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
Viktor [21]
3 years ago
14

Imagine you are an advisor for a sitting US president. You have just received word that three small boats appear to have attacke

d a US port. The president wants to retaliate, but you think more evidence is needed before US forces attack. What historical event could you reference to support your case best?
History
2 answers:
Semmy [17]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

Gulf of Tonkin incident

Explanation:

The Gulf of Tonkin incident was an important incident that led to the United States becoming more directly involved in the Vietnam War. The confrontation involved North Vietnam and the United States in the Gulf of Tonkin. At first, the United States had reported two attacks, and it also had blamed them on North Vietnam. However, as more facts were gathered, there was a widespread belief that at least one, if not both of the attacks were false. The same incident could take place in this example, unless enough information is gathered.

Charra [1.4K]3 years ago
3 0

Pearl Harbor Attack.

You might be interested in
Which of the following statements about Mycenaean civilization is false?
finlep [7]
C is the correct answer
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Who are the Progressive leaders now in day 2020?
Jet001 [13]

The most important political leaders during this time were Theodore Roosevelt, Robert M. La Follette, Charles Evans Hughes, and Herbert Hoover. Some democratic leaders included William Jennings Bryan, Woodrow Wilson, and Al Smith. This movement targeted the regulations of huge monopolies and corporations.
8 0
3 years ago
Compare and contrast the changes in the government, economy, and society from the Romanov era under the tsar to the rule by the
Tresset [83]

The rulers of the Soviet Union viewed empire and imperialism in ideological terms as ‘the highest and final stage of capitalism’.1 By this Leninist definition, the Soviet Union did not identify itself as an empire, and instead, its leaders vehemently denounced imperialism that was carried out by its enemies and competitors: the capitalist states. Despite its own anguish over being identified as an empire, the Soviet Union indeed was one. While the meaning of ‘empire’ has shifted over time, for the purposes of this paper the definition of empire is in the sense of a great power, a polity, ruling over vast territories and people, leaving a significant impact on the history of world civilizations.2 As the characteristics of the Soviet Union are examined, support for viewing the USSR as an empire grows.

The Soviet Union emerged after the Russian Revolution of 1917. The Tsarist Russian Empire’s government was overthrown by the local soviets, led by the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks attempted to replace the Russian empire with a communist one, in which socialism would make nationalismobsolete and in place there would be a supra-national imperial ideology.3 Still, coming back to the issue of ‘empire’, the Soviet Union clearly maintained a commanding control over multi-ethnic and multi-linguistic societies that surpassed the extent of the preceding Imperial Russia Empire. A question thus arises: was the USSR a Russian empire? The first aspect to consider is if the USSR was a continuation of Russian imperialist power or if an intrinsic distinction can be made between the two. What is notable to address is what is meant by ‘Russian’ identity and nationality, its formation, and reshaping through time. Once this will be accounted for, this paper will move on with an answer to the question: the USSR was indeed an essentially different empire from the one preceding it, and thus, the USSR was not a Russian empire.


8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What reasons support the ACLU’s stance that the the displays were unconstitutional?
sashaice [31]
<span>The crèche and menorah are both religious symbols.
The displays were on government property.
The government does not have the right to endorse or promote religious practices.</span>
3 0
3 years ago
Please help. I will mark brainliest! ​
Alekssandra [29.7K]

Answer:

B. James Madison

Explanation:

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What are some reasons why young people joined the red guards
    7·1 answer
  • How did John Calvin help change Europe’s cultural geography?
    7·1 answer
  • The 1989 explosion aboard the uss iowa brought increased public attention to the use of
    8·1 answer
  • Discuss the strengths and limitations of the “Clovis people” to describe the peopling of the Americas. PLEASE HELP AND EXPLAIN!!
    11·1 answer
  • When evaluating past eras, historians depend on primary documents and other resources to understand events and cultures. For ins
    5·1 answer
  • 12. what is <br>Wallace's main<br>argument <br><br>​
    6·1 answer
  • Which reform measure could voters use if they wanted to change a law about taxes?
    10·2 answers
  • Which of the following is the best conclusion that can be made from these statements? Te president as commander in chief can sen
    11·1 answer
  • Why did business leaders in the north support tariffs?
    15·2 answers
  • In the 1840s, the United States had a dispute over the Oregon Country with O Spain. O Great Britain. O France. O Mexico.​
    10·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!