I think that this question was asked by a bot made by brainly.
The Nazis treated their<u> </u><u>enemies </u><u>differently based on </u><u>race </u><u>but in </u><u>general </u><u>treated them as </u><u>subhuman</u><u>. </u>
<h3>Nazis and their enemies</h3>
- Nazis hated Jews and subjected them to mass killings, forced labor, starvation, and segregation.
- Nazis also hated Communists and meted out the same treatment as Jews to them.
Nazis also used their enemies as scientific subjects for the most heinous of experiments.
In conclusion, Nazis treated enemies as subhuman and committed atrocities against them.
Find out more on Nazi atrocities at brainly.com/question/1151041.
The two sides of the debate over slavery were divided between the two main sections of the United States; the North and South. Many Northerners viewed slavery as evil and wrong and some were involved in the abolitionist movement. The North did not obey fugitive slave laws because they said they were cruel and inhumane. No states in the North allowed slavery and the North and the abolitionists who lived there harbored fugitive slaves and helped them escape to Canada along the Underground Railroad. In the South, on the other hand, the people said that slavery was necessary to their way of life even though the majority of southerners did not even own slaves. Those who did own slaves, said slavery was good for the slaves because they were cared for in every way and given a job and that slavery was good for the slave owners because it allowed southern whites to achieve a high level of culture.
The correct answer is C. It described the event as it was experienced at the time
Explanation:
A primary source is any source including documents, paintings, manuscripts, diaries or recordings that are created at the moment the event occurs. On the other hand, a secondary source is a document that is usually created to report, summarize, analyze a primary source. In comparison to secondary sources, primary sources are created when the even occurs and are closer to it, but usually more subjective. In the case of historians wanting to study an event a primary source has multiple advantages, one of this is that the document would reflect the way the event was experienced as the source is created at the same time the event occurs or short after this, and reported by someone who was part of the event, experience it or witness it in a closer way which provides a closer perspective of the event.
They were called missions.
the answer is b. good luck :))
