1) General J.E.B. Stuart wasn't there, and he was an asset to the Confederate army.
2) The Confederates brought on a "general engagement" too soon
3) The Confederates should have taken the defensive on the second day
4) The wrong point of attack was taken on the second day
5) Longstreet delayed his attack on the second day
6) There was uncoordinated and poor artillery structure on the third day
7) The point selected for Pickett's charge was badly chosen
8) Pickett's charge was not properly supported
9) A lack of well trained staff officers caused failure
what's the new deal ?????????????
Answer:
B)
a plot by Germany to have Mexico invade the United States
D)
the assassination of the Austrian Archduke caused the U.S. to enter the war
Explanation:
Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the throne of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and his wife, Sophie, were assassinated by a Bosnian Serb nationalist in Sarajevo in June 28 1914. This caused a war between Austria- Hungary and Serbia a month later. Germany sided with Russia and other countries like France, Belgium, Russia sided with Serbia.
The U.S remained neutral. In 1915, a German submarine sank a British ship and about 128 Americans lost their lives. In March 1916, a German U-boat attacked a French passenger ship which led to the death of many Americans. The U.S. wanted to cut ties with Germany but the Germans promised to warn before attacking passenger ships. The German did not keep to their agreement but continued to sink more passenger ships.
In 1917, the British deciphered a message from German Foreign Minister Arthur Zimmermann to the German minister to Mexico, Heinrich von Eckhart proposing an alliance between Mexico and Germans. The message stated that the Germans would support the Mexicans in regaining the territory that was lost in the Mexican-American War. This lead to the U.S declaration of war against Germany.
The Pacific War, sometimes called the Asia–Pacific War, was the theater of World War II.
Answered with what i know and a little research.
- <span>As a vigorous and multifaceted Hinduism unfolded in India during the 7th century, a new religion made its appearance in Arabia: Islam. Within a century, Islam’s dominions extended from Spain to Sind (now part of Pakistan). By the 10th and 11th centuries the followers of Islam consolidated their hold on northwestern India. By 1200 Islamic rule was established in the city of Delhi in northern India, and it then spread in two waves over nearly the whole of India. The first wave of expansion occurred under the Delhi Sultanate, which ruled from 1206 to 1526. During the second wave, under the Mughal Empire (1526-1858), Islamic rule achieved its maximum extension.
This encounter between Hinduism and Islam lasted more than 800 years. During most of this time, Islam had the upper hand politically, a fact that had enormous consequences for Hinduism and that presented challenges for both Hinduism and Islam which continue to this day. Islam’s military victories outside India were followed by the conversion of the masses to Islam, with the possible exceptions of Spain and the Balkans. In India, however, Islam succeeded in converting barely a quarter of the population to Islam by 1900. Although Hinduism had successfully incorporated all previous invaders and political conquerors within the Hindu religious system—from the Persians in 6th century BC to the Huns in the 6th century AD—its powers of assimilation failed in the face of Islam.
One response of Hinduism to the presence of Islam was political. It included the emergence of the Hindu Vijayanagar kingdom, which held power in southern India from about 1336 to 1565, and the Hindu Marāthā state in western India during the 17th and 18th centuries. The rise of Sikhism and the Sikh Empire (1767-1846) in the Punjab can also be considered part of this response. Willing to use violence in self-defense, Sikhs took a militant stance toward the conquerors.
The Islamic presence evoked a paradoxical Hindu religious response that blended hostile rejection and active emulation. Mainstream Hinduism retreated into a defensive position under the protective cover of orthodoxy (conformity to rule), judging by the number of Hindu religious codes produced during this period. At the theological level, however, Hinduism witnessed the rise and flowering of the bhakti (devotion) movement. This movement of ecstatic devotion to Vishnu or Shiva had gained a firm foothold in the south by the 9th century, and it swept over the rest of the country by the 17th century. Devotion to the divine (bhakti), rather than knowledge of the divine (jñana), became the dominant form of Hinduism, perhaps reflecting the historical circumstances. Bhakti poetry expressed love for the divine, often in the forms of Krishna and Rāma. Among the mystical bhakti poets were Chaitanya, Tulsīdas, Mīrābāī, and Kabīr.
The bhakti movement also provided a point of contact with a mystical movement in Islam known as Sufism. Sufis were religious figures known for their piety and love of God. As they carried out their work in India, the two traditions of Hinduism and Islam came together in their love of God. This coming together, however, never crossed over from communion to union, but the rise of Sikhism points to a possible crossover. Sikhism rejects image worship and ritualism in keeping with Islam, while retaining many aspects of the Hindu world-view. </span>
