The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Should the US have become an empire?
No of course not, because that would have been in direct opposition to the elevated ideas expressed by the United States Founding fathers when they created the US Constitution and established the new form of government during the Constitutional Convention held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in the summer of 1787.
Nevertheless, as it happens in the history of the nations, there were Presidents that under the idea of the Manifested Destiny tried to expand the US territory waging war, invading, and supporting imperialistic ideals, as was the case of President James Polk. It was the time of the Mexican-American War when the United States got the territories of California, Arizona, and New Mexico, Other Presidents had similar foreign policies.
How long could the US have maintained an isolationist policy toward the world?
Basically, the US developed the concept of isolationism during two important times in modern history. First, at the beginning of World War I. US President Woodrow Wilson tried to maint the foreign policy of neutrality. Years later, at the beginning of World War II, US President Franklin D. Roosevelt tried to do the same. In both cases, after terrible events, both presidents decided to enter the war.
<span><span>IT IS an awful lot of rubbish. Since 1960 the amount of municipal waste being collected in America has nearly tripled, reaching 245m tonnes in 2005. According to European Union statistics, the amount of municipal waste produced in western Europe increased by 23% between 1995 and 2003, to reach 577kg per person. (So much for the plan to reduce waste per person to 300kg by 2000.) As the volume of waste has increased, so have recycling efforts. In 1980 America recycled only 9.6% of its municipal rubbish; today the rate stands at 32%. A similar trend can be seen in Europe, where some countries, such as Austria and the Netherlands, now recycle 60% or more of their municipal waste. Britain's recycling rate, at 27%, is low, but it is improving fast, having nearly doubled in the past three years.Even so, when a city introduces a kerbside recycling programme, the sight of all those recycling lorries trundling around can raise doubts about whether the collection and transportation of waste materials requires more energy than it saves. We are constantly being asked: Is recycling worth doing on environmental grounds? says Julian Parfitt, principal analyst at Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP), a non-profit British company that encourages recycling and develops markets for recycled materials.Studies that look at the entire life cycle of a particular material can shed light on this question in a particular case, but WRAP decided to take a broader look. It asked the Technical University of Denmark and the Danish Topic Centre on Waste to conduct a review of 55 life-cycle analyses, all of which were selected because of their rigorous methodology. The researchers then looked at more than 200 scenarios, comparing the impact of recycling with that of burying or burning particular types of waste material. They found that in 83% of all scenarios that included recycling, it was indeed better for the environment.Based on this study, WRAP calculated that Britain's recycling efforts reduce its carbon-dioxide emissions by 10m-15m tonnes per year. That is equivalent to a 10% reduction in Britain's annual carbon-dioxide emissions from transport, or roughly equivalent to taking 3.5m cars off the roads. Similarly, America's Environmental Protection Agency estimates that recycling reduced the country's carbon emissions by 49m tonnes in 2005.Recycling has many other benefits, too. It conserves natural resources. It also reduces the amount of waste that is buried or burnt, hardly ideal ways to get rid of the stuff. (Landfills take up valuable space and emit methane, a potent greenhouse gas; and although incinerators are not as polluting as they once were, they still produce noxious emissions, so people dislike having them around.) But perhaps the most valuable benefit of recycling is the saving in energy and the reduction in greenhouse gases and pollution that result when scrap materials are substituted for virgin feedstock. If you can use recycled materials, you don't have to mine ores, cut trees and drill for oil as much,says Jeffrey Morris of Sound Resource Management, a consulting firm based in Olympia, Washington.Extracting metals from ore, in particular, is extremely energy-intensive. Recycling aluminium, for example, can reduce energy consumption by as much as 95%. Savings for other materials are lower but still substantial: about 70% for plastics, 60% for steel, 40% for paper and 30% for glass. Recycling also reduces emissions of pollutants that can cause smog, acid rain and the contamination of waterways.</span></span>
Answer:
no
Explanation:
Young girls did not have any chances to express their imagination, while boys did have a few chances.
Answer:
The Mexican army attacked them. The main cause of the war was the westward expansion of the United States. All through the 19th century Americans believed it was their right to expand westward. At the time they believed they could conquer the people already living on the land and take it for the United States.
Explanation:
