The correct answer to this open question is the following.
The suggestions that I think he might have made to the two sides if he had gotten them together to discuss a peace treaty would have been the following.
First, I would have recommended US President Woodrow Wilson to tell both sides of the conflict to meet at a neutral site; in this case, I would have invited them to New York City.
Then, President Wilson would open a series of meetings and negotiations letting the European countries know the kind of suffering, pain, and damage the war would produce to each and every country involved. President Wilson could show a forecast of the possible consequences.
Finally, showing the moral authority of the US at that time, he could have invited both sides to leave their expansionist interests and leave the occupied territories and stop the threats of invasion. This could have been a good-will sign to move on with diplomatic agreements.
So, Bush believed that all military missions should be based on U.S. strategic interests and should have clear objectives and exit strategies. He does not want to over commit the armed forces and would like to see allies shoulder more responsibility in terms of regional conflicts. Bush believes that U.S. regional priorities consist of Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, and the Far East, and he strongly supports maintaining U.S. presence in NATO. He feels that the U.S. should be prepared for military intervention if necessary, but that a strong military will act as a deterrent to security threats.
Gore assailed Bush's proposal to withdraw U.S. forces from the Balkans saying it would be "a damaging blow to NATO" and would jeopardize other U.S. alliances. He has defined six criteria for deciding whether to deploy the military: (1) Is the mission in U.S. national interests? (2) Is military force the only way to solve the conflict? (3) Have all other options been exhausted? (4) Will force solve the problem? (5) Do we have the support of allies? (6) Is the cost of the operation proportionate to the objective? Gore's policy of "forward engagement" calls for early diplomatic intervention to prevent the need for future military deployment.
:)
Answer:
While it was true that the cotton gin reduced the labor of removing seeds, it did not reduce the need for slaves to grow and pick the cotton. In fact, the opposite occurred. Cotton growing became so profitable for the planters that it greatly increased their demand for both land and slave labor
Explanation:
I really don’t know why this is so challenging to me
