The best answer is Battle of the Philippine Sea otherwise known as the "Great Marianas Turkey Shoot". This battle ended any chance the Japs had of using sea or air power to protect Philippines from invasion and provided the US the jumping off place and support logistic's to invade Philippines.
<span>The battle of the coral sea was the sea battle that stopped Japan's expansion and the first Carrier group battle. </span>
<span>The battle of Midway could be an answer. This battle was the turning point in the war with Japan and let eventually to the liberation of Philippines.
</span>
Thomas Jefferson called his election the revolution of 1800, because it marked the first time that power in America passed from one party to another. He promised to govern as he thought the Founders would want, based on decentralized government and trust in the people to make the right decisions for themselves
If a company wants to create a new strong market it needs mass production and specialization for sure. I think self-interest is also import, but if the new market is successful, the profit would appear anyways. Economic freedom should be needed in most countries as it gives the company a lot of new possibilites.
So I'd pick answer B - self-interest might be not one of the four needed elements.
Houston won the election in a landslide, carrying 77% of the vote to Smith's 13% and Austin's 10%. Mirabeau Lamar was elected vice president by a majority of 2,699 votes.
Gerrymandering is a method by which the boundaries of council wards are moved to create the majority desired by the current authority. It was used widely in Northern Ireland by the loyalist authority during the 1920s-30s in order to keep the nationalists (who were generally Catholics) subdued, hence stopping them from gaining a political foothold which could have led to the destabalisation of the Northern Irish state.
I am not aware of it being expressly illegal (I study History GCSE, not government and politics), but I imagine such an action would be taken to make elections more fair, gaining equal representation of each sect within the population to allow equal civil rights for all. It would also make elections more competitive, preventing one political party from abusing their power to remain dominant in a country, despite public opinion as a whole.
It makes elections unfair because if there is a slight majority of supporters of party A in one part of a city (for example), the boundary of the electoral wards could be moved to subdivide it into minorities compared with supporters of party B in other areas of the city, whereas a whole this area would have easily voted-in a party-A representative.
I hope this helps, although it is quite a tricky concept to explain in detail.
