What was the Truman Doctrine? Question 25 options: the program to promote a successful return to a domestic economy in the postwar era the U.S. policy of giving economic and military aid to countries to help them restrict the spread of communism the plan to fund and support economic recovery in any nation of Europe that requested such aid

Explanation:

For centuries there had been a thriving slave trade between the Western African Empires and the Islamic Empires to the north. ... The discovery and colonization of the Americas caused the expansion of the slave trade in West Africa. This was extremely harmful to West Africa.

Answer:

Brainliest pls

Explanation:

However long the adversaries of The Bible acknowledge the reality of the Bible, it is somewhat simple to turn around assaults on the Bible essentially by citing part and refrain to demonstrate the Bible right. A few pundits, albeit not really foes of the Bible, portray this as roundabout thinking since it depends on the Bible to be right, to demonstrate it to be right. One reaction to this is to take scriptural sections that are affirmed by non-scriptural sources and utilize this proof to demonstrate the whole Bible right and entirely inerrant. Tragically, a few pundits persevere and say that nobody at any point asserted the Bible is never generally right, simply that it isn't generally so and besides that, there is no proof that it is in a profound way right.

Despite the fact that we can never really show the Bible to be in a profound way right, we can try to redirect these assaults by highlighting predictions in the Bible. On the off chance that predictions can be demonstrated to be valid, the Bible has probably been roused by God. The rub is that devotees acknowledge the predictions to be valid, however over and over cynics highlight motivations to uncertainty the actual truth of those predictions.

Eventually, we can involve the Bible and confidence to negate scriptural analysis as far as we could tell, however, we can never truly invalidate these assaults in the personalities of a very much informed pundit.

Answer:

Explanation:

The break of communion between what are now the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches has lasted since the 11th century. The Great Schism came about due to a complex mix of religious disagreements and political conflicts. Rome believed that the pope (the religious leader of the western church) should have authority over the patriarch (the religious authority of the eastern church).

Answer: Joseph Smith

Explanation: Give me the brainliest

Answer:

1. Elizabeth Cady Stanton

2. Susan B Anthony

3. Carrie Chapman Catt

4.  Alice Paul

Explanation:

hope this helps

Answer:1. Elizabeth Cady Stanton

2. Susan B Anthony

3. Carrie Chapman Catt

4.  Alice Paul

Depending on the time period, it was made when states wanted to secede.

Answer:

d

Explanation:

british

Answer:

true

Explanation:

The U.S. government exercises checks and balances through its three branches: the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.

Answer:

See below.

Explanation:

The answer is true. "It provides a system of balance in the government."

-hope it helps

Answer: state

Explanation: i just toke the test ._.

trust me its c because the run mat and why you i have

Answer:

It's C

Explanation:

If this is the person I think it is then yes it's C

Answer:

The answer is C.

Explanation:

Its C because he was born in a really poor family and then became wealthy.

Answer:

Capital offers natural resources as raw materials.

Explanation:

By increasing productivity through improved capital equipment, more goods can be produced and the standard of living can rise. Capital is an important factor of production because it's what allows labor and land to be purchased.As a factor of production, capital refers to the purchase of goods made with money in production.

Answer:

"The United States was justified in going to war because Mexico had shed American blood on American soil, Texas (a land that many Mexicans still considered theirs) was an independent republic and had the right to govern itself, and Texas was trying to become part of the United States, which means that the United States had a right to be involved, too."

Explanation:

"Mexico had encouraged Americans to settle in the province of Texas, which was part of Mexico at the time. After the Texans and Mexicans fought, Texas won its independence from Mexico in 1836. Now, in 1846, America sent a troop of men lead by General Zachary Taylor to the Texan border to make sure the Mexicans weren’t attempting to attack Texas (Doc B). This angered the Mexicans since it made it seem like Texas was now allied with America. The dispute that followed led to the death of sixteen Americans. Also, the Mexicans chose to believe that the arrival of General Zachary Taylor was an outright attack, which lead to the battles of Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma (Doc C).  This shows that Mexico had taken the first step of fighting the United States. Eventually, the Mexicans were forced to surrender. As to which side fired first, this cannot be determined. In one letter to Congress, James Polk stated, “We have tried every effort at reconciliation. The cup of forbearance had been exhausted even before the recent information from the frontier of the Del Norte. But now, …Mexico has passed the boundary of the United States, has invaded our territory and shed American blood upon the American soil” (Doc B).

