Final answer:
A president's response today to a scenario similar to World War I's unrestricted submarine warfare would likely differ from Wilson's due to modern advancements in technology, international law, and the strategic environment. The complexities of global politics and international bodies could lead to more diplomatic or collective defense responses, and the influence of public opinion shaped by media may press for measured reactions.
Step-by-step explanation:
- If the same situation of a world war and unrestricted submarine warfare occurred today, it is likely that a president's response would differ from President Wilson's due to advances in global communication, international law, and modern warfare technology. In Wilson's time, he sought to avoid war but was eventually drawn in by German actions and domestic pressures, including the sinking of civilian ships and the Zimmermann Telegram.
- Today, the complexities of global politics and the existence of international organizations like the United Nations could facilitate a more diplomatic resolution or a collective defensive action, rather than unilateral movement towards war. Additionally, modern warfare with its sophisticated technologies and the aspect of nuclear deterrence presents a very different strategic environment than the one faced by Wilson.
- The current international landscape includes a more interconnected global economy, a web of alliances, and the widespread condemnation of acts like unrestricted submarine warfare under international law.
- Any contemporary president would also have to consider public opinion, which is now informed by near-instantaneous news and social media, potentially making the need for a measured response more pressing.
- Moreover, the military strategies and capabilities of the present would make the renewal of unrestricted submarine warfare unlikely and not strategically advantageous as it was in the past.