And you don't have to feel desperate and respond like 10 min later I'm cool if you answered right away
Prussia was a strange little country. For most of its life, it was all split up. Ducal Prussia in the East was held by the Elector of Brandenburg, while royal Prussia in the West was part of Poland. By the beginning of the 18th century, the Hohenzollern family held firm control over both Brandenburg and Ducal Prussia, but it was always seeking to expand and collect more territory. In 1701, Elector Frederick III received the title 'King in Prussia' as a reward for helping the Holy Roman Emperor and Austrian ruler Leopold I, and the Kingdom of Prussia officially began.
Over the next several decades, Prussia grew in power, politically and militarily. The next king, Frederick William I, who reigned from 1713 to 1740, built up a massive army. He started out with about 38,000 soldiers in 1713, but by the time of his death, Prussia was a military powerhouse with over 80,000 well-trained soldiers.
The king's successor, Frederick II, at first seemed unlikely to make good use of all that military might. The new king styled himself as an 'enlightened' monarch. He studied the ideas of the Enlightenment, wrote essays on political philosophy, played and composed music and patronized the arts. Frederick II, however, was no wimp. He had an aggressive side, as we shall soon see.
A)He placed warships around Panama to block sea lanes.
Explanation:
- Using the excuse that the rumors are true that Nicaragua intends to invade northern Panama, the official Bogotá sends a military battalion, which is not only slowed down to Panama City thanks to the leadership of the Panamanian railway, but also to the command of the separatists.
- However, the troops of the Revolutionary Junta were under the watchful eye of the USS Nashville, commanded by John Hubbard, who helped bring Colombian troops to Panama later.
- Colombia proclaims independence from Colombia on November 3, 1903, and a day later Demetrio Brid, president of the Panama Self-governing Council, becomes the de facto president of the independent state, with Gerera as Panama's first constitutional president next year.
Learn more on President Roosevelt on
brainly.com/question/8140223
brainly.com/question/2055743
#learnwithBrainly
Answer:
The US was all for Neutrality. It had kept their sons safe and the economy healthy, not to mention george washington and the basic laws that the US was built on mentioned staying neutral. B/c of this many were happy about his slogan, they were content keeping to themselves.
Hope that helps have a good day
Althought every case presented in the options was about an aspect of religion in schools the one which ruled that school sponsored prayer by clergy at a graduation was unscontitutional is <em>"Lee v. Weisman"</em> .
It was the first major school prayer case decided by the Rehnquist court on the year 1992.
<h3>
<u>
Context</u></h3>
Robert E. Lee was the principal of Nathan Bishop Middle School in Providence, Rhode Island. He invited a rabbi to present a prayer at the 1989 graduation ceremony, Deborah Weisman was a student from that class and her parents requested a temporary injunction to ban the rabbi´s presentation. At first instance the Rhode Island court denied the Weisman´s motion, nevertheless the Wesiman family still attended to the graduation and the rabbi gave his speech.
The Weisman family continued their litigation after the graduation and won in the First Circuit Court of Appeals. The argument of the family was an interpretation of the <em>"Establishment clause"</em> that sustained the free excercise of religion throughout the country and prohibit the congress to sanction a law about establishing a determinated religion. The interpretation which the family and the Supreme Court held was a broad interpretation.
After having lost in the First Circuit Court of Appeals the school district appealed to the Supreme Court under the argument that the prayer was nonsectarian and doubly voluntary, Deborah was free not to stand for the prayer and the participation in the ceremony wasn´t obligatory neither.
<h3> <u>
Decision</u> </h3>
On june 24, 1992 the decision was announced and, as I wrote in the last paragraph, it was a win for the Weisman family as the Court accept the arguements presented by them and reject the ones presented by the school district making special emphasis on the one which said that the attend of Deborah to the graduation was voluntary:
<em>"To say a teenage student has a real choice not to attend her high school graduation is formalistic in the extreme. True, Deborah could elect not to attend commencement without renouncing her diploma; but we shall not allow the case to turn on this point. Everyone knows that, in our society and in our culture, high school graduation is one of life's most significant occasions. A school rule which excuses attendance is beside the point. Attendance may not be required by official decree, yet it is apparent that a student is not free to absent herself from the graduation exercise in any real sense of the term "voluntary," for absence would require forfeiture of those intangible benefits which have motivated the student through youth and all her high school years" </em>Anthony Kennedy.
I hope that the answer is correct and helps you. Regards