Before Texas became part of the United States, it was an independent republic. An independent republic has the right to govern itself and set itself apart from other nations. Texas regarded the Rio del Norte to be the Texan border (Doc B). This means that Texas now has the choice to do whatever they wish. Charles Sumner, a state legislator from Massachusetts, said, “…in seeking extension of slavery, (our own citizens denied) the great truths of American freedom” (Doc D). If Texas is independent, it has the right to own slaves. Also, states in the United States already owned slaves, so the point cannot be argued any further. Sumner also said Americans brought slaves in Mexico in defiance of Mexican law (Doc D). However, Mexico invited Americans into Mexico and Mexico should have realized that Americans would have different ways. Also, Texas was trying to become part of the United States, which meant that the United States had a right to go to war with Mexico.

Since Mexico could not govern all of its territory, they invited Americans in. Now that Americans were settling in unpopulated Mexican territory, the ratio of Americans to Mexicans increased (Doc A). Eventually, the American lifestyle took over, and demanded different rights. In Document C, Velasco-Marquez said the treaty signed between Texas and the U.S. and also the fact that Texas wanted to be annexed to the U.S. was an act of war. Texas had the right to be a part of the U.S., and if Mexico considered this an act of war with Texas, then the U.S. had the right to be involved too (Doc C). Finally, James Polk said, “The invasion was threatened solely because Texas had determined…to annex herself to our Union” (Doc B). If that is true, then America did have the right to declare war.

Once Mexico showed aggression to Texas, the United States had a right to go to war with Mexico because Texas was an independent republic and wanted to be annexed into the United States. Whatever Texas does, Mexico cannot have a stake in it. From these points, it can be concluded that the United States was justified in going to war with Mexico."

Excerpt from textbook.

It should be noted that William Howard Day influence change in the nineteenth century because He published a narrative about his own life and wrote books about black history.

According to this question, we are to discuss about the influence of

William Howard Day.

As a result of this we can see that during William Howard Day narrative about his own life and wrote books about black history was published.

Therefore, option C is correct.

Learn more about William Howard Day at:

https://brainly.com/question/26288982

Answer:

separate but equal

Explanation:

hope it helped

Option A or the first option is the correct answer that describes the soldier's feeling.

The tremendous amount of rats is the most amazing aspect of trench life. They've invaded the entire area.

You can't keep them out no matter what you do.

They become quite obese as a result of all the food they steal from humans.

They're repulsive to look at, and some are as big as cats.

Therefore, the soldier was feeling disgusted by the rats.

Learn more about the Soldiers information, refer below

https://brainly.com/question/10058128

Answer:

He was disgusted by them.

Explanation:

Backing away is the action that is considered rude during a conversation.

This is the process in which people communicate with each other through interactions.

Interactions are meant to be done through speaking, facial expressions and hand gestures where necessary. It is however considered rude when individuals back away especially in Colombia.

Read more about Conversation here https://brainly.com/question/24549573

Answer:

backing away.

Explanation:

Answer:

Many psalms that begin with complaint and prayer end with joy and praise, but this begins with joy and praise and ends with sad complaints and petitions; for the psalmist first recounts God's former favours, and then with the consideration of them aggravates the present grievances. It is uncertain when it was penned; only, in general, that it was at a time when the house of David was woefully eclipsed; some think it was at the time of the captivity of Babylon, when king Zedekiah was insulted over, and abused, by Nebuchadnezzar, and then they make the title to signify no more than that the psalm was set to the tune of a song of Ethan the son of Zerah, called Maschil; others suppose it to be penned by Ethan, who is mentioned in the story of Solomon, who, outliving that glorious prince, thus lamented the great disgrace done to the house of David in the next reign by the revolt of the ten tribes.

