Could Spain have won the Spanish-American war?

Could Spain have won the Spanish-American war?

Should they have won?

Was America right in claiming places like the Phillipines and Peurto Rico as their colonies after?

>Spain have won Spanish-American war.
Nope. Spain was a wreck in the late 19th Century.
>Should they
If they ever did, they'd just be BTFO by all the revolutions of their last colonies.
>Was America right in claiming places like the Phillipines and Peurto Rico as their colonies after?
I heard the Americans helped Flips win their independence and then backstabbed them. So no.

>19th century Spain
>winning
>a war

>I heard the Americans helped Flips win their independence and then backstabbed them

President McKinley sent a team of experts to determine what should be done with the Philippines after the war. They concluded that the islands lacked the institutions for self-governance and if America did not annex them, Germany was waiting in the wings ready and willing to take control. Thus McKinley, on their recommendation, annexed the Philippines until such time as they could be ready to self-rule.

>Could Spain have won?
Probably not. The US had been building up its military for a while, whereas Spain never recovered from Nappy's invasion. They had far less manpower and were much farther away.

>Should Spain have won?
Hard to say. Cuba was pretty bad under Spain, but it would get just as bad under Batista. As for the Philippines, the Spanish were probably better. On the other hand, Puerto Rico is doing alright. And if Spain had won they might not have had the Generation of 98, which played a big role in restoring pride in Spanish culture.

>Should the US have kept the territories?
Probably not. Both Cuba and the Philippines likely would have given power to criollos or educated mestizos, and they're both too small to see a bunch of caudillos rise up. They probably would have gotten to democracy eventually.

And then genocided them, according to some.

Sound like every imperialist excuse ever m9. Still the fact that the country was promised independence in the first place was a dick move even Europeans don't do.

Even if you think taking over the Philippines was necessary, the treatment of Cuba was unjustified, especially the Platt Amendment.

Why was Germany interested in The Phillipines?
Was there any other interest in it by other powers like Japan or Britain?

At the end of the Spanish-American war there existed no state to hand independence over to. They could have handed it over to the warlord who was fighting the Spanish prior to the war, but he was hardly a representative of the entire islands. All in all, I think McKinley made the right decision in the regard to the Philippines. The alternatives were either annexation by Germany or Japan who would be less interested in organizing a functioning democratic state than America, or a long and protracted civil war as the different tribes battled for control of all the islands. None of which were experienced in statecraft.

territorial gain

I'm still hearing excuses, Yank.

>"Warlord"
An elected president?
> but he was hardly a representative of the entire islands
Pic related. The planned Philippine republic in its original form. Other areas were envisioned to be either considered conquered or convinced to join eventually in the future. The Visayan delegations were proof of such convincing. But this was the working state.

There were two other republics in the Philippines: Zamboanga and Negros. Nobody considered the Southern Muslims and Northern Headhunters as "Filipino."

>or a long and protracted civil war as the different tribes battled for control of all the islands.
Wouldve been better IMO. Part of the cancer killing the Philippines is that thanks to the artificial country the US clobbered together, people are superfucking regionalistic and divisive after Independence. The First Republic surviving and browbeating others in line wouldve shut up everyone into an actual state entity. Wouldve probably annihilated regional elites too and their fondness for corruption.

Instead we get "why should we obey you? why should we obey you?" and "lol u don't kno our culture, dont make decisions for us" faggotry.

As if warlords haven't been elected president before.

I know right. There are many starting republics who elected popular warlords as presidents. Often warlords involved in the revolution's military leadership.

Do you really believe Aguinaldo is comparable to GW, or the First Philippine Republic comparable to the 13 colonies?

>Could Spain have won the Spanish-American war?
No, if you read about the state of the spanish navy before the war you would see that they never stood a chance and that the spanish government knew it
>Should they have won?
Hard to say, given how america would just make them into colonies anyway it just seem like am extremely pointless war for them
>Was America right in claiming places like the Phillipines and Peurto Rico as their colonies after?
No, especially because america entered the war with the intention to liberate them and won the support of the population for it
t.spaniard

>Could Spain have won the Spanish-American war?
Lmao no. Spain post Peninsular war was a shit-tier country.

