The previous section lists several events that happened in the
U.S. during World War II. What do these events show when
considered all together?

HELP PLS AND NO FILE PLS

!!!!!!WILL MARK BRAINLIST ANSWER!!!!!!!

Answer:

It appears as "digestible" which means you are able to digest it.

Explanation:

Answer:

D

Explanation:

The most obvious promise he made was for "Bread, Land and Peace". Bread for the hungry in the cities - people were starving because so many peasants were in the army and the food supply infrastructure broke down.

Answer:

d

Explanation:

yuh

Answer:

On March 25th, the Suez Canal was blocked. This occurred due to a ship, the Ever Given, being stuck inside the canal. Strong winds caused the ship to lose control and steer into the side of the canal. While this may seem like a normal occurrence, what isn't is remaining stuck. While the ship was stuck for 6 days it caused a detrimental amount of damage. Reports state that this one incident could cost the world from 6 to 10 billion dollars worth of trade, just lost. Egypt wants to be compensated, and honestly, it turned into a huge mess.

the answer would be b on scholar

Answer:

the third option

Explanation:

The US imposed sanctions on Iraq ordered them to withdraw their troops from Kuwait

Answer: It showed that progress was being made in defeating the South, and it helped persuade Union voters to re-elect Lincoln as President.

Answer:

I think that it's A and D

Explanation:

Answer: true

Explanation:

Answer:

By 1840, the factories in Lowell employed at some estimates more than 8,000 textile workers, commonly known as mill girls or factory girls.

Answer:

no sabo

Explanation:

no sabo

Answer An order issued by the Supreme Court directing the lower court to transmit records for a case for which it will hear on appeal.

hope this helps

The research question I would asked is why is the US  health care systems run by private sector and the UK health care systems run by the Government.

The United States is known to be run by private sector and they often spend a lot of money on health care than any other countries of the world.

The UK is known to be at the  bottom among industrial countries in terms of Healthcare. Healthcare  in the U.S. is said to be delivered in almost all percentage by private sector providers. Hospitals are said to be owned by profit firms and also by non-profit and charitable organizations.

Learn more about  research question from

https://brainly.com/question/25257437

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

The several ways that personal and government budgeting are similar in the following way.

Both budgets are necessary to project the series of expenses needed to make in the short, medium, and long-term. Both, the government and the personal government clearly establish how much money you have to spend when you need to spend it, the limit of money to be spent in a certain period of time, and the concept of the expenditure.

One important way they are different is the large numbers of each budget. A personal budget is about our income and how to spend it correctly so we do don create personal financial problems. On the other hand, the budget of the government is about trillions of dollars. Large sums of money have to be destined to all the important departments of the federal government, the states, and social programs.

If the federal government does not follow strict rules and parameters to respect the budget, in the end, it has to loan money which will generate more debt.

Answer:

D

Explanation:

Answer:

When its charter expired in 1836, the Second Bank ended its operations as a national institution. It was reestablished as a commercial bank under the laws of Pennsylvania, where it continued to operate until its failure in 1841.

the events that occurred as a result of the closing of the Second National Bank. After the Second National Bank closed, smaller state and private banks failed, land values decreased, people lost their jobs, and an economic depression began.

Answer:

QUESTION:

What were the pros and cons of Herbet Hoover's presidency?

ANSWER:

I read what's in this article. And I think that it will help you out. Here's the link: https://epikfails.com/2017/07/07/presidential-pros-cons-part-eight/

Explanation:

I hope that this helps you out! :)    

Have a great rest of your day/night!    

Please thank me on my profile if this answer has helped you out.

Answer:b

Explanation:

Answer:     Both require members to remove barriers to trade

Explanation:    I took the test !

Answer:

Athenian Genocide : 1913-1922

Target : Greek Population

Deaths : 300,000 to 900,000

Namibian Genocide : 1904-1907

Deaths : 24,000 to 100, 000

Target : Herero and Namaqua people

Rwandan Genocide : 7 April – 15 July 1994

Target : Tutsi population, Twa, and moderate Hutus

Deaths : 500,000 to 600,000

Answer: Athenian Genocide- In the summer of 416 BCE, Deaths- 300,000–900,000, and the Greek population, particularly from Pontus, Cappadocia, Ionia and Eastern Thrace was there target.

Namibian Genocide- 1904-1908, Tens of thousands of Namibians (the first genocide of the 20th Century) were killed. There target was German.

Rwandan Genocide- April 7, 1994 - 15 July 1994, Deaths: 206,000–800,000, target: Tutsi population, Twa, and moderate Hutus

Explanation:

Answer:

the US millitary

Explanation:

The U.S military was first

Answer:

Explanation:

===================================================================

ITALY- Benito Mussolini

===================================================================

GERMANY- Adolf Hitler

===================================================================

JAPAN- Hirohito

===================================================================

Answer:

the Answer .....A

Explanation:

hope its helpful

Answer:

One short-term consequence of the alliance between the Wampanoag and the Pilgrims is the mutual defense alliance against their common enemies which only lasted until more Englishmen including both Puritans and non-religious settlers had arrived in New England, tipping the balance of power in favor of the English.

Explanation:

Hope that this helps you out! :)

Have a good rest of your day/night!