(1).God made a covenant with is servants David

Explanation: hope this could help you

Answer:

The internet

Explanation:

The internet because if you looked at a book you wouldn't be very likely to find an answer in the past year. If you look in a newspaper you probably wouldn't find anything because they go based off of recent stories. And a police departments bulletin board wont have it because they don't have that kind of stuff on a bulletin board.

Answer:

A, the Internet.

Explanation:

For very recent information about a broad topic, the Internet probably has the most up-to-date data.

Answer:

In 1783 the United States received a huge territory from Great Britain as part of the peace treaty ending the revolutionary war. This new region stretched from the Appalachian Mountains to the Mississippi River, and from Canada to Spanish Florida.

Explanation:

Answer:

C: Sacagawea

Explanation:

A widespread misperception of Lewis and Clark’s expedition of discovery involves two intrepid frontiersmen trekking their way across an uncharted continent accompanied by their Indian guide and interpreter Sacagawea. More recent popular interpretations have added recognition of Clark’s servant York and the presence of Lewis’ dog Seaman. The two U.S. Army captains actually led a well-organized group of individuals chosen for their specific skills that was formed around a “permanent party” of twenty-nine soldiers, two civilians under contract for special work with the War Department, and two dependents (increased to three after the birth of Sacagawea’s son), one of whom was Sacagawea. At various times, they also hired other civilians with particular talents to perform important tasks. Without minimizing her contribution to the expedition, she was neither the only guide, nor the lone interpreter.

The ability to communicate in Indian languages was one of those absolutely crucial capabilities that Lewis and Clark had to acquire in order to accomplish the diplomatic component of their mission. One must recall that there is no single American Indian language. The native inhabitants of the Great Plains spoke many different languages and dialects. Even those from within the same “language group,” are not always mutually intelligible. Long before contact with Europeans, the various Indian nations on the plains developed a system of hand signs that could be mutually understood in order to communicate, negotiate peace, establish military alliances, and conduct trade with one another. What made the Captains’ task of finding sufficient interpreters even more complex was the fact that they did not know how many different Indian tribes of the various nations would be encountered along the route

There was little difficulty in finding individuals who knew one or more of the Indian languages spoken along the lower Missouri River. French, Spanish, English and American settlers, trappers and traders had interacted with the tribes for years, and it was only natural that some of the frontiersmen married Indian women. The children of mixed white and Indian marriages often spoke the languages of both parents. George Drouillard (pronounced DREW-yar), the son of a French father and Shawnee mother, was one of them. Captain Lewis met Drouillard in Illinois while recruiting at Fort Massac, and recognized that his talents as a scout, hunter and interpreter would be most useful, and engaged his services. Lewis met Francois Labiche and Pierre Cruzatte in the Saint Charles and Saint Louis areas, and recruited them into the army as volunteers. Both men were the sons of French fathers and Indian mothers, and both spoke French and Omaha as well as English.

Next to the ability to speak one or more Indian languages, proficiency in French was a decided advantage. French-Canadian traders and trappers had lived among various Indian tribes for decades, and the expedition was sure to encounter a number of them along the way. Although he could not speak an Indian language, Private John Baptiste Lapage could translate French and English. Having him along gave Lewis and Clark one additional man who could speak to the traders’ language, which was sure to prove helpful when they met a Frenchman who spoke the language of his hosts.

\

Answer:

C

Explanation:

Answer:Greek lawgiver. (flourished 7th century bc), Athenian lawgiver whose harsh legal code punished both trivial and serious crimes in Athens with death—hence ...

Explanation:

The correct answer is Draco ( Drakōn; fl. c. 7th century BC), also called Draco or Drakon, was the first recorded legislator of Athens in Ancient Greece. He replaced the prevailing system of oral law and blood feud with a written code to be enforced only by a court of law.

In Roman mythology, Draco was one of the Giant Titans who warred with the Olympian gods for ten years. He was killed in battle by the goddess Minerva and thrown into the sky, where it froze around the North Pole.

Draco also spelled Dracon, (flourished 7th-century bc), was an Athenian lawgiver whose harsh legal code punished both trivial and serious crimes in Athens with death—hence the continued use of the word draconian to describe repressive legal measures.

Learn more about Athenians at https://brainly.com/question/8075169

#SPJ2