Answer:
1. FIRST BATTLE OF THE MARNE
At the start of the First World War, Germany hoped to avoid fighting on two fronts by knocking out France before turning to Russia, France’s ally. The initial German offensive had some early success, but there were not enough reinforcements immediately available to sustain momentum. The French and British launched a counter-offensive at the Marne (6-10 September 1914) and after several days of bitter fighting the Germans retreated.
Germany’s failure to defeat the French and the British at the Marne also had important strategic implications. The Russians had mobilised more quickly than the Germans had anticipated and launched their first offensive within two weeks of the war’s outbreak. The Battle of Tannenberg in August 1914 ended in German victory, but the combination of German victory in the east and defeat in the west meant the war would not be quick, but protracted and extended across several fronts.
The Battle of the Marne also marked the end of mobile warfare on the Western Front. Following their retreat, the Germans re-engaged Allied forces on the Aisne, where fighting began to stagnate into trench warfare.
The opening months of the war caused profound shock due to the huge casualties caused by modern weapons. Losses on all fronts for the year 1914 topped five million, with a million men killed. This was a scale of violence unknown in any previous war. The terrible casualties sustained in open warfare meant that soldiers on all fronts had begun to protect themselves by digging trenches, which would dominate the Western Front until 1918.
Explanation:
John Locke, because he was the big supporter of unalienable rights or god given rights.
Checks and Balances was designed to keep each branch from assuming too much power. Presidential power is checked and balanced in many ways. While he can veto various bills and keep them from becoming laws, he can be overridden by a 2/3 vote in both houses. SO if the Congress feels like the President is over stepping his bounds then they can in turn overrule him. The Supreme Court is also in the mix in that if they deem a law to be unconstitutional then they can rule it so and the law is no more. Presidents can influence Supreme Courts by whom they nominate for open positions (or in the case of one President, attempt to add more judges to the Court). However, after the nomination is made and the Senate approves and confirms them then they are free. The only way a Judge can be removed is they are found to be doing something illegal, deemed incompetent and unable to continue doing their job, resign, or die. This allows judges to "operate outside the realm of politics." The idea is that they can focus and not worry about politics and we can assume that decisions will be made free from political influences and bribery.
They had both protested/sided against their government
B is the answer because some young priest gave the Bible in like “English” so the ppl could read it and know what’s expected of them
