Did america need to be an imperial nation?

Explanation:

to insure that Americans were not excluded. Although this goal sometimes required acquisition of islands, since bases were needed both for trade and for the exercise of political and military influence, it did not require assumption of larger administrative responsibilities. Americans, by their competitive superiority, could achieve economic dominance without taking on such burdens.” In other words, May argues that the main reason why American imperialism did not take the form of conquering and holding land was that there was that cost-benefit analysis would provide more profit if the nations in question retained political autonomy yet opened their borders to trade with America. It is simply more advantageous for a capitalist society to secure the flow of trade (by breaking down barriers and raising our own tariffs as seen fit) rather than to secure land; the latter was indeed the mentality of a feudalistic society, the claiming of earth for little more than just that. It has long been a tradition of American historians to prove that American intentions are not imperialistic.

haha! : )

nice one lol

the fact that could also be added to column b is that during world war ii, specifically between the years 1941 and 1945, japan expanded its territory towards the indonesian territory in what was known later as part of the "pacific war". in that time, japan could conquer the philipines, singapore,   borneo, central java, malang, cebu, sumatra and various other islands of the area, therefore expanding its territory for a brief period of time.