8.3 - Expansion and Imperialism: - Practice C

Officials: forts protect travel; leaders: forts threaten control of hunting lands

Officials: forts end trade; leaders: forts increase trade opportunities

Officials: forts stop migration; leaders: forts make migration easier

Officials: forts reduce government costs; leaders: forts reduce local taxes

To encourage settlers to avoid the trail entirely until the forts are removed

To justify military protection for travelers and warn about possible conflict

To explain why Plains Indian nations wanted more U.S. trade agreements

To announce that the government had ended westward settlement in the region

Settlers and the U.S. military expanded travel corridors across Indigenous lands

Most western territories stopped receiving new settlers after the Civil War

The U.S. government ended all treaty negotiations with Native nations

Plains Indian nations relocated east to avoid contact with settlers

Many U.S. expansionists: intervention shows strength; Spanish officials: intervention threatens authority

Many U.S. expansionists: intervention ends immigration; Spanish officials: intervention increases immigration

Many U.S. expansionists: intervention lowers tariffs; Spanish officials: intervention raises state taxes

Many U.S. expansionists: intervention stops all trade; Spanish officials: intervention eliminates newspapers

Growing public support for overseas involvement and expansion of U.S. influence

A national decision to stop all naval spending and close U.S. ports

The end of all U.S. trade with the Caribbean region

A policy of permanently avoiding alliances and international conflicts

To encourage Americans to avoid involvement outside the United States

To persuade Americans to support action against Spain and aid Cuba

To explain why the United States should return territories it already controls

To show that public opinion had no influence on foreign policy decisions

To argue that the United States should end overseas trade to avoid conflict

To justify expanding naval support to protect Pacific commerce and travel

To announce that the United States would stop sending ships across the Pacific

To explain why coaling stations were unnecessary for steam-powered ships

U.S. trade advocates: bases protect commerce; anti-imperialists: bases risk entanglement abroad

U.S. trade advocates: bases reduce trade; anti-imperialists: bases increase isolation

U.S. trade advocates: coaling stations end migration; anti-imperialists: coaling stations increase migration

U.S. trade advocates: Pacific routes hurt business; anti-imperialists: Pacific routes create no new markets

Growing interest in Pacific trade and access to Asian markets

A national decision to stop industrial production and focus only on farming

The end of long-distance ocean travel due to new land routes

A policy of avoiding all foreign commerce and closing U.S. ports

Concerns that European powers might use force to collect debts in the Caribbean

A policy of ending U.S. involvement in the Western Hemisphere

A decision to abolish the U.S. Navy to reduce overseas commitments

A belief that Latin American countries should invite European colonization

To justify U.S. intervention to maintain order and limit European involvement in the Americas

To announce that the United States would stop trading with Latin America

To promise that the United States would never use force outside its borders

To declare that European powers should control debt collection in the Western Hemisphere

U.S. officials: intervention prevents European pressure; many Latin American leaders: intervention threatens sovereignty

U.S. officials: intervention ends instability; many Latin American leaders: intervention guarantees equal voting rights

U.S. officials: intervention stops all immigration; many Latin American leaders: intervention increases immigration

U.S. officials: intervention lowers local taxes; many Latin American leaders: intervention raises tariffs