Why did president wilson order that american soldiers were to fight in separate units under american command? he did not trust the allied forces not to sacrifice americans first. he wanted to position the u. s. to influence the postwar settlement. he hoped to gain european territory for the u. s. during the fighting. he believed the allied commanders had demonstrated a lack of ability.

The answer is very simple: domestic politics.

President Wilson feared two things:

1) That the Allies would use the untrained and badly equipped troops as cannon fodder.

2) That US troops under foreign command would lead to public outcry.

So far, US troops had only been placed under foreign command once (US Navy at Shanghai Station under British command in 1900). This was not well received in the American press back then.

Now in reality, General Pershing, in his wisdom, realized that Allied help was needed to properly train and equip the American Expeditionary Force.

The French trained and equipped the American troops and even integrated coloured American troops in French front line units as the US Army was strictly segregated.

The US troops fought in reality under French command (and some under Belgian command as well) although the French orders were officially issued as 'suggestions' to limit political fallout in the US.

The trick worked.

1) checks and balances- this idea is implemented in the constitution to ensure that no one branch of the federal government gains too much power. for example, the legislative branch(congress) can approve a bill that will then be sent to the executive branch (president). if the president does not like the bill or thinks that it violates the rights of citizens, he/she can veto the bill. vetoing the bill stops the bill from becoming a law. this check on power ensures that congress makes laws that do not violate the rights of citizens.

2) anti-federalists do not want to ratify the constitution unless it includes a bill of rights. the anti-federalists are worried that the constitution gives too much power to the federal government. having a strong central government caused problems when the us was still part of great britain. this is why the anti-federalists are fearful of this type of system.

3) federalists want a new constitution passed because it will fix america's weak political structure. before the us constitution is implemented, the constitution being used is known as the articles of confederation. this constitution has an extremely weak central government, allowing for disunity among the states.

can't do the whole thing, hope this

president carter called the victims of kidnapping "victims of terrorism and anarchy" and added that the united states was not going to give in to blackmail. in the united states, they see hostage-taking as an outrage on the part of the islamist movement that violated the principle of international law on the immunity and inviolability of diplomats and their embassies.

carter refused to yield to the demands, khomeini used the situation to consolidate his power and nullify the challenges of the moderate wing of his government, headed by its president. the euphoria over the humiliation of the most powerful nation distracted the iranian people from the economic difficulties of their country. carter, in april 1980, broke diplomatic relations with iran and imposed a trade embargo, except medicine and food. iranian funds in the us they were frozen and accounted for to compensate the hostages when they were released and to pay the demands of us companies against iran.