<span> Many people went to a travel agency and an agent would make all the arrangements for your tickets, including packages with a place to stay and possible rental car.</span>
Answer:
A. The emperor strengthened the military.
B. The emperor ordered a policy of censorship and book burning.
C. The emperor of the Qin dynasty established an autocracy.
F. The Qin dynasty had a strict system of laws with harsh punishments.
Explanation:
Got it right on the instruction. Hope this helps! Please give brainliest if this helps.
The covenant : The royal covenant was made with David (2 Sam 7). It promised to establish his dynasty forever while acknowledging that its original royal-covenant promises had been given to the ancestor of the whole nation, Abraham.
The significance:
Covenant, a binding promise of far-reaching importance in the relations between individuals, groups, and nations.
lil extra:
it has social, legal, religious, and other aspects. This discussion is concerned primarily with the term in its special religious sense and especially with its role in Judaism and Christianity.
Answer:
The Spanish-American War of 1898 ended Spain's colonial empire in the Western Hemisphere and secured the position of the United States as a Pacific power.
Explanation:
Yes I think that each side has good things to say about the other side. This is because I think that many people's political viewpoints don't always perfectly align to one party or the other. In reality, life is much more complicated than picking one side. Sure some people might agree with policies from the Democrat's side, but they might see other Republican views to be valid as well. I like to think of it as a buffet of ideas, where people tend to pick and choose which talking points they magnetically snap to. We could have for example a socially liberal person but who supports conservative financial measures; or we could have someone who has very religious conservative morals, but supports liberal monetary policies.
In other words, it's unrealistic to assume people will be purely one party. Those who seem that way tend to be stuck in a bubble where it's like a feedback loop of talking points fed to them. Fox News is one example of this on the conservative side, while MSNBC is an example of this on the liberal side. Those stuck in this bubble would likely not have much nice things to say about the other side, if they have anything nice to say at all. However, I think to some (if not many) people, politics has become very toxic that they simply turn the tv off entirely. By "turn off", I mean literally turn it off or change the channel to something else. These people I'd consider somewhere in the middle in a moderate range. Furthermore, these moderates are likely to have some nice things to say about both sides, but they might have their complaints about both sides as well.
In short, if you pick someone from either extreme, then it's likely they'll have nothing nice to say about the other side. If you pick someone from the middle, then they might have nice things to say about both sides. It all depends who you ask. Also, it depends on how politically active they are.
