1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Shtirlitz [24]
3 years ago
15

The conflict in the Balkans increased after the death of Slobodan Milosevic. True or False?

History
1 answer:
Andreyy893 years ago
5 0
It true it was the spark and beginning of ww1
You might be interested in
Explain 2 reasons used to justify war with Mexico in the 1800’s.
Ira Lisetskai [31]

Answer:

"The United States was justified in going to war because Mexico had shed American blood on American soil, Texas (a land that many Mexicans still considered theirs) was an independent republic and had the right to govern itself, and Texas was trying to become part of the United States, which means that the United States had a right to be involved, too."

Explanation:

"Mexico had encouraged Americans to settle in the province of Texas, which was part of Mexico at the time. After the Texans and Mexicans fought, Texas won its independence from Mexico in 1836. Now, in 1846, America sent a troop of men lead by General Zachary Taylor to the Texan border to make sure the Mexicans weren’t attempting to attack Texas (Doc B). This angered the Mexicans since it made it seem like Texas was now allied with America. The dispute that followed led to the death of sixteen Americans. Also, the Mexicans chose to believe that the arrival of General Zachary Taylor was an outright attack, which lead to the battles of Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma (Doc C).  This shows that Mexico had taken the first step of fighting the United States. Eventually, the Mexicans were forced to surrender. As to which side fired first, this cannot be determined. In one letter to Congress, James Polk stated, “We have tried every effort at reconciliation. The cup of forbearance had been exhausted even before the recent information from the frontier of the Del Norte. But now, …Mexico has passed the boundary of the United States, has invaded our territory and shed American blood upon the American soil” (Doc B).

Before Texas became part of the United States, it was an independent republic. An independent republic has the right to govern itself and set itself apart from other nations. Texas regarded the Rio del Norte to be the Texan border (Doc B). This means that Texas now has the choice to do whatever they wish. Charles Sumner, a state legislator from Massachusetts, said, “…in seeking extension of slavery, (our own citizens denied) the great truths of American freedom” (Doc D). If Texas is independent, it has the right to own slaves. Also, states in the United States already owned slaves, so the point cannot be argued any further. Sumner also said Americans brought slaves in Mexico in defiance of Mexican law (Doc D). However, Mexico invited Americans into Mexico and Mexico should have realized that Americans would have different ways. Also, Texas was trying to become part of the United States, which meant that the United States had a right to go to war with Mexico.

Since Mexico could not govern all of its territory, they invited Americans in. Now that Americans were settling in unpopulated Mexican territory, the ratio of Americans to Mexicans increased (Doc A). Eventually, the American lifestyle took over, and demanded different rights. In Document C, Velasco-Marquez said the treaty signed between Texas and the U.S. and also the fact that Texas wanted to be annexed to the U.S. was an act of war. Texas had the right to be a part of the U.S., and if Mexico considered this an act of war with Texas, then the U.S. had the right to be involved too (Doc C). Finally, James Polk said, “The invasion was threatened solely because Texas had determined…to annex herself to our Union” (Doc B). If that is true, then America did have the right to declare war.

Once Mexico showed aggression to Texas, the United States had a right to go to war with Mexico because Texas was an independent republic and wanted to be annexed into the United States. Whatever Texas does, Mexico cannot have a stake in it. From these points, it can be concluded that the United States was justified in going to war with Mexico."

Excerpt from textbook.

4 0
2 years ago
explain how talk if including a bill of rights came up at the very end of the constitutional convention.
Hitman42 [59]

''''''' HAMILTON '''''''

7 0
3 years ago
In what ways were Tsar Nicholas and Vladimir Lenin similar in their leadership style?
Dennis_Churaev [7]

Answer:

Well, first you'll have to identify themes of their rule.

Style of rule -

NII was obviously an autocrat (even though he, in theory anyway, had a representative  body of the peoples, the Duma. But he hung onto his absolute rule with the Fundamental  Laws (1905)), and Lenin had spoke alot of 'dictatorship of the proletariat,' both pretty absolute.

Repression (secret police, censorship) -

NII had the Okhrana, and tried to continue his father's 'Reaction.' Secret police for the purpose of preserving the status quo, keeping the Tsars in power.  

Lenin's Cheka was far more efficient, and though the total amount of the Cheka's victims in the  civil war are officially 12,000 and something(wiki it), historians widely believe this figure to be in  excess 500,000. Lenin therefore could be judged as the worse of the two.

Reform -

  • NII - Illusory Reform (October Manifesto created the Duma, and as mentioned, this had no real authority),  
  • Stolypin's land reforms did almost nothing. Lenin issues the Workers Control Decree, and also  
  • the Bolshevik Land Decree - however these were only very temporary (before a return to a very  
  • authoritarian economic set-up (strict discipