That answer is material abundance. After world war 2, The United States was known for being one out of 2 Super powers of the world (other one being the Soviet Union) The American economy was skyrocketing, Americans had the highest standard of living at that time. It all came down to the US being mainland being virtual untouched, this allowed to US to produce guns,weapons,materials, Etc at a larger scale than any nation of the war. The US was lending these items to its Allie’s (Russia,France,the uk) and in return they would pay back the US after the world. The increase of these items for there Allie’s during world war 2 brought a lot of jobs for Americans and brought employment up.
Prior to the attack on the port of Pearl Harbor, Japan knew the ships they needed to attack with the help of radio intelligence.
<h3>What is the significance of the Pearl Harbor attacks?</h3>
The Pearl Harbor attacks are regarded as the most dreadful attacks ever in the United States, which were conducted by the Japanese Navy on December 7 in the year 1941.
Japan used radio intelligence and ships like Sotoyomo to conduct these attacks on the port of Pearl Harbor, which led to loss of lives as well as ammunition.
The United States replied to these attacks by conducting nuclear bombings on the Japanese port cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Hence, the significance of Pearl Harbor attacks is aforementioned.
Learn more about the Pearl Harbor attacks here:
brainly.com/question/12486783
#SPJ1
I believe the answer is: A microhistorian might document one day in a town that experienced particularly high unemployment levels, while a comparative historian might graph unemployment levels in several cities throughout the Great Depression.
Microhistorian tend to choose that method because they tend to favour a more intensive research within smaller unit of research (such as villages, small neighbourhood, etc). Comparative historian on the other hand, might choose that method because they favour research technique that collect as many data as possible from one segment of historical period and compared it with the another.
Answer:
D:There was very little fighting done as the British only worked to occupy Charleston, South Carolina for its port so it could cut off trade for the southern colonies.
Explanation:
Answer:
an emperor of Russia before 1917. tsar Nicholas 2
Explanation:
a person appointed by government to advise on and co-ordinate policy In a particular are' the former British drugs czar.'
