Final answer:
While the United States initially maintained a stance of neutrality during World War I, it provided supplies and weapons to Britain, suggesting that neutrality in trade is a complex issue. The U.S. later abandoned its neutral stance and entered the war due to strategic concerns and aggression from Germany, including the sinking of civilian ships and the Zimmerman Telegram.
Step-by-step explanation:
US Neutrality and Trade During World War I
When World War I began in 1914, the United States under President Woodrow Wilson adopted a stance of neutrality, avoiding entanglement in the escalating conflict. Despite this, the U.S. economic interests leaned towards the Allied powers, supplying Britain with materials and, later on, weapons. The concept of a neutral nation is one that does not engage in military alliances or support in conflicts; however, the very act of trading with one side can be seen as a compromise of that neutrality.
The argument against providing support to warring nations is that it can be perceived as an indirect involvement in the conflict. This act could provoke aggression from the opposing side, as it did when German U-boats targeted ships suspected of carrying supplies to the Allies, leading to American casualties and a shift in public sentiment. On the other hand, some argue that neutrality does not require a cessation of trade and that economic interests must be maintained for the prosperity of the nation.
Ultimately, the United States' position shifted due to strategic concerns and aggressive acts such as the sinking of US ships and the Zimmerman Telegram. As a late entrant in 1917, the U.S. joined the Allies, signaling the end of its official neutrality and making an impact on the war's outcome and the global balance of power.