[RegularOpossum]

The argument generally is the case in Hawaii was particularly egregious, as Hawaii had an organized government with formal diplomatic relations with many countries, including embassies in Great Britain and France.

Hawaii, along with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, are examples of areas of significant escalation of the U.S. expansionist history through the overthrowing of recognized governments. It's all bad, but these are just a different type of bad.

[voisin]

Does diplomatic relations make the difference? Seems like splitting hairs. Read about what happened to the native populations which had established hierarchies and relations with each other throughout the continent and it looks no different to my eyes than what happened to the Hawaiians.

[RegularOpossum]

Yes, having formal diplomatic relations in the late 19th century with major Western powers to other nations is a significant difference. This is very different than say, France having tribal relations in an influence fight with British Colonial expansionism 150 years prior to the overthrowing of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

Again, it's all bad, this is just a different kind of bad.