Question

The annexation of Hawaii by the United States is a contentious issue, with arguments on both sides. Proponents argue that it was strategically important for American military and economic interests, particularly as a naval base in the Pacific and for control over Hawaii's thriving sugar industry.

Conversely, critics emphasize that the annexation violated Hawaiian sovereignty and self-determination, as it lacked support from the majority of Hawaiians. Queen Liliuokalani, the last monarch, opposed the annexation and tried to restore the monarchy. The initiative was marred by the illegal overthrow of the monarchy in 1893, supported by American and European businessmen, raising questions about the legitimacy of the annexation.

In conclusion, while there are strategic and economic arguments for the annexation, the lack of support from the Hawaiian population and the questionable means used to achieve it complicate the narrative. Understanding both perspectives is vital for a full appreciation of this historical event.

shorten and no big words

Answer 1

The annexation of Hawaii by the United States is a debated issue. Supporters say it was important for military and economic reasons, especially for a naval base in the Pacific and for the sugar industry.

Critics argue that the annexation took away Hawaiian sovereignty and self-determination because many Hawaiians opposed it. Queen Liliuokalani, the last monarch, was against the annexation and sought to restore the monarchy. The situation was complicated by the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian government in 1893, which involved American and European businessmen, raising doubts about the annexation's legitimacy.

In summary, while there are valid reasons for the annexation, the lack of support from the Hawaiian people and the controversial methods used complicate the story. Understanding both sides is important for grasping this historical event.