Answer:
This answer relates to the 1930's.
Explanation:
Appeasement was a policy pursued by European powers, in their dealings with Nazi Germany in order to avoid a repetition of WW1, namely another conflict engulfing Europe.
Many in the West supported Hitler as someone who was bringing stability to Germany and was an effective bastion against the Soviet Union and communism.
There was also the feeling that the Treaty of Versailles had been too harsh on Germany and Hitler had justification for his territorial requests.
In 1935 the Saar once more became part of Germany after over 90% voted in favour in a plebiscite.
In 1936, Germany entered and remilitarised the Rhineland, in direct contravention of the Treaty of Versailles. Had this been stopped it may have led to a different path being taken by Hitler. however the West did nothing.
This encouraged Hitler to make further claims including the Anschluss with Austria in 1938.
Also in 1938, the Munich Agreement signed away the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia. The rest of Czechoslovakia was taken over in 1939.
Only when Germany attacked Poland did the West act with Britain and France declaring war.
A. Yes They were willing to work dangerous jobs for low wages.
Answer:
France and Italy I believe...
Answer:
1) Hughes invented Hughes Aircraft in 1932 which helped form many ideas and inventions in aerospace tech.
2) Hughes drill bit was named "Rock Eater" because it penetrated medium and hard work with 10 times more speed then any former bit.
3) (I don't know if were still talking about the drill bit or what but here's my answer for that) "Rock Eater" found virtually all the oil discovered in the glory days of wildcatting, making Howard the richest man in the world at the time.
4) "Rock Eater" penetrated 14 feet of hard rock in 11 hours which no previous equipment had been able to penetrate.
5) It greatly effected the oil industry and the Hughes Tool Company.
Explanation:
(Really hope this helps!! Sorry if any of these are incorrect, if they are I am very very sorry! Have a lovely day by the way! <3)
Answer:
The Pullman Strike and Loewe Vs Lawlor
Explanation:
The Pullman Strike was an organised strike by the American Railway Union against the Pullman Company. The strike closed off many of the nations railroad traffic. Workers of the Pullman company had gone on strike in response to a reduction in wages and when this was unsuccessful, they increased their efforts and with the help of the AFU took it nationwide. They refused to couple or move any train that carried a Pullman car. At its peak the strike included 250,000 workers in 27 states.The federal government's response was to obtain an injunction against the union and to order them to stop interfering with trains. When they refused, President Cleveland sent in the army to stop strikers from interfering with the trains. Violence broke out and the strike collapsed. The leaders were sentenced to prison and the ARU dissolved.
Loewe V Lawlor was a Supreme Court decision that went against the rights of the labour movement. D. E. Loewe & Company had been subjected to a strike and a boycott as a result of it becoming an 'open shop'. The nationwide boycott was supported by the American Federation of Labor and persuaded retailers, wholesalers and customers not to buy from Loewe. This boycott cost him a large amount of money and he sued the union for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act (Another piece of legislation subsequently used to attack unions).
The case was sent to the US Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut, which found that the lawsuit was out of the scope of the Sherman Act. However, upon appeal it then went to the Supreme Court, who ruled in favour of Loewe. The courts decision was important for two reasons. Firstly it allowed individual unionists to be held personally responsible for damages arising from the activities of their unions. Secondly, it effectively outlawed secondary boycott (Where members of different companies boycott in solidarity with the affected workers) as a violation of the Sherman Act. Both of these limited the ability of the unions to bring about change through striking and boycott.
Read more on Brainly.com - brainly.com/question/13463190#readmore
