Even so, that does not imply that: Mexico could not possibly use any "generous financial support" to buy the arms, ammunition, or other war supplies for the very reason that the U.S. was the only sizable arms manufacturer in the Americas. To make matters worse, Germany could not be counted on to supply Mexico with war supplies directly, as the British Royal Navy controlled the Atlantic shipping lanes.

As the editor 148.247.186.142 has pointed out, Mexico could buy weapons produced in Argentina, or use the Argentinian companies as intermediaries. Moreover, as the same editor also pointed out, the 75% of the fuel used by the British Royal Navy in 1917 was produced in Mexico. Hence, without fuel the British Royal Navy could not control the Atlantic shipping lanes at all. Actually, it is not a coincidence that the UK took Persia in the partition of the Ottoman empire of 1918, considering the fact that the Anglo-Persian oil company was founded there in 1908; and the UK had learnt the lesson: it is really dangerous to depend exclusively on the oil produced in only one foreign country. Well, they learnt the lesson until the oil crisis of 1973. Finally, let us also recall that the US made plans in 1917-1918 for invading Mexico and taking control of Tampico oil fields, but the US also calculated that Mexicans would set in fire the oil fields before they could arrive there; the classical scorched earth technique applied by the Russians against Napoleon and Hitler.

Usually people does not take into consideration that Mexico had a super-weapon in 1917: the oil fields, because mass production of oil in Saudi Arabia began until 1945.189.203.69.72