MAlexMatt
Banned
Yes, because the Founders feared a large army was a menace to civil liberties and that as such too many soldiers could not be trusted, armies were thus evil.
Indeed. Traditional English mistrust of standing military establishments expressed on American shores.
you might possibly keep the USA out of the world wars, but mainly by the actions of others... Germany will have to go the extra mile to placate the USA in WW1, Japan will have to not attack at Pearl Harbor, Hitler will have to restrict his war in Europe, etc. The main problem is that the USA is increasingly tied up in the global economy after 1900, importing and exporting, and with that comes the need to have friends overseas (which invariably leads to having enemies overseas), and to protect your lines of communication and trade. The USA can stay out of the world's conflicts only if you prevent the rise of such powers as Nazi Germany, the USSR, etc., powers that want to be big on the world stage. Basically, everyone will have to act as the USA does, being concerned solely with economic issues and no international aggression. That's tough to achieve...
The US was very tied into international trade more or less from the beginning. A large component of the annual harvest was exported and hundreds of thousands depended on this export for their livelihoods even in the early 19th century.
The issue surrounding WWI was that, for the first time, the US was becoming a major creditor to the warring powers, meaning the politically powerful financier class suddenly had a serious interest in 'bailing out' one of the sides in the war which they would have pursued with vigor no matter who was elected President in 1912 and 1916. That's why I said it was important to push WWI back altogether, not just US involvement in the war (which is almost inevitable if you've got a Federal Reserve Act in 1913 and a war any time after that).
Wilson Progressivism was about as conservative of reform as you can get. It would be ASB to attempt to preserve the literal status quo without some major butterflies at the founding of the Republic or at the end of the Civil War.
The whole Progressive movement puts the lie to the left-right scale of things. Wilson was a serious centralizer who set the stage for the changes that came after, from the Immigration Reforms of the 20's to the more radical changes of the 30's, and everything else since. Without that foundation to build on, the 19th century status quo, or at least a recognizable variant thereof, can continue indefinitely.