Answer:
A
It dramatically increased the military role of the united states in the vietnam war
Answer:
It makes differentiating for my students easy and not just one more thing I need to do!!
Explanation:
Answer:
D
Explanation:
The ships dropped them off and never came back with supplies :( They were also dreadfully unprepared for the winter ahead of them.
The correct answer to question one is B) The Flapper. Although Flappers were inspired by the earlier Gibson Girls that had existed 30 years before, they rose to prominence during the 1920s. Their hair was bobbed, they listened to Jazz, were sexually active and promiscuous and far more independent and assertive than their older female counterparts. Good examples are renowned actress Louise Brooks and Daisy Fay Buchanan from the novel <em>The Great Gatsby by </em>F. Scott Fitzgerald<em>.</em>
The correct answer to question two is: True. The driving notion behind this societal shift was The Lost Generation. WWI or The Great War as it was known at the time greatly shocked and horrified both the veteran survivors and civilians throughout all belligerent nations. The Spanish Flu pandemic also killed millions of children and youngsters. Young people (including women, e.g. Flappers) considered that life was too short and uncertain to not enjoy it as much as possible since it might be over soon due to war or disease. they also criticized the rampant materialism of their generation.
Introduction
After the Cold War ended, promoting the international spread of democracy seemed poised to replace containment as the guiding principle of U.S. foreign policy. Scholars, policymakers, and commentators embraced the idea that democratization could become America's next mission. In recent years, however, critics have argued that spreading democracy may be unwise or even harmful. This paper addresses this debate. It argues that the United States should promote democracy and refutes some of the most important arguments against U.S. efforts to spread democracy. After a brief discussion of definitions of democracy and liberalism, the paper summarizes the reasons why the spread of democracy— especially liberal democracy— benefits the citizens of new democracies, promotes international peace, and serves U.S. interests. Because the case for democratization is rarely made comprehensively, the paper explicates the arguments for why democracy promotes liberty, prevents famines, and fosters economic development. The logic and evidence of a democratic peace are also summarized, as are the ways in which U.S. security and economic interests would be advanced in a world of democracies. These benefits to U.S. interests include a reduction in threats to the United States, fewer refugees attempting to enter the United States, and better economic partners for American trade and investment. The paper then turns to a rebuttal of four prominent recent arguments against the benefits of spreading democracy: (1) the claim that the democratic peace is a myth; (2) the argument that the process of democratization increases the risk of war; (3) arguments that democratic elections are harmful in societies that are not fully liberal; and (4) claims that "Asian values" can undergird polities based on "soft authoritarianism" that are superior to liberal democracies. The paper argues that these recent critiques of U.S. efforts to promote democracy have not presented a convincing case that spreading democracy is a bad idea. The internationa spread of democracy will offer many benefits to new democracies and to the United States. The democratic peace proposition appears robust, even if scholars need to continue to develop multiple explanations for why democracies rarely, if ever, go to war. The evidence on whether democratization increases the risk of war is mixed, at best, and policies can be crafted to minimize any risks of conflict in these cases. The problem of "illiberal democracy" has been exaggerated; democratic elections usually do more good than harm. The United States should, however, aim to promote liberal values as well as electoral democracy. And the "soft authoritarian" challenge to liberal democracy was not persuasive, even before the Asian economic turmoil of 1997 and 1998 undermined claims for the superiority of "Asian values."
