I’ll give you two:
Yes: The “War” on the Indians was not a traditional war of declaration but of skirmishes. When wagon trains of people headed West Indians would commonly target them for raids and pillage, so along many routes forts where built and patrols would try and make sure they were safe. If the problem became worse the local garrison would find the tribe and come with a list of demands. Most of the time they were fired upon arrival out of fear or anger. This would lead to a small battle or skirmish which would likely cause collateral damage.
No: The wars raged in the west against the Indians were that of near genocide, and to call it anything but is misleading. To claim that the slaughter of hundreds of innocent people was a “battle” is absurd and shouldn’t be considered. Though in films that depict such events are dramatized and inaccurate, situations much like those were taking place around the west yearly.
<span>forced showdown between the southern states to themselves.</span>
The third alternative is correct (C).
<u>Both the Wall of China and the Silk Road represented, in their respective periods, the political power of China as a nation.
</u>
<u>The Great Wall</u> crosses mountains and rivers and is considered one of the great wonders of the world. Many of the stones used in its construction measure more than two meters and its weight exceeds one ton. The main reason for its construction was the desire to defend itself against the attacks of the nomadic peoples of the north, but also was used to transfer people and armaments at great speed from one side to another, demonstrating the technological character of the work.
<u>The Silk Road</u> was a series of commercial and cultural transmission routes that were central to the cultural interaction between the West and the East. Silk was certainly China's main trade item, but many other goods were also marketed. These routes allowed the development of strong commercial relations of the Chinese empire with Persia, India and the Roman Empire.
Answer:
D, John adams was a federalist and the opposing party had a lot of immigrants. He responded with a law that restricted immigrants voting rights.
They all studied the social contract.
