What colonies wrer under control of this country at the start of WWI?
81462
http://www.philipdru.com/philipdru_stream.html\nhttp://www.philipdru.com\nhttp://weekendinterviewshow.com\nhttp://thestressblog.com\nhttp://www.antiwar.com
451834
America. They're occupied by us. Making us in charge.
331968
WW1 was from 1914 until November 11, 1918
119195
The US had not entered the war with the intention of gaining a colonial empire. However, at the end of the war the colonial ruler Spain was militarily crushed and the three remaining colonies (Cuba, Puerto Rico and Philippines) were in rebellion. The US felt if they did not take posession that they would be seized by European powers (a German flotilla did show up off of Manila Bay).
524663
Structuring a nation's foreign policy to acquire and develop colonies is a strategy of building an empire.  This is imperialism.\n\nWhen a number of empires aggregate themselves into unnecessary alliances, a great and needless conflict can erupt over a petty incident.  This is how the First World War started in 1914.  The first post argues that this is a crime caused by imperialism.  But foreign alliances of this sort are apart from intra-national colony building, which is imperialism proper.\n\nMy feeling is that the dangerous element in imperialism is that petty governments can develop oppressive colonies.  France, Belgium, Germany and the United States were ineffective and cruel imperial powers.  The arrogant and corrupt French mismanagement of Indo-China is a prime example of imperialism creating a world "hot spot" of trouble that ultimately haunted the United States.  The Belgium imperial government of the Congo sponsored a genocide campaign.  Imperial Russia under the Romonov's oppressed all their people and, coupled with an unpopular participation in an alliance during the First World War, were toppled as a government.  The Soviets oppressed and expanded this empire, ultimately were toppled as a government, and the south Asian republics that exist today are unstable and potential dangerous to peace on that continent.\n\nThe best argument for imperialism as a good movement was, of course, the British Empire.  After harrassing their American colonies into a successful revolt, the British never made a mistake of that magnitude again.  Unlike the other colonial powers, the British led with a light hand (one one person in 800 in colonial India was actually British) and were the world leaders in modernizing and industrializing their colonies.  To this day, compare a map of the railroads in India to those of the surrounding countries to see their emphasis upon colonia infrastruture.\n\nThe great dream of the ultimate British imperialist, Cecil Rhodes, was not merely all of the eastern part of Africa being placed under British rule, but the development and expansion of the empire to eventually re-incorpoate the United States into Great Britain (!) and become the world's government, with a benefit being no multi-power international conflict and therefore no more war.\n\nIt is hard to claim that the British Empire was a negative influence on the world.  The main complaint, and it is a well founded one, is that the British Empire warped and grossly changed the native cultures of the peoples it ruled.  It was an empire of forced modernization.\n\nThe greatest feat of the British Empire goes unheralded and largely unrecognied.  Britain's flag was planted on one quarter of the world's population.  The British were the first genuinely international currency and international banking system.  Nor is this just a prelude to the internationalism that has become the standard model of growth since 1945.\n\nThe other major empires folded or made deals with Hitler, except for the United Sttes (still an imperial power in the 1930's with the Philippines as a territory).  Hitler made  a deal with the Soviets and successfully invaded Belgium and France.  But he failed to invade England.\n\nThe English had a vastly superior intelligence system (another benefit of its empire, especially the Canadian intelligence masters) and the British had an imperial banking system which they properly used to bankrupt themselves in order to stop the Nazis.\n\nThe British Empire did not alone defeat the Nazis, but it achieved a stalemate, an accomplishment which saved the world from tyranny once its former territory, the United States, finally came into the fray.  So, at its very best, one of the empires made the world a safer place.\n\nThe cost was the dissolution of the empire itself.  This was a heavy price, but defeat at the hands of Hitler was unthinkable.\n\nThe smaller, crueler, more oppressive empires created dangers which
388950
Honestly, USA. We took over other people's land and called it our own. Our government and President sucks. Most of the people in the country don't know about their own Constitution. And there is always something corrupt in the White House now-a-days.
179059
US was an independent country, so it controlled its own territoty, but not much beyond it (the present world domination started after WWII)
609983
In which war, WWI or WWII?
239917
Civil war made us a country instead of a bunch of states, the Spanish American war established our control of the America's and the First World War turned the US into the center of world instead of Europe.
97388
poele at home during WW1 were forsed to sacrafice food and time. women took mens jobs, and children had to work. a lot of oil and money we're used and lives were lost
699825
Hope this helps you out. BTW the Brits had the most colonies!!!!\n\nThe 2nd link shows which countries owned which other countries. It's taken from 1898. It's a big image so it might take a while to load if you got a slow connection.
527080
The British Commonwealth
12097
Africa at the start of the 20th century\n\n\nAll of the continent claimed by European powers, except for Ethiopia ("Abyssinia") and Liberia.\n\nThe European powers set up a variety of different administrations in Africa at this time, with different ambitions and degrees of power. In some areas, parts of British West Africa for example, colonial control was tenuous and intended for simple economic extraction, strategic power, or as part of a long term development plan.\n\nIn other areas Europeans were encouraged to settle, creating settler states in which a European minority came to dominate society. Settlers only came to a few colonies in sufficient numbers to have a strong impact. British settler colonies included British East Africa, now Kenya, North and South Rhodesia, later Zambia and Zimbabwe, and South Africa, which already had a significant population of European settlers, the Boers. In the Second Boer War, between the British Empire and the two Boer republics of the Orange Free State and the South African Republic (Transvaal Republic), the Boers unsuccsefully resisted absorbtion in to the British Empire.\n\nFrance planned to settle Algeria and eventually incorporate it into the French state as an equal to the European provinces. Its proximity across the Meditterranean allowed plans of this scale.\n\nIn most areas colonial administrations did not have the manpower or resources to fully administer the territory and had to rely on local power structures to help them. Various factions and groups within the societies exploited this European requirement for their own purposes, attempting to gain a position of power within their own communities by cooperating with Europeans. One aspect of this struggle included what Terrence Ranger has termed the "invention of tradition." In order to legitimize their own claims to power in the eyes of both the colonial administrators, and their own people, people would essentially manufacture "traditional" claims to power, or ceremonies. As a result many societies were thrown into disarray by the new order.\n\n\n\n\nDuring World War I, there were several battles between the United Kingdom and Germany, the most notable being the Battle of Tanga, and a sustained guerrilla campaign by the German General Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck.
986530
3 countries.\n\nPre 1920's British Mandate. Its the logical next step.\n\nI have a feeling 2 of them will be great future allies to us. One hosting one of the largest US military bases in all of history.
138895
The Germans, when they broke the treaty of Versailles. Hitler began taking over neighboring countries and the rest of the world thought Germany wasn't much of a threat so they didn't really pay attention to what Hitler was doing.
362025
I'd say WWI, after WWII the soviets and Americans were pretty much at eachother's throats and the advent of the atomic age ensured heightened levels of paranoia from all sides now that a single bomber could level a city.\n\nAfter WWI things could have gone a lot better if the allied powers weren't so harsh on germany (but that goes back to the french's stupidity during the napoleonic wars, but I digress) and if the stock market hadn't crashed hitler would have had a much harder time coming to power.
334303
?  Which colonies are you referring to? \nThe United States were no longer considered "colonies".  The American government had been officially recognized by the British Government after the Revolutionary War.\n\nAre you refering to other countries/colonies that were used as military bases in the Atlantic during the war?