Eh Buddy Hoser

Newsflash, Hitler was quite popular in countries all across Europe before he invaded those people's countries. Antisemitism has always been a reoccurring issue in Europe and the US, with many people and governments supporting the Nazi's opinion about Jews. Most people supported a nonconfrontational policy of letting Germany do their own thing so long as they didn't come after them...and then Germany came after them. The idea that Hitler's popularity was limited to any one country is whitewashing of history to hide the fact that he had the implicit support of many in Europe who either agreed with him or simply didn't want to start another Great War. It's the same reason that the foundation and recognition of Israel as a country had widespread support across Europe and the US from many antisemitic groups/people in power. They saw it as a perfect solution to get rid of Jews in Europe. They were even volunteering to deport themselves to the desert!

That's not to say that the US is some knight in shining armor goody two shoes or something. The US is the only other country to have held Nazi rallies, and almost joined the war on the other side once or twice. But the US was also largely focused on a policy of isolationism and wanted to stay out of a war in Europe. The US also spent years funding England during the early part of the war, who first used that money to send additional funds to France alongside that which they already were, and then used that money themselves when they actively joined the war. And the US provided all kinds of military equipment to the Allies before entering the war through the Lend-Lease program. The general opinion that I see is that the US was gearing up to officially enter the war when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, and that that had the effect of an inciting incident which caused any pro-isolationist groups within the country to change their position and accelerated the US's timetable rather than being the reason that the US got involved at all.

they didn't just jump in immediately.

the Soviet Union also helped fight against Hitler as much as the Allies.

Both true, i'd prefer if we didn't have to jump in and the US sorts itself out without foreign intervention. But when i see these razzias against people of colour or read stories from the lgbtq, I cannot think it's their problem.

Hitler was still popular in the US with more people than most would guess even after the war. Racism is deeply ingrained into the US state, has been from the very start (obviously) and never left.

The soviets after the nazis attacked them lol.

Don't worry, there's no way that the US wouldn't make it Europe's problem if he started invading other nations.

He could only invade Mexico or South America without triggering article 5. Since Canada and Greenland (through Denmark) are both NATO members if he messes with them then its immediately a good chunk of Europe's problem. There's also French Guiana in South America and some islands in the carribean I forgot when I started typing that would also trigger article 5.

US was hesitate to join yet another european squabble. The horrors of WW1 was still fresh in people's minds. Also, the us wasnt sitting on their hands as it was becoming inevitable US would be forced to join. The US probably would had declared war on germany in 1942 even if japan never attacked.

On another note, the Soviet Union also helped fight against Hitler as much as the Allies.

The same one that was allied with hitler and invaded poland side by side? We're just lucky hitler was a dumbass and back stabbed them.

Mexico's problems largely boil down to drug trafficking to America for American dollars and fuelled by American weapons flowing into the country. This is highly contemporary.

The history of Mexico is the history of Europeans entering into a place where they had no business at all and killing and destroying everything because they fucking suck. That was way before 1825, but I see no reason to forget about it.