>Should they have won?
They only would have lost their remaining to the UK or Germany later on. Cuba in particular would have been a very lucrative acquisition.

>Was America right in claiming places like the Phillipines and Peurto Rico as their colonies after?

Does it matter? No one gave a shit when the UK bullied China out of Hong Kong. The Philippines and Puerto Rico were far away from Europe, and thus irrelevant who claimed it.

>sure I stabbed him, but the other guy COULD HAVE punched him
>therefore I'm innocent

It's more the idea of "I know we mugged you, but if we didn't they would, and we're confident we can put your money to a more worthy use!"

Imperialism at the time was full of "We don't really want it, but fuck letting THEM have it." Along with a healthy dose of "We're doing you a favor really, stop whining. You're way better off with us than them."

>Why was Germany interested in The Phillipines?
Coaling stations for trade with the Chinese/Legations. Many people forget that many of the Pacific colonies weren't generally intended to be profitable or expansionist for expansion's sake. They were simply intended as a spot to coal the steamers of the era while trading the Pacific.

>No one gave a shit when the UK bullied China out of Hong Kong.
Pretty sure the Chinese gave a shit.

Jokes on the British. The Chinese got Hong Kong back.

>Was America right in claiming places like the Phillipines and Peurto Rico as their colonies after?
America betrayed the Philippines so hard, they did it while the Flips utilized the US Flag's exact red-white-blue scheme in gratitude towards the US when they were making their flag.

>"... and the colors of blue, red and white commemorating the flag of the United States of North America as a manifestation of our profound gratitude towards this Great Nation for its disinterested protection which it lends us, and continues to lend us...."

>19th century spain
>winning anything

>all the assblasted flips in this thread
No one was betrayed in the Spanish-American War. The intent was to free Cuba. There was no intent for the independence of anyone else. You were a spoil of war. No more, no less. The fact you confused the intention of the conflict is on you, not the U.S. government.

>We intentionally misled them.
>It is their fault we are able to betray them.
I think there's only one Flip in this thread and it was the guy talking about the Philippines in more detail.

>state outright the intention of only freeing Cuba
>intentionally misled them
Pick one and only one

Spain was in free-fall at the time. USA was just being opportunistic. Can't blame them though. Some other power (probably Britain) would have done the land grab otherwise.

M8 I'm Spanish, and I looked up the war back in college. The Filipino rebels and the colonial authorities actually had a ceasefire after spending like 2 years of shitty stalemate fighting, only reigniting the rebellion when the US promised assistance towards their independence. Even transported exiled leaders of the revolt back to the islands too.

If anything, you defending the shittiest moments of Freedomland © makes you the assblasted party here.

>Could Spain have one
Probably not, Spain may have had a chance had it had support from the world powers at the time (Britian, France, Germany, Russia, Japan etc) but none of those saw anything in helping Spain and Spain at the time had terrible relations and foreign policy.

Yes, if the US sat by and did nothing the bloodshed would have been greater. It is like the trolley problem.

The motivation of the US was to restore peaceful trade, not territorial annexation like some belligerent despot. In the liberal view this is still "evil", but I'm not sure what kind of utopia they imagine was feasible in 1898 that could have prevented this. In terms of what is humanly possible, the US did the right thing.

>Its just cuba! Its just cuba!
>Weirdly sides with the Pinoy rebels.
Whatever lies you tell yourself eh, fatty Yank?

>The motivation of the US was to restore peaceful trade, not territorial annexation like some belligerent despot
Lol, the whole exercise was USA's attempt to be like the cool Europeans.
>Annexes territory.
>Fails to establish profitable colonies.
>W-w-we granted them independence cuz we good boys who love freedom!

As an investment the purpose was to reduce costs and loss of business due to a long drawn out war between different factions and Spain.

Regardless, at the cost of the USS Maine (stabbed in the back unexpectedly) and a few 1000 soldiers they restored order to 2 sizeable portions of the world. The US could also pressure them to modernize and open up to investment and global markets which undoubtedly yielded profit.