The long and short term consequence of the alliance (respectively) between the Wampanoag and the Pilgrims includes:

This alliance involves a peace treaty that states that they will not harm each other, will come to aid if attacked by third parties and have equal jurisdiction over offenders.

However, the long term consequence was that number of natives were killed, taken captive and sold into slavery while short term consequence was that its assist white settlers survive by providing them with the resources for food.

Read more about alliance

brainly.com/question/384845

Answer:

North Vietnam attack Saigon, Communism gained control

Explanation:

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1969-1976/ending-vietnam

North Vietnam troops invaded and took down the presidential place in Saigon, effectively ending the war. After that, the Communist party took over and currently leads the one-party government.

Answer:

Having rebuilt their forces and upgraded their logistics system, North Vietnamese forces triggered a major offensive in the Central Highlands in March 1975. On April 30, 1975, NVA tanks rolled through the gate of the Presidential Palace in Saigon, effectively ending the war.

Explanation:

Answer:

true. the answer is TRUE

Answer:

false

Explanation:

Answer:

Economic imperialism in China led to war and political collapse, while formal colonialism in Africa led to oppression of native peoples. ... As they were also behind in military technology and modern warfare, they were defeated and were forced to give concessions to theimperialists

Explanation:

Answer:

The Emperors name was Go-Daigo.

Answer:

Explanation:

On January 15, 1868, George Templeton Strong, a New York attorney, read the report from the country's capital and wrote in his journal, "Undertakings at Washington look blustery. A sad blast or something to that affect is entirely conceivable." It "makes up," he stated, "a compromising possibility."  

It very well may be said that Strong was thinking little of the circumstance. The House of Representatives was going to arraign a leader of the United States, Andrew Johnson, for "egregious acts of misconduct." Everywhere, one spectator grumbled, "the air is weighty with dangers and misgivings."  

Prosecution would be protected yet stunningly untidy—and remarkable. No president in U.S. history had at this point been arraigned.  

It at last occurred on February 24, somewhat more than a month after Strong composed the proclamation in his journal. By an edge of 126 to 47, the House casted a ballot to denounce Johnson and the following day informed the U.S. Senate, where the president would be put being investigated as the Constitution required. The Senate would cast a ballot to either clear Johnson or convict him and eliminate him from office.  

Andrew Johnson was brought into the world in Raleigh, North Carolina, to a poor mudsill father who kicked the bucket when his child was three years of age. Johnson had no proper instruction; all things considered, his mom apprenticed him to a tailor when he was ten years of age. At age 18 years, he was an ignorant town tailor in his recently received territory of Tennessee. There he met and wedded 16-year-old Eliza McCardle, the girl of a shoemaker, who instructed him to peruse and compose. Johnson turned into an unquenchable peruser who found he had an adoration for and talent for legislative issues. What's more, governmental issues seemed to cherish him. A familiar, amazing speaker, he rose quick. During the 1840s, while still just in his thirties, he turned into a U.S. Delegate from Tennessee. During the 1850s he was lead representative, and by the 1860s he was a U.S. Representative who, in contrast to each other Southern congressperson, stayed faithful to the Union during the conflict.  

In 1864, Johnson was named the bad habit official running mate in Lincoln's effective re-appointment crusade. Despite the fact that he was a Union Democrat—a Southern man with Union slants—not a Republican like Lincoln, he was put on the pass to widen its allure. He had liberated his slaves and upheld Lincoln's liberation strategy. At the point when Lincoln passed on April 15, 1865, just three months into his subsequent term, Johnson became president, arriving at the top of U.S. legislative issues. Johnson was a man of genuine disposition, whom one guest saw as "limited and one sided" with "a willful, dubious temper." One of his most clear characteristics was his hardheadedness. An onlooker said he was consistently "certain he was correct, even in his blunders." This quality served him sick in his associations with Congress and carried him to reprimand.  

The reprimand was the last blowup among Johnson and Congress over how to deal with Reconstruction of the Union after the Civil War—and who planned to do it. Johnson accepted he planned to do it as he would prefer. Revolutionaries in the Republican Congress considered it to be their work and their work alone.  

In question was the destiny of 4,000,000 previous slaves liberated during the conflict or by the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. Is it accurate to say that they were to be given each benefit of opportunity, as Congress wanted? Or then again left to get by admirably well, unprotected in a wrathful, brutal, bigoted South? Johnson, a racial oppressor, was very little worried about their destiny and was especially against giving individuals of color the option to cast a ballot. Likewise being referred to was the post bellum job of southern pioneers who had taken an interest in severance. Is it safe to say that they were to be seriously rebuffed, as Radicals running Congress wished or set back in the driver's seat, as Johnson needed?  

At the point when Johnson became president after Lincoln's death in April 1865, the Radicals were enchanted, accepting he would be more amiable to their program and simpler to manage than Lincoln. During the conflict and before Johnson became president, an ex-Confederate had said of him that he "inhaled fire and hemp against the South, broadcasted he would make conspiracy accursed by hanging backstabbers." This satisfied the Congressional Radicals. However, in the wake of turning out to be president at war's end, Johnson changed his view as his confidence in racial oppression and his bigotry reemerged. He trusted African Americans were a substandard race unsuitable to oversee themselves as well as other people, and he anticipated that the Southern states should be readmitted into the Union and white Southerners to continue their strength over blacks.