Here's the skinny: the Teller Amendment was a rule created by Congress that the U.S. couldn't annex Cuba after the Spanish-American War. This Amendment basically made it so that America could help Cuba fight Spain, but then back out and not occupy Cuba.

Remember that this was America's empire-building phase in the late 1800s, and islands like Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines were all being wrapped up in American arms, like it or not.

Think about the Platt Amendment as a reaction to the Teller Amendment. Teller says the U.S. can't lay claim to Cuba; Platt says the U.S. can control tons of aspects of how Cuba is run, just without actual American ownership. See the connection? The Platt Amendment is essentially everything but full ownership, and if the Teller Amendment didn't exist, there would likely be no need for the Platt Amendment.

So why didn't Congress simplify everything and just make Cuba conquer-able and save all that ink from all these amendments? Well, though this was America's empire-building phase, there were critics. Many Americans were angry that their country was dominating other less powerful countries, because that's exactly what Europe had been doing for hundreds of years, and Americans saw themselves as something different, something better.

Or, simply hypocrisy—America was born as a territory of England and fought against ownership, and now was doing the exact same thing to other nations.

So, to sum up: without the Teller Amendment, America would have most likely completely annexed Cuba and today it might be a territory just like Puerto Rico. But with the Teller Amendment, the U.S. still wanted some control over Cuba, and that's where the Platt Amendment fit in.