Answer:
One ironic outcome of the immense wealth Spain acquired - and ultimately squandered - with the colonization of the New World was to make rich others. Great wealth allowed the Spanish kings to fight wars in Europe: against France, in the Netherlands, in Italy and against the Turks in the Mediterranean. But on the other hand, large amounts of those riches - gold, silver - ended in the pockets of the European bankers who had given credits to the Spanish kingdom. Because it lost some wars, Spain had to pay indemnizations and reparations to victors, too. At the same time, much of the treasuries belonging to Spain were stolen by British pirates who attacked and robbed the huge fleets of <em>galeones</em> transporting gold to the Spanish ports. As a Latin American historian once wrote, "Spain had the cow, but others drank the milk."
Explanation:
<span>If the Confederates had a strong support coming from Europe, the war could have turned into their favor. The Confederates were outclassed industrially and militarily by the Union. This led to their defeat in 1864. England and France have shown interest to join the American war, on the Confederates’ side, but it never materialized.</span>
Answer:
As the country dragged into chaos and civil war the British played Indian National Congress and Muslim League off one another. Thus inevitably long term commitment of British to Indian unity was no longer valid.
Explanation
hope this helps
B. 9; appointed for lifetime terms
Answer:
They believed that communism was too totalitarian and wouldn't let people choose government. 2) The U.S. is a capitalist country, and so its prosperity depends on having people buy its products all over the world. In communist countries, there is no private property, so it cuts people off from buying products.
if this is correct can u answer my question on my profile thx
