The MOST important aspect of the Monroe Doctrine (1823) was that it

History

2 answers:

sattari [20]3 years ago

7 0

Answer: showed the US backed the independence of Latin America.

Explanation:

The United States was still young at the time the Monroe Doctrine was declared, and did not have a powerful navy to be patrolling the South American coast at that time. But the US did want to keep European powers from encroaching into the Western Hemisphere, and wanted to put Europe on notice to that effect.

President James Monroe asserted the doctrine in his annual address to Congress in 1823. The doctrine was that the US would not interfere in European affairs, but also would view any attempts by European powers to take control of any nation in the Western Hemisphere as a hostile act against the United States.

As reported by the US Office of the Historian, there were some additional motives in mind in the US position, in addition to backing the independence of Latin American nations. "Monroe’s administration forewarned the imperial European powers against interfering in the affairs of the newly independent Latin American states or potential United States territories. While Americans generally objected to European colonies in the New World, they also desired to increase United States influence and trading ties throughout the region to their south."

klio [65]3 years ago

5 0

The Monroe Doctrine was important because it stated that the newly independent United States would not tolerate European powers interfering with the nations in the Western Hemisphere, and if the European powers did interfere, then the United States would retaliate with war.

*Hope this helps

You might be interested in

Select the correct answer.

klasskru [66]

Answer: West Coast

Explanation:

3 0

3 years ago

How the Protestant Reformation is linked to the mentality of that Renaissance period

lubasha [3.4K]

The Northern Renaissance was also closely linked to the Protestant Reformation with the resulting long series of internal and external conflicts between various Protestant groups and the Roman Catholic Church having lasting effects.

3 0

3 years ago

Why did the civil war / 13th amendment and women's right to vote / amendment 19 happened?

zheka24 [161]

(a)
Let: 
a be the acceleration of the system, 
g be the acceleration due to gravity, 
T be the tension in the string. 

For mA: 
T = mA a 

For mB: 
mB g - T = mB a 

Adding to eliminate T: 
mB g = (mA + mB)a ...(1) 

a = mB g / (mA + mB) 
= 7.0 * 9.81 / (11.0 + 7.0) 
= 3.815 m/s^2 
= 3.82 m/s^2 to 3 sig. fig. 

(b) 
Let: 
s be the distance to the edge of the table, 
t be the time taken. 

s = at^2 / 2 
t = sqrt(2s / a) 
= sqrt(2 * 1.250 / 3.815) 
= 0.810 sec to 3 sig. fig. 

(c) 
From (1): 
(mA + mB)(a / g) = mB 
mA(a / g) = mB(1 - a / g) 
mA = mB(g / a - 1) 
= 4.0(100 - 1) 
= 396 kg.

6 0

3 years ago

How were the Spartans and the Athenians similar and different?

Marta_Voda [28]

One of the main ways they were similar was in their form of government. BothAthens and Sparta had an Assembly, whose members were elected by the people.Sparta was ruled by two kings, who ruled until they died or were forced out of office.

3 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

When is the only time a new justice may be appointed?

Usimov [2.4K]

The appointment and confirmation of Justices to the Supreme Court of the United States involves several steps set forth by the United States Constitution, which have been further refined and developed by decades of tradition. Candidates are nominated by the President of the United States and must face a series of hearings in which both the nominee and other witnesses make statements and answer questions before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which can vote to send the nomination to the full United States Senate.[1] Confirmation by the Senate allows the President to formally appoint the candidate to the court.[1] The Constitution does not set any qualifications for service as a Justice, thus the President may nominate any individual to serve on the Court.

Senate cloture rules historically required a two-thirds affirmative vote to advance nominations to a vote; this was changed to a three-fifths supermajority in 1975. In November 2013, the then-Democratic Senate majority eliminated the filibuster for executive branch nominees and judicial nominees except for Supreme Court nominees by invoking the so-called nuclear option. In April 2017, the Republican Senate majority applied the nuclear option to Supreme Court nominations as well,[2] enabling the nominations of Trump nominees Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh to proceed to a vote.....

Hope this helps ;)

5 0

3 years ago