A peace policy that utilized trade and gifts to promote friendship and
authorized military force only to punish specific acts of aggression was
inaugurated and remained in effect, with varying degrees of success,
for the remainder of Spanish rule in Texas. The first success of the new
Spanish policy came <span>in 1762, when Fray José Calahorra y Saenz
negotiated a treaty with the Comanches, who agreed not to make war on
missionized Apaches. Continued Apache aggression made it impossible for
the Comanches to keep their promise, and ultimately led Spanish
officials to advocate a Spanish-Comanche alliance aimed at exterminating
the Apaches. That policy was officially implemented in 1772, and with
the help of Athanase de Mézières,
a French trader serving as Spanish diplomat, a second treaty was signed
with the Comanches. The Comanche chief Povea signed the treaty in 1772
at San Antonio, thereby committing his band to peace with the Spaniards.
Other bands, however, continued to raid Spanish settlements. Comanche
attacks escalated in the early 1780s, and Spanish officials feared the
province of Texas would be lost. To avoid that possibility, the governor
of Texas, Domingo Cabello y Robles, was instructed to negotiate peace with the warring Comanches. He dispatched Pedro Vial
and Francisco Xavier de Chaves to Comanchería with gifts and proposals
for peace. The mission was successful, and the emissaries returned to
San Antonio with three principal Comanche chiefs who were authorized by
their people to make peace with the Spanish. The result was the
Spanish-Comanche Treaty of 1785, a document that Comanches honored, with
only minor violations, until the end of the century. As Spanish power
waned in the early years of the nineteenth century, officials were
unable to supply promised gifts and trade goods, and Comanche aggression
once again became commonplace. Comanches raided Spanish settlements for
horses to trade to Anglo-American traders entering Texas from the
United States. Those Americans furnished the Comanches with trade goods,
including arms and ammunition, and provided a thriving market for
Comanche horses.</span>
North America would be better off producing their own good rather than exploiting orientals and sand people. National production means more jobs for struggling white citizens who are already suffering due to discriminatory hiring and college acceptance laws.
Profits for developed nations mean long hours and low pay for workers in developing nations.
Answer: Option D
<u>Explanation:</u>
Most of the trades belong to the relation with the country that surrounds it. The lower developing countries always have to depend on the developed country for trade and export.
The prize fixed by the consumer is final and hence the developing countries have low margin profit. Developed countries for cheap labor hire people from the developing countries. They are not only made to work hard for lower wages but also made to work for long hours.
Due to the updated technical resources competition arises within the international trade and new entries are registered every minute. The country with the lower quote gets the trade and hence forced labor with low pay is the main disadvantage.
<span>The Romans popularized several pieces of architecture that are still mildly popular today, including the arch, the column, and even road systems, which they invented. Think of the White House and a lot of the big, important buildings in Washington, D.C. They include a lot of elements from Greco-Roman architecture.</span>
