Should the united states have taken a more active approach in the war prior to the attack on pearl harbor? explain the pros and cons of such involvement.

Yes i think because what they did to help would have still brought them trouble so why not go for it.if you think about the help they sent that was sending troops weapons and supplies that was still going to harm them.the attacks on the place that was  sent on the most active place used to send the items (and people) was basically the game plan of silencing them and the forces they sent if they still attacked them on a sensitive part say the presidency (white house)  it might have brought up the 3rd world war but this time against Japan.(please i need a brainiest answer to level up)

Cherokee  removal, part of the trail of tears, refers to the  forced  relocation between 1836 and 1839 of thecherokee  nation from  their lands ingeorgia, south carolina, north carolina, tennessee, texas, and alabama to the indian territory (present day oklahoma)  in  the thenwestern united states, and the resultant deaths