Mexican War
The events that followed after Mexico gained independence from Spain have remained historical up to date. However, the US-Mexican war has remained an issue of contention between two groups that argue whether or not the war was justified. The history of the war shows that the main reason behind the war was the annexation of Texas, and Polk’s interest in Mexico. Generally, the Mexican war was not justified by any means, and the US was led by the desire for superiority and the need for slavery lands.
The Mexican war started due to Polk’s interest in Texas, which was part of the Mexican territory. After independence from Spain, Mexico owned several empty lands. In a bid to have the grounds occupied, Mexico accepted the settlement of Americans in their land (Grynaviski, 2016). However, allowing Americans into Mexico was not a wise idea because later, the Americans turned up against the Mexicans and decided to take Texas. Generally, Mexicans were based on Catholicism, and slavery was not acceptable on their lands. Americans, on the other hand, were protestants but still valued slavery. Polk’s ascension to power came along with the desire to expand America to new territories. Polk generally believed that he had a divine calling to aid in the expansion of America, and therefore he was ready for any conquest that would give America more possession of territories. Polk’s desire to expand America led to the war, and thus, the war was only based on personal opinions. Moreover, the Mexican war was based on the illegal acquisition of Mexican territories.
Texas was Mexican territory, and thus, any attempts by the US to annex Texas was ill-intended and cannot be justified. Although Texas applied to be annexed by America, Mexica was not ready to lose any part of its territories (Alonso, 2017). Texas was under Mexico, and any attempt to get it without permission from Mexico could only be likened to theft. Therefore, America literary took advantage of the conflict between Texas and the Mexican authorities to get Texas. Generally, the conflict was supported by America hence the war that later ensued. Justification cannot be given for taking advantage of internal conflict to ‘steal’ part of another country. Moreover, the Mexican war received resistance from within America.
Several people in congress were against the Mexican war leading to a question on its justification. Abraham Lincoln, for example, did not see the reason behind investing in a war that did not benefit the Americans (Towers, 2015). Also, the move by Henry David to write in opposition to the war and his subsequent arrest showed that the war did not have benefits to the Americans. Generally, the Mexican was pushed by hidden individual interests and cannot be justified.
In sum, the Mexican war was not justified by any means, and the US was led by the desire for superiority and the need for slavery lands. The war was based on the illegal acquisition of Mexican territories. Polk’s desire to expand America led to the war, and thus, the war was only based on personal opinions. Generally, the war cannot be justified because it was based on personal interests and received resistance from within America.
References
Alonso, A. (2017). A Legacy of Words: A Discussion of the Frontier Legacy and Expansionist Rhetoric in the Nineteenth Century (Master’s thesis, Arizona State University).
Grynaviski, E. (2016). Intending war rightly: Right intentions, public intentions, and consent. Review of International Studies, 42(4), 634-653.
Towers, F. (2015). Lincoln’s Citadel: The Civil War in Washington, DC. The Journal of Southern History, 81(4), 985.