"colonies attached to the mother-country afford, therefore, the surest means of supporting abroad the sea power of a country. in peace, the influence of the government should be felt in promoting by all means a warmth of attachment and a unity of interest which will make the welfare of one the welfare of all, and the quarrel of one the quarrel of all; and in war, or rather for war, by inducing such measures of organization and defense as shall be felt by all to be a fair distribution of a burden of which each reaps the benefit.
having therefore no foreign establishments, either colonial or military, the ships of war of the united states, in war, will be like land birds, unable to fly far from their own shores. to provide resting-places for them, where they can coal and repair, would be one of the first duties of a government proposing to itself the development of the power of the nation at sea.
the question is eminently one in which the influence of the government should make itself felt, to build up for the nation a navy which, if not capable of reaching distant countries, shall at least be able to keep clear the chief approaches to its own."—alfred t. mahan, naval strategist and author, 1890
a. briefly explain one way the idea of manifest destiny relates to the views expressed in the text excerpt.
b. briefly explain one way the idea of imperialism relates to the views expressed in the text excerpt.
c. briefly explain one event or idea from the period 1890−1905 that could be used to support or refute the views expressed in the document.
(25 points)

Alfred Thayer Mahan was not only a writer, but also a brilliant American naval strategist and historian who strongly believed, from his observations over the conflicts that arose in Europe during his lifetime, between the different powers, especially conflicts over colonies and the protection of the homeland from attacks by naval forces, that it was really a necessity for any nation to build strong navies to protect not just the homeland but any and all territories belonging to a nation. In this brief excerpt of his, aside from lauding the importance of imperialism in keeping the military forces of a nation, and also the life of a nation, strong, he also emphazises that since the United States does not have colonies, they should still fight to build a naval force worthy to confront those of European powers in order to protect their homeland.

A. Manifest Destiny was the strong belief of Americans, especially philosophers and theorists, on the U.S´s God-given right to expand its territory over any that they wished. This philosophy, from the 19th century, drove the U.S to actions such as the purchase of Louisiana and even conflicts with other nations and the Indian nations. This ideal relates to the one expressed by Mahan in that both support the idea that a country has the right to seek expansion, be it within its borders or on foreign soil, to ensure its wellbeing and protection.

B. Imperialism is the idea that a nation has the right to seek to expand its influence and power over others and to seek new lands, even if these are already established by others. Powers may use military force or other means to acquire said land. This is where colonies come from. In this excerpt of Mahan, the author almost seems to admire the idea of colonization and even thinks that it is a good thing for both the invading and the colonized territory and its people. It also seems as if Mahan does not like the idea that the U.S does not have colonies.

C. One event that took place and that seems to be supported by these ideals of colonization and naval power is the Philippine-American War between 1899 and 1902. This war was fought between the U.S and the Philippiness when the latter was seeking its independence from the United States, who had received the land in the Treaty of Paris, after the war with Spain. This conflict refutes the ideals set forth by imperialism and also by Mahan because aside from the enormous loss of lives and the unnecessary use of resources to retain control over a land that doesn´t rightly belong to the invading force, it denies the rights that people have to govern themselves and choose their government, ideals that were established in the U.S Constitution from the very beginning.

since most of current immigration into the u.s., both legal and illegal, is coming from latin america. it would be very difficult to imagine or rationalize a country my fellow citizens are trying desperately to flee into, would pose a threat to my prosperity or freedom. since the u.s. has a long history of intervention, but no record of permanent occupation, i would not feel oppression is the main objective.  

the largest free trade nation, along with the largest gdp in the world wanting to expand it's economic policy on us, and including us, could only be positive. the u.s. government has no interest in, or way of simply forcing american culture on us. and has no track record of it. other nations that adopted american social culture, or "americanization" did so voluntarily, mainly through the choice of allowing american businesses and u.s. citizens to come into their nations, as free operatives.