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.

disease was the number one killer of native peoples. they had had little exposure to the diseases of europe. this led to some villages being almost completely wiped out and some tribes destroyed.

the safahids used force when persuasion to convert from being a sunni muslim to embrace shi'ism was not effective. they also persecute shi'ites who have different views from their imposed teachings.