Argument #1: The United States and Mexican War was unlawful.
America acted supreme over Mexican land and their rights without a valid reason.
The US government used Manifest Destiny as excuse to expand borders and go to war with Mexico. The term “manifest destiny” was born by John O’Sullivan and was thought of a year before the war began. During the year 1846, people were moved by manifest destiny and seeked influence from the government to push west. The idea of manifest destiny could have been used as an excuse from the government to go to war with Mexico because California was already wanted by America.
"John L. O'Sullivan on Manifest Destiny, 1839." John L. O'Sullivan on Manifest ...view middle of the document...
Mexicans were forced to go to court in order to prove if they owned the land. When undergoing these trails, Mexican landowners were to pay their own travel costs, witnesses, interpreters, and attorneys, which usually made them go bankrupt.
Argument #3: The United States government handled the slave debate poorly.
The government handled the slave debate poorly because this is what caused America to enter a civil war.
The Missouri Compromise, from the beginning, was a terrible idea. The Missouri Compromise was made to solve short term problems, so it would eventually have to be demolished. This compromise had to end because there would always be conflict between the number of free and slave states, which would cause imbalance within the government, meaning they had to resolve this problem once again. Not only did the Missouri Compromise increase the conflict between free and slave states, but it added on to the sectionalism in America.
The Compromise of 1850 is another example of America handling the slave debate poorly. The Missouri Compromise would become void because now it would cause confusion on whether or not a state above the Missouri Compromise line was free, and whether a state below the Missouri Compromise...