U.S. entry into World War I emphasized the country’s poor preparedness to fight a large-scale conflict and fuelled a lively debate, on the one hand, on the reasons of such a state on things, on the other on the ways to overcome it. Former President Theodore Roosevelt and his “preparedness movement” played an important role in the debate and, although their positions did not gain the upper hand, their experience provides a telling example of alternative vision to Woodrow Wilson’s “small footprint” approach in military affairs. Moving from these assumptions, the paper provides an overview of the efforts the U.S. made since April 1917 to adapt their military and industrial instrument to the need of the European war. Emphasis rests, on the one hand, on recruitment and the issue of universal military training (UMT), on the other on military expenditures and the limits of the industrial mobilization system. In both fields, Wilson’s policies are compared with the more ambitious and ideologically oriented programs of the “preparedness movement”, with the aim of shading some light on their alternative vision of U.S. role in the world.
|Titolo tradotto del contributo||[Autom. eng. transl.] The "preparation movement" and the approach of the United States to the First World War|
|Numero di pagine||18|
|Stato di pubblicazione||Pubblicato - 2017|
- Prima guerra mondiale