Answer:
It seems that both sources are describing how President Polk demonstrated the manifest destiny of continued westward expansion, and by emphasizing capturing Mexican territory, he would fulfill the presidency policy of continental protection. I believe the question is making the point of how the dispute over the border would not be resolved according to the foundational logic of location. The border separating the two powers were incorrect across both perspectives--the landscape boudnary of one power did not constitue the other's prefered boundary, and evidently the Untied States were foreshadowed to attack regardless of the negotiation outcome in evidence of the brewing tensions. I hope this helps slightly as I do not know specifically to what the question refers.
Explanation:
