Brad Mayer wrote:
>
> The Philippines had no real 'strategic' value for the U.S., so what
> drove US imperialism into occupation? Ideology - of a different
> coloration, but with the same results.
This is probably not true; in fact the Philippines probably had more strategic value in terms of the 1890s than Iraq does today. Consider the following, from a web page giving a chronology of the Spanish American War:
11 June (1898) McKinley administration reactivated debate in Congress on Hawaiian annexation, using the argument that "we must have Hawaii to help us get our share of China."*
The Philippines would have had similar strategic importance in achieving "our share of China."
Carrol