Answer:
La Guerra Chichimeca se llevó a cabo principalmente en los actuales estados de Zacatecas, Guanajuato, Aguascalientes, Jalisco y San Luis Potosí entre los indígenas zacatecos y guachichiles contra los españoles y sus aliados indígenas.
Suck a fat ockkkkkkkkkkkkk
Answer:
- Lane-Poole, “For the first time in their history, the Mughals beheld a
rigid Muslim in their emperor—a Muslim as sternly repressible of himself as of his people around him, a king who was prepared to stake his throne for sake of his faith.
- He must have been fully conscious of the dangerous path he was pursuing, and well aware against every Hindu sentiment. Yet he chose this course, and adhered to this with unbending resolve through close on fifty years of unchallenged sovereignty.”
-
Dr. S.R. Sharma, writing about the acts of religious intolerance of Aurangzeb has observed, “These were not the acts of a righteous ruler of constructive statesman, but the outbursts of blind fanaticism, unworthy of the great genius that Aurangzeb undoubtedly possessed in all other aspects.”
Aims of Aurangzeb’s religious policy:
- It is generally accepted that Aurangzeb was a fanatic Sunni Mussalman. His chief aim was to
convert Dar-ul-harb (India: the country of Kafirs or infidels) to Dar-ul-Islam (country of Islam).
- He was intolerant towards other faiths, especially Hindus. He was also against Shia Muslims.
Aurangzeb’s religious policy had two aspects i.e:
(i) To promote the tenets of Islam and to ensure that the people led their lives accordingly.
(ii) To adopt anti-Hindu measures.
Anti-Hindu measures:
Following were the anti-Hindu measures adopted by Aurangzeb:
- Demolishing temples and breaking idols
- Imposition of Jaziya
- Discriminatory toll far
- Removal of the Hindus from Government jobs
- Restrictions on Hindu educational institutions
- Conversion through different means
- Social restrictions
It seems that you have missed the necessary options for us to answer this question, so I had to look for it and here is the answer. The British government took control of the Suez Canal and Singapore during the 19th century for implementing a policy in order to <span>ensure safe passage on strategic waterways. Hope this helps.</span>
It would violate the constitution i believe. The President shouldn't have that much power. Our government was designed to have that many branches to make sure things went slow, so we could protest any new rules. If the president managed to fire the Supreme Court, a crucible part of our government would be gone!
