Britain's victory in the Battle of Britain demonstrated the courage and resilience of the country's military and its people and allowed them to remain free from Nazi occupation. It also enabled the Americans to establish a base of operations in England to invade Normandy on D-Day in 1944.
Answer:
B. both supported a republican form of government
Explanation:
In The republican form of government, the citizens have the ability to influence the government decisions because members of the government are the representatives that selected by the citizens.
Both anti-Federalist and The Federalist supported this form of government. Their main disagreement is revolved around how much power the central government should have over the states.
The federalist wanted the central government to have huge power/influence over the states. The anti-federalist wanted the opposite.
Answer:
1) the prejudice in this country, or the corona
2) you will have to answer this one, it's a personal question
1) it emphasis the fact that these problems are not just a one man problem, it's all of us as a unity
2) to unify the people and to get her point across
3) again, personal question
1) there is too much i could say for this one so i am just going to give topics
- the way the virus was handled
- prejudice of all kinds
- debt
2) to try our best to do every little thing to help make this country a better place for all people
I hope this helped. :)
Answer:
I hope it helps u.
Explanation:
Arms races have generated a great deal of interest for a variety of reasons. They are widely believed to have significant consequences for states' security, but agreement stops there. In the debate over their consequences, one side holds that arms races increase the probability of war by undermining military stability and straining political relations. The opposing view holds that engaging in an arms race is often a state's best option for avoiding war when faced with an aggressive adversary. Debate over the causes of arms races is just as divided. One school believes that arms races are primarily rational responses to external threats and opportunities, whereas arms race skeptics believe that arms buildups are usually the product of a mixture of internal, domestic interests, including those of the scientists involved in research and development (R&D), the major producers of weapons systems, and the military services that will operate them. The policy implications of these contending views are equally contradictory; critics see arms control as a way to reduce the probability of war and rein in domestic interests that are distorting the state's security policy, and proponents argue that military competition is most likely to protect the state's international interests and preserve peace.
Arms buildups and arms races also play a prominent role in international relations (IR) theory. Building up arms is one of a state's three basic options for acquiring the military capabilities it requires to achieve its international goals; the other two are gaining allies and cooperating with its adversary to reduce threats. In broad terms, choosing between more competitive and more cooperative combinations of these options is among the most basic decisions a state must make, and it is often the most important.
Mark me as brainlist answer,
Have a nice day,
Thank you ☺
