>3174255
I'm not Spanish dickhead, stop WUZZING about shit you had no part in, it's really gay

>>3174227
I'd still say that "frontier conflicts" aren't nothing. At the very least, they occupy some mental space — vast tracks of land are not useful if there are violent natives roaming around making it unsafe for your settlers, and there's no sense in acquiring more territory if you're not even using what you have. And even if they were not always very eventful, such conflicts still tied up portions of the United States Army.

>>3174146
Because it would be a political shitstorm and going through those fucking jungles would be hell

>>3174151
Southerners had and still have a fetish for shitskins. It's like Otto von Bismarck with a banjo, uniting all shitskins under one flag.