Mexican American War Dbq Essay

America was justified in going into war with Mexico because they wanted to respect their soldiers,Texas was now an American state,and Mexico lost control of the land.It took four people to cause the Revolutionary War,and it only took 16 men to start the Mexican-American War.In order to respect the American soldiers that were killed,America needed to go to war.Document B it states, “Texas had determined to annex herself to our union,and under these circumstances,it was it was plainly our duty to extend our protection over her citizens soil.”(Doc B)When Texas declared its independence,it was known to soon become an American state.Texas was seen as a sister to America and they wanted to protect the land that was invaded.On Document A it states,

would consider such an act “ a declaration of war” in the minds of many mexicans, the war from mexico’s point of view was that when texas gave themselves to the united states it was not allowed for both legal and security reasons, so when the mexican government found out about the treaty signed between texas and the united states they considered an act of war. The evidence backs up the thesis by stating that “Texas gave themselves to the United States” which is expansionism for the United States. The United States wasn't justified in going to war with Mexico. This is because many Texans wanted to keep their slaves, which also led to expansion and slavery. From the document the text states, “Mexico, on achieving her independence from the Spanish crown.

The territory between the Rio Grande and the Nueces River was disputed, so the Mexicans were able protect the land in which they believed was theirs. Because of the dispute between the land, both countries thought that the land was theirs. Furthermore, Texas was annexed without the consent of Mexico. President Polk used this as an excuse to start war, but things could have been avoided. For example, the U.S. bought land for railroads from Mexico during the “Gadsden

In document D Mexico got their independence from Spain. All of the land that was Spain's was now Mexico's. This evidence shows the the United States was not justified in going to war because Mexico just got Texas and The United states already want to go to war over it. It’s Mexico's land not the

Invasion." ... From Mexico’s point of view, the annexation of Texas to the United States was inadmissible for both legal and security reasons (Document C). Mexican and American schools and historians view this war differently. Mexico sees it as an invasions while America sees it as a war. Mexicans believes that America occupying the territory that they were fighting over increased the possibilities of a confrontation.

In document C it states that "From Mexico’s point of view, the annexation of Texas to the United States was inadmissible for both legal and security reasons. " Also in document C it states "when the Mexican government learned of the treaty signed between Texas and the United States". From the beginning the annexation of Texas to the US was not allowed which was the knowledge Mexico knew for the longest, until Mexico learned there was a treaty signed. The word "learn" makes it sound like this hasn't been discussed, like Texas and the US never went to see Mexico's input.

In the year 1844, The President of Mexico, Santa Anna, was forced to sign a treaty (Doc C). He was told to sign a treaty to make Texas a free country, or he would die.The Mexican government did not approve of this treaty, or know of this treaty until after the signing (Doc C). When they heard of the treaty signed by Santa Anna, The Mexican government believed this was not a proper treaty. So they kept their originally established border, The Nueces River [Hook exercise]. Yet, the Americans crossed the Border. Not only did the Americans cross the border, the sent 70 soldiers, fully armed,

Mexico did have the power to govern more territory and had fair laws and a treaty with America. “The annexation of Texas was inadmissible for for both legal and security reasons”(Doc C, Par1).“They already had the Anglo Saxon foot on the borders of California which Mexico had been to before.” With California America’s possession, they did not need more of Mexico’s land(Doc A, Par3). With that in place, Ignoring the governmental power of Mexico was wrong considering they had seize of California. Mexico had been disrespected at both rightful land masses. America's actions to seize

A man named John L. O’Sullivan says that Mexico is “...hammering our power, limiting our greatness, and checking the fulfilment of our manifest destiny” (Document A). This quote talks about how the Mexican government is affecting the Texas in a bad way. O’Sullivan also states,”Mexico never can exert any real governmental authority over such a country” (Document A). The quote is talking about California, which is with Mexico and has anger towards the government as well. A Mexican, named Jesus Velasco-Marquez, said “...when Texas and America signed the treaty, it would be considered a declaration of war” (Document C). This shows how desperate the government is toward getting back at Texas for leaving. Also “Mexico was catholic and non-slavery, while Texas was protestant and pro-slavery” (Roden 317). Texas left because Mexico and Texas had different beliefs. The Mexican government gave Texas a great reason to leave because no one can live in a country with a terrible government, and different

