Everything really he did painting with the subject of ela was his main because with the ela subject is goes with the cordinate of each values of his method
– Trench Warfare was not very effective because it caused a stalemate between the sides.
<u>Further Explanation:-
</u>
<u>The feature of the western world which effected the way of fighting the war was the development of Trench Warfare. Once the war-related to ‘Race to Sea' got over, the conflict was now shifted to holding on to positions. To hold on to the positions,</u> The army wanted to keep themselves out from firing range of machine guns and for that, Soldiers had to dig down into defensive positions and that was when the trenches were introduced. The trenches were dug along the length along the front and it was very clear that these hastily dug ditches were made to be permanent and because of that, they involved into complex systems which were defensive on both the sides and the area which was opposing to this trenches was known as 'no Man's land'.<u> Trench warfare was considered as deadlier for attackers then defenders and attackers suffered twice the causalities during an assault on the trench line of Enemy. Because of all these attackers faced during an assault, The western front became one of the Stalemate.
</u>
Learn more:
1. According to Roger Williams, how did the English usually justify their attacks on the Indians?
<u>brainly.com/question/4891530
</u>
2. How did congress approach reconstruction after the civil war?
<u>brainly.com/question/507264
</u>
Grade – High School
Subject – History
Chapter – Trench Warfare
Keywords –Trench Warfare, Causalities, Assault, Attack, Defenders, Stalemate, Western Front, Soldiers, Guns, Defensive Positions, Ditches.
Answer:
The Allied forces invaded France.
Both sophists and philosophers were well trained and highly educated, but the main difference was that a sophist taught others and they got paid for that. It is said that their own wealth was their only goal.
Philosophers, such as Socrates, refused to get paid.
Throughout history, the sophists have had a reputation as professionally amoral, . They would help people to attain any goal, regardless of what it was. They would take any case, promote any cause, and empower any person, if the money was right.
Philosophers, for the most part, have walked on the side of the angels. They may sometimes have had reputations as prolix and obscure, complex and abstract, out of touch, but they have, for the most part, seemed to be purer souls in their focus and work.
In other words, the sophists were much more concerned about how than about why. The philosophers have always been more cautious.
