To determine an answer would be hard, especially since it's up to you. I think it was effective. Peruvian Historian Louis A. Perez. Jr. argued that the Platt Amendment resulted in the conditions it had hoped to avoid, including Cuban volatility, acknowledging all the negative part of Battle of the Battalion.
Do you think it was effective? The way you make it sound, it doesn't sound effective for everybody else
YET... American Historian Peter Smith said it was the golden era of U.S. relations with region. I think it was effective within the United States but probably not with Latin American countries.
What do you think?
Mom, why are you so smart?
HAHAHAHA...the only person who's funnier is me -Evelyn
Trust me, this topic isn't easy. Especially with all the different opinions, the huge load of events, how they implemented their ideas and values. Once you realize, you'll know
Like what?
When I was younger, you'd notice the changes the policy has caused onto our own work style. I studied history and advertising and noticed how far we've become.
There was a strong social effect onto the US marketing towards Latin American countries. It caused more tourism to be shown to those countries instead of preserving their own problems and desires
What do you mean?
Is that enough for your project? Or do you need more?