The correct answer is: violation of individual liberties, and the violation of the national and international laws.
As much as the government has plausible for doing it so, as we look back at the history of terrorist attacks, the government would argue the indefinite detention without, considering it aa form of prevention. If we know the human rights we will realize the most viable and obvious argument for being against that type of detention is the violation of national and international laws about the individual liberties. That's when there is no evidence of crime and when the individual does not represent national threat. It may be controversial the way government tries to deal with issues like that, but international organizations has made very clear their points about
The Americans simply wanted the land for themselves, they pushed the natives further out towards California, used them as slaves before Africans. Give me a time frame so I can answer the problem better
Explanation: The Allies told Hitler to stop expanding after they took Czechoslovakia. When They Invaded Poland. The British And French Declared War on Germany, starting WW2. The Soviets Joined and split Poland between them and Nazi Germany.
