Nothing that Wilson said about the danger to democracy could not have been said all along. For that cause we could have gone to war six months or a year or two years earlier, with incalculable effect on history. Except for the proof of hostility in the resumed submarine campaign and the Zimmermann telegram, our cause would have been as valid, but we would then have been fighting a preventive war-to prevent a victory by German militarism with its potential danger to our way of life-not a war of no choice. Instead, we waited for the overt acts of hostility which brought the war to us?

The author's word choice gives the reader a sense that

Question

Angelina Peterson

English

11 April, 13:12

Nothing that Wilson said about the danger to democracy could not have been said all along. For that cause we could have gone to war six months or a year or two years earlier, with incalculable effect on history. Except for the proof of hostility in the resumed submarine campaign and the Zimmermann telegram, our cause would have been as valid, but we would then have been fighting a preventive war-to prevent a victory by German militarism with its potential danger to our way of life-not a war of no choice. Instead, we waited for the overt acts of hostility which brought the war to us?

The author's word choice gives the reader a sense that

+3

Answers (2)

Know the Answer?

Leandro Chase · Answer 1

the entry of the United States into World War I was justified, and the timing was accurate.

Explanation:

In "How We Entered World War I," by Barbara Tuchman makes reference to the US entry into World War I as proved to be right or reasonable. The reason is that, apart from the the sinking of the Lusitania and the Zimmermann telegram campaigns, the US would have been forced to fight against Germany anyway in order to keep something worse from occurring.

Macdonald · Answer 2

D the entry of the United States into World War I was justified, and the timing was accurate.