Truman and Eisenhower foreign policies aims at achieving Brinkmanship, Domino Theory and Containment.
<h3>
What are Truman and Eisenhower foreign policies?</h3>
Truman embraced containment policy, i.e. to prevent communism. A doctrine to help the countries under the danger of communism. While Eisenhower had a conservative approach of warfare and concerned with reducing taxes.
The three element of Truman and Eisenhower US foreign policies are:
- Brinkmanship means a superior show of force should be used to bluff the enemy into backing down.
- Domino Theory means if one nation succumbs to communism, it will set off a chain reaction in the region
- Containment means the United States’ main goal is to prevent communism from spreading any further.
Therefore, the three element of Truman and Eisenhower US foreign policies are Brinkmanship, Domino Theory and Containment
Learn more about Truman and Eisenhower, US foreign polices here:
brainly.com/question/1181404
A major reason why the colonists opposed the taxes imposed after the French and Indian War was because "<span>They claimed that since the colonies had no representation in Parliament, Parliament had no right to tax them" since they viewed this as being tyrannical. </span>
What type of answer are you looking for?
The great Athenian leader of the 5th century BCE, Pericles, was swept into power in a popular democratic movement. A member of a noble and venerable family, Pericles led the Athenians against Cimon for harboring autocratic intentions. Pericles had been the leader of the democratic faction of Athenian politics since 462 BCE. Ephialtes was the Athenian leader who had finally divested the Areopagus of all its power; Athens was now solely governed by the council and the democratic Assembly.
Pericles quickly brought forward legislation that let anyone serve as the archon [one of the nine central leaders], despite birth or wealth. The Assembly became the central power of the state. Consisting of all the free-born male citizens of Athens, the Assembly was given sole approval or veto power over every state decision. The Assembly was not a representative government, but instead consisted of every male citizen. In terms of numbers, this still was not a democratic state: women weren't included, nor were foreigners, slaves or freed slaves.
Pericles also changed the rules of citizenship: before the ascendancy of Pericles, anyone born of a single Athenian parent was an Athenian citizen; Pericles instituted laws which demanded that both parents be Athenian citizens. So, in reality, the great democracy of Periclean Athens was in reality only a very small minority of the people living in Athens. It was, however, the closest human culture has come to an unadulterated democracy.
One figure towers over this new democratic state: Pericles. This Age of Athens, which begins either in 462 or 450 or 445 BCE and lasts until 404 BCE, when Athens was defeated by Sparta, is called the Athenian Age, the Classical Age or after its most important political figure, the Age of Pericles.
And still there remains the figure of Pericles himself. There is no question that the democratic reforms of the Age of Pericles owe their existence to the energy of this political figure. He was a man of immense persuasiveness and an orator of great power. Although he was eventually ostracized by the Athenians [he later returned], he dominated the democratic government of Athens with his formidable capacity to speak and to persuade. He had two central policies: democratic reform and the maintenance of the empire.
Sparta, however, growing increasinly wary of Athenian prosperity, would soon find itself entangled once again with its old rival. The thirty year peace managed to hang on for only fourteen years before hostilities broke out again. In 431BCE, a second war broke out, called simply The Peloponnesian War; this war would see the death of Pericles in its second year, but eventually witness the foolish destruction of the Athenian navy, the defeat of Athens and the end of Athenian democracy.
<em>A. Congress was denied power to regulate trade.</em>
Explanation:
The Articles of Confederation had many weaknesses, it did not give proper power to the national government, so they could not regulate trade, enforce laws, or tax citizens. Colonists were scared that if enough power got into the hands of the government, the same thing would happen with what happened with Great Britain. Although the national government had no judicial branch, would also be correct in this case, as the national government did not have enough power or resources to do so, the question states "mercantile laws", which have to do with trade. Congress did not have any power to regulate trade under the Articles of Confederation, as they hated how the British used to enforce laws on them about what they can and cannot trade, and who they can and cannot trade with.
