The correct answer is C. Observing what happened to the Spartans and the Romans shows that it is best to destroy a newly acquired state that is accustomed to freedom.
Explanation:
The text focuses on explaining the differences between the Spartans and the Romans when conquering new territories. The author explains the Romans destroyed and dismantled new territories, and were successful. On the opposite, the Spartans were not successful because they only established a government in new territories.
This implies, destroying new states is a better strategy than allowing freedom, this is reinforced by the idea "he who becomes master of a city accustomed to freedom and does not destroy it may expect to be destroyed by it" that shows the need to destroy or dismantle new states to control them. Thus, the main idea is that destruction is the best strategy to use with acquired states which is proven by comparing Spartans and Romans.
Answer:
b. objective
Explanation:
To say that someone is 'good' or 'strong' is not objective because it is based on your own values, perceptions and judgement. So, someone else might have a very different perception of those adjectives based on his own experience and values.
It's not objective, it's subjective, because it depends of the subject (individual) saying those words, on what they define is good, on what they believe is strong and so on.
Objective means it's something that everyone agrees on, that has a general consensus among the population. For example, saying someone is beautiful/handsome implies your own criteria of beauty, which may or may not be shared by others. But if you say someone is tall, then it can be measured and quantified to determine if it's really the case or not, it's not dependent on someone's opinion or feelings.
I'm pretty sure the answer is A
Answer:
Mrs. Taylor<u>,</u> the English teacher, also heads the debate club.
Explanation:
Hope this helps!