Answer:
Israel should protect itself from Palestine like how each and every nation protects itself. By providing security to their own people, and taking the fight to them. Palestine has unofficially declared war and has always been warring against Israel, and failed to compromise in any way. All they look for is the destruction of the Jews and them being able to take the lands. Their tactics of destroying the Jews is similar to terrorists, and ideological similar to the Nazi's, the terrorism and sui-cide bombers, and the ideology that all "inferiors" and "jews" must die.
To be able to protect themselves, the Israelites must provide security for their citizens, and to be able to take the fight to the Palestines (which they cannot do, as the U.N. would not allow them too. However, sometimes just providing security is not enough, and Israel must fall on the old saying: "The best defense is a good offense." [Art of War].
Until Palestine learns and uses peace, or until the extinction of one or another people group, the Middle East will not experience peace.
Small limited government, rights reserved to people, power goes to states and people, less government programs, socially typically against abortion and gay marriage. traditional.
Answer:
The absence of the Weather Forecast would affect the type of information that can be taken down by the ATIS broadcast as the weather condition during the day or night.
Explanation: This is due uncomplete information from the ATIS broadcast
Explanation:
Because a modern society is one with rapid and easy communication and travel. In a world with rapid and easy travel and powerful weapons technology the result of inequality, injustice and exclusion will be genocidal war and extinction. This can occur on the global scale or the national/regional scale. There are no options.
None of these conclusions is valid.
- The first one implies that people either think that their employer should cover part of the health insurance costs (as said in the original sentence), or they think that the employer should pay 100%. This is not correct because there are other possible opinions people can have, like thinking that the employer shouldn't pay for anything, for example.
- The second conclusion is invalid for the same reason: it implies that people can only either think that the employer should pay a large part, or that the employer shouldn't pay anything. It is not considering other options.
- The third conclusion does not work either because it is referring to what people think about <em>the amount </em>of the costs themselves, whereas the original topic was <em>how</em> they are paid for.
