could the USA have use better things to prevent world war 1

Hello Iam freddie and i say the USA could have done nothing else to prevent world war 1 war was the only thing that it come to nobody was willing to listen and violence was the thing it had to come to

Definitions:
World War 1: A military engagement lasting from 1914-1918, the belligerents of the war were the Allies, and the Central Powers
Allies:France, England, Russia, USA, Italy
Central Powers: Germany, Austria-Hungry, Ottoman Empire, Bulgaria

I propose that the United States could've stopped World War 1 by attempting to invade England in the year 1913.
Had the United States invaded England in the year 1913 then France and Russia would've declared war on the United States. Thus the definition of World War 1 would have never been present as the military conflict would have happened in 1913 not 1914 and the Allied powers would not have existed, meaning they could not have been a belligerent in the World War 1

But why would we invade England they are one of our greatest Allie and then have Russia fight us to man there is not telling how this would have turn out and then France also we would not have broken relations with England we would have also with France and Russia there is no telling how bad it could have been 3 to 1 and you know Germany would have got in it because they just kept blowing up ships like crazy with there invention of the U-boat ( submarine) so there is no telling how this would turn out it would have probably been worse the Russia and England and France probably would have invaded the USA and then Canada and central America might have gotten involve so man they way you put it you made it sound 10 times as worse so if we use your strategy there ant no telling how the world would be today

I will begin my rebutting my opponent's arguments and then move on to reiterate my own case.
My opponent's premise seems to be this.

the USA could have done nothing else to prevent world war 1 war was the only thing that it come to nobody was willing to listen and violence was the thing it had to come to

So first off I would like to challenge the assertion that nobody was willing to listen. The definition of nobody is no person; no-one[1]
The definition of listen is:hear with intention;
Source
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Now what is implied in this statement is that not a single person on the entire planet was willing to hear with intention. This is absurd as if it were true Woodrow Wilson would not have bothered preparing an inaugural address, because there would have been no one to hear it.

and violence was the thing it had to come to

this statement cannot be true as the definition of violence is
the third album by the Washington-based Alternative metal music group Nothingface. The album was released on September 5, 2000, via TVT Records.
Source
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_(album)
World War 1 started in 1914 and ended in 1918 whereas violence did not exist until 2000 therefore the thing (which I assume to mean World War 1) could not have come to violence as they are separated by near a hundred years.

Now onto defending my own argument.
My opponent has not raised a single valid objection to my argument. I will agree whole heartedly that had the US invaded Enlgand the world would probably not have turned out like it has, but that doesn't mean that it would not have stopped World War 1. So my argument still stands.

But why would we invade England

To stop World War 1 of course

So let's recap the debate
1)My opponent has yet to provide a single source or definition and has not contested mine, meaning that my are considered to be correct
2)Under my definition I have proved the US could've prevented World War 1 and have refuted every argument my opponent has made.

Therefore I have been proven correct so
VOTE PRO