answersLogoWhite

0

He did not agree with the notion that in order for a country to be profitable, it had to be owned. He also thought that etc.hope this is the answer you are looking for dont know if its right but it should this is what i sead on this note.

User Avatar

Wiki User

8y ago

Still curious? Ask our experts.

Chat with our AI personalities

FranFran
I've made my fair share of mistakes, and if I can help you avoid a few, I'd sure like to try.
Chat with Fran
BeauBeau
You're doing better than you think!
Chat with Beau
ViviVivi
Your ride-or-die bestie who's seen you through every high and low.
Chat with Vivi
More answers

Taking a general view of the Philippines as a commercial market for us, I need not again argue against the barbarous notion that in order to have a profitable trade with a country we must own it. If that were true, we should never have had any foreign commerce at all.

User Avatar

Wiki User

10y ago
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: How does Caral Schurz counter the argument that annexation of the Philippines was necessary to make the nation a commercial market for the US?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp