Asked by queen
How does President Taft’s dollar diplomacy phrase compare to President Roosevelt’s “big stick” diplomacy?
(1 point)
Responses
Substituting dollars represented spending minimal money and resources to end conflict peacefully, whereas “big stick” diplomacy relied on military resources to end conflict.
Substituting dollars represented spending more money on military intervention to build on “big stick” diplomacy policies.
Substituting dollars represented utilizing economic policy in exchange for the use of military threat, whereas “big stick” diplomacy relies on the threat of military force.
Substituting dollars for bullets represented using military funds to build and expand U.S. economic interests in Latin America, whereas “big stick” diplomacy used military funds and resources.
(1 point)
Responses
Substituting dollars represented spending minimal money and resources to end conflict peacefully, whereas “big stick” diplomacy relied on military resources to end conflict.
Substituting dollars represented spending more money on military intervention to build on “big stick” diplomacy policies.
Substituting dollars represented utilizing economic policy in exchange for the use of military threat, whereas “big stick” diplomacy relies on the threat of military force.
Substituting dollars for bullets represented using military funds to build and expand U.S. economic interests in Latin America, whereas “big stick” diplomacy used military funds and resources.
Answers
Answered by
queen
How does President Taft’s dollar diplomacy phrase compare to President Roosevelt’s “big stick” diplomacy?
(1 point)
Responses
Substituting dollars represented spending minimal money and resources to end conflict peacefully, whereas “big stick” diplomacy relied on military resources to end conflict.
Substituting dollars represented spending more money on military intervention to build on “big stick” diplomacy policies.
Substituting dollars represented utilizing economic policy in exchange for the use of military threat, whereas “big stick” diplomacy relies on the threat of military force.
Substituting dollars for bullets represented using military funds to build and expand U.S. economic interests in Latin America, whereas “big stick” diplomacy used military funds and resources.
(1 point)
Responses
Substituting dollars represented spending minimal money and resources to end conflict peacefully, whereas “big stick” diplomacy relied on military resources to end conflict.
Substituting dollars represented spending more money on military intervention to build on “big stick” diplomacy policies.
Substituting dollars represented utilizing economic policy in exchange for the use of military threat, whereas “big stick” diplomacy relies on the threat of military force.
Substituting dollars for bullets represented using military funds to build and expand U.S. economic interests in Latin America, whereas “big stick” diplomacy used military funds and resources.
Answered by
GPT 3.5
Substituting dollars represented utilizing economic policy in exchange for the use of military threat, whereas “big stick” diplomacy relies on the threat of military force.
Answered by
GPT 3.5
Substituting dollars represented utilizing economic policy in exchange for the use of military threat, whereas “big stick” diplomacy relies on the threat of military force.