Answer:
If the US lost the American revolution, I'd think you would end up seeing a similar relationship that the UK had with Canada, Australia, etc.
The immediate consequences would have resulted in the founding fathers executions or imprisonment. Some like Franklin, who were seen as more worldly may have kept their freedom but overall all those guys probably would be done as political actors. The British would have made the colonies pay for much of the cost of the war and the continued stationing of massive amounts of solders.
Over time the British would have probably continued to expand their control over the lands between the Appalachians and the Mississippi, resulting in a series of further colonies. Many of these colonies would be simple expansions of already existing colonies like New York, Pennsylvania and Virgina. I believe all three had claims to lands West of the Appalachians, claims that had to be dealt with and truncated in the new America, but may have been left alone in a 19th century British colonial America.
Explanation:
Answer:
Explanation:
Massacre: an indiscriminate and brutal slaughter of people.
“an indiscriminate and brutal slaughter of many people” Many is of course “A large quantity”. So there we have it, certainly more than a couple but if it gets to be say 100,000, which is definitely a large number, I suspect that might be encroaching into the realms of genocide.
OK so if you happen upon a car crash and there are bodies spread over the scene, 2 from each of the 2 cars, then you would immediately spot, just by looking there were 4 people involved, but if it was a pair of coaches each with 52 passengers and they were all spread around the scene you wouldn’t be able to put a number to it by just sweeping your eyes across the mess, perhaps then it is getting to be a massacre. Could that be a useful definition? If the number slaughtered is more than you can estimate merely with a look? I also think it needs to be within a definable area, like a football field, or a stadium or perhaps a town. If it involved a whole region of a country then it becomes Genocide, maybe.
Could it be then The indiscriminate and brutal slaughter of more people within a definable area than you can estimate readily with a sweep of your eyes.
Just a suggestion, so go gently on me ………….
My guess is :
Edmond Charles Genêt<span> served as French minister to the United States from 1793 to 1794. His activities in that capacity embroiled the United States and France in a diplomatic crisis, as the United States Government attempted to remain neutral in the conflict between Great Britain and Revolutionary France. The controversy was ultimately resolved by Genêt’s recall from his position. As a result of the Citizen Genêt affair, the United States established a set of procedures governing neutrality.</span>
Answer:
he reconstructed the city politics and sterngthened the senate power
B.
They had control over Northwest India !
