1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
bija089 [108]
3 years ago
9

Can someone tell me if this makes sense? I would state that Yes, the United States was and is defended for doing battle against

Mexico in 1846. The purpose behind this is on the grounds that in 1884, Mexico began the War when they assaulted the Army that was driven by General Zachary Taylor who was organization by the United States to shield the region on the Rio Grande that it was in truth guaranteed by the United States of America. In any case, it was possessed as an outcome in light of the settlement among Texas and Mexico when Texas previously got autonomous.
The United States of America attempted to be tranquil and arrange the contested domain that had once been a piece of Texas. The United States of America did this by sending John Slidell to Mexico City that was engaged around then to offer Mexico significant measures of cash for the contested domain.



Assuming, huge IF, the United States of America had truly incited the war and would have exploited the fluffiness that was going on with the pertinent bargains, at that point the people in the significant districts which included Texas and Alta California, would have been exceptional off under the influence of America then they would in the event that they were leveled out of Mexico. What's more, the purpose behind this is on the grounds that while this was all going on, Mexico was degenerate and confounded at the time in view of the Presidency changing hands quickly and furthermore on account of the just customs being surrendered en route. Furthermore, now and again yet not very many, there were pilgrims that were initially Americans, had solicited to be part from the United States of America!!



Presently, the main premise that Mexico could guarantee was any better terrains directly than decide that real estate parcel was that they needed to vanquish that real estate parcel first. Presently the Spanish nobility of Mexico didn't have a "unique town pioneer" to guarantee the grounds. The explanation behind that is Mexico had just procured them by overcoming and uprooting the Indian and Mesoamerican occupants.
History
2 answers:
Vladimir [108]3 years ago
6 0

Although the text makes sense, it could use some corrections. For example, many of these statements are opinion but are given as facts. This gives the reader the wrong idea about the subject. Moreover, some words are not meant to be used in a formal text, such as "fluffiness." Finally, the text could use some proofreading, particularly when it comes to punctuation (ex. Americans, had solicited to be part from the United States of America!!).

goldfiish [28.3K]3 years ago
3 0

Answer:

Yes i think so great job :)

Explanation:

You might be interested in
Why were some japanese unwilling to follow buddhism?
Mrrafil [7]
Tthe reason for this question is Because Buddhism did not orignate in Japan
6 0
4 years ago
Where is Gadsden Purchase located, how did we get it, who did we get it from?
hammer [34]

Answer:

The Gadsden Purchase, or Treaty, was an agreement between the United States and Mexico, finalized in 1854, in which the United States agreed to pay Mexico $10 million for a 29,670 square mile portion of Mexico that later became part of Arizona and New Mexico.

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
Warfare between christians and muslims that lasted nearly 200years was called
Maurinko [17]
I believe it was the crusades, which was attacking for the land known as "Jesus's birthplace", need anything, tag me :)
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How did the d day invasion impact the outcome of world war 2
stiks02 [169]

Answer:

It allowed Allied troops to advance into Germany once France was free

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Why do you suppose jefferson felt that it was not only the right but also the duty of a people to overthrow a despotic governmen
il63 [147K]
Jefferson felt that it was the perfectly fine as the obligation of a people to oust an oppressive government since it is not out of the question to the general population all in all to ensure each other, else it would influence their security and joy. 



From the Declaration of Independence. Not exclusively do you have the privilege to oust your administration, it is an obligation put on us by establishing fathers. On the off chance that our legislature double-crosses us, acts other than as per our desires, or we feel changes should be made, it is our commitment to do as such.
6 0
4 years ago
Other questions:
  • Why did emile berliner's gramophone win the format war against thomas edison's phonograph?
    11·1 answer
  • Which approach to foreign policy involves sending ambassadors to other countries?
    5·2 answers
  • What three things left France's government in debt before the revolution?
    7·1 answer
  • What were the intended differences that the Framers devised in separating legislative representation
    8·1 answer
  • During what years was Aztec society?
    10·1 answer
  • In your opinion, how might industrialization lead to World War I? (In your own words)
    14·1 answer
  • La grandeza de Roma o la libertad frente a la paz en Maquiavelo
    15·1 answer
  • How did changes in farming,such as the use of a seed drill and crop rotations,help to stimulate the industrial revolution????​
    7·1 answer
  • City-state includes the city and the surrounding farms and land.<br> True<br> False
    5·2 answers
  • Why did Germany want the Rhineland?<br> Why did Japan want Manchuria?<br> How are they similar?
    13·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!