In document B, the President shares what America thought was the border of the country. In the document it says, “The Congress of Texas, by its act of December 19, 1836, had declared the Rio Del Norte to be the boundary of that republic...The country between that river and the Del Norte...is now included within one of our congressional districts.” In Document C, the author shows what Mexico thought was their border. It says, “-instruction to protect the border, meaning the territory located between the Rio Grande and the Nueces River”. Both documents convey the two countries inability to agree on a border and who owned the land. A war was unavoidable considering how long this had gone on

In document I it says, “The fact of the advance of the army, under your excellency’s orders, over the line occupied by you north of the Nueces River at Corpus Christi, places me under the necessity, as the chief political authority of the State of Tamaulipas, being justly alarmed at the invasion of an army.” Since Jenes Cardenas, the author of this letter, was alarmed at the invasion of the United States army in their territory, it clearly means that there had been no conflict with the United States prior to the invasion because Mexico would’ve expected something like this to happen, and therefore wouldn’t have been alarmed by it. Additionally, document H says, “The point of your ultimate destination is the western frontier of Texas, where you will select and occupy, on or near the Rio Grande, such a site as will be best adapted to repel invasion, and to protect what, in the event of annexation, will be our western border.” This means that the United States purposely sent troops to the Rio Grande, which they knew belonged to Mexico, and tried to take all land north of the Rio Grande without Mexico’s consent. Along with that, in document A, John L. O’Sullivan says, “Imbecile and distracted, Mexico never can exert any real government authority over such a country…. The Anglo-Saxon foot is already on [California’s] borders … armed with the plough and rifle, and marking its trail with schools

Benjamin Lundy, who was an antislavery advocate at the time, spoke about what the Americans are trying to accomplish in document C, “The immediate cause and the main goal of this war… has been to grab the large and valuable territory of Texas from the Mexican Republic, in order to re-establish the SYSTEM OF SLAVERY; to open a vast and profitable SLAVEMARKET; and… to annex it to the United States.” The American settlers didn’t address the fact that they truly did make a plan to make Texas a slave market when they brought slaves to Mexico– may I add, Mexico told incoming settlers beforehand the rules you must follow if they are going to live on their slot of land, and bringing slaves was one of them. This next piece comes again from Benjamin Lundy, adding on to the proof that Americans weren’t even trying to do the same as what Mexico is doing for them (providing land, selling the land for a cheap price, etc.). “...Inhabitants of Texas have been fighting to maintain the sacred principles of Liberty, and the natural, inalienable Rights of Man:---whereas, their motives have been exactly the

It was also violation of international law and Mexicans were threatened as their other territories could be annexed by similar method along the border. The Mexican government had always wanted to maintain in a negotiable manner with the United States. Although the Mexican nation was seriously offended by the United States due to its action in Texas, the government was willing to receive a representative who would arrive in this capital from the Unite States having full faculties to settle the current dispute in a nonviolent, sensible and respectable

These similarities and differences define each game. For example “Star Craft 64” and “Side Meier’s Civilization IV” are both strategy games. However, Star Craft is based as an RTS. So the player has seemingly complete freedom to do as they please with the game. Whereas Civ.

“Some congress did not want to anger Mexican officials who still regarded Texas as part of their country” (Roden317). Some people in the American government respected the fact that Texas was Mexico’s territory first. Others were ignorant and preferred to continue their plan of converting Mexican land to American soil. American settlers and an Anglo-Saxon foot were on the borders and prepared to obtain California, even if there was conflict with Mexico (O’Sullivan323). Mexico’s government was not as strong, but the land, such as Texas and California, belonged to them and should not have been controlled by America.