DBQ AOC

On the more beneficial and smart approach, Congress was solely and exclusively given the right on peace and war, something that was, again, contradicting since the United States was not going to involve themselves in any war according to the Article of Confederation. Because of the lack of power given to the national government, the Articles of Confederation were deemed insufficient and not used for a very long period of time. The states were not even given the right to decide how large that their militia could have been. Regarding justice and diplomacy, each state was given only one vote regarding political matters. Even with the instituted militias, they were not allowed to do anything unless first attacked upon. On the other hand, to encourage the states to expand their borders westward, no state was deprived of any land that would directly, or indirectly benefit the common good of the United States.

Considering the many flaws and minor hiccups that are associated with the Articles of Confederation, it was most likely better that they were not used for very long. Canada was already settled and developed primarily by the French, who the United States had recently refused to help in the aid of the French for their independence after the freshly configured Articles of Confederation. This was an attempt at keeping the states out of conflict that was not needed with a growing nation, but at the same time, it limited the ability of the states to aid in foreign controversies. The Articles of Confederation can not be considered a complete failure. Whether the government was afraid of an attack from one state on another, this was not a good idea. It may be better to consider these articles as a preamble or a rough sketch of the Constitution. Rather than having a unified, national army, each state was allowed a small militia based on the number of inhabitants that it contained. This would only have caused the jealousy and discontent of other states.