I’ll give you two:
Yes: The “War” on the Indians was not a traditional war of declaration but of skirmishes. When wagon trains of people headed West Indians would commonly target them for raids and pillage, so along many routes forts where built and patrols would try and make sure they were safe. If the problem became worse the local garrison would find the tribe and come with a list of demands. Most of the time they were fired upon arrival out of fear or anger. This would lead to a small battle or skirmish which would likely cause collateral damage.
No: The wars raged in the west against the Indians were that of near genocide, and to call it anything but is misleading. To claim that the slaughter of hundreds of innocent people was a “battle” is absurd and shouldn’t be considered. Though in films that depict such events are dramatized and inaccurate, situations much like those were taking place around the west yearly.
- <u>The definition of a market economy is one in which price and production is controlled by buyers and sellers freely conducting business</u>
<h3>
<u>example</u></h3>
- <u>the United States economy where the investment and production decisions are based on supply and demand.</u>
<u>
</u>
<u>#</u><u>c</u><u>a</u><u>r</u><u>r</u><u>y</u><u>o</u><u>n</u><u>l</u><u>e</u><u>a</u><u>r</u><u>n</u><u>i</u><u>n</u><u>g</u>
I believe the answer is C, it wasn’t clear that Ethel Rosenberg was a Soviet spy. Hope this helps!
I’m fairly positive it’s A. the church took total control using fear as its weapon.
<span>They followed strict caste rules while interacting with people of other castes.
They believed that their present life was the result of their past karma.
They could choose any occupation, regardless of their caste. </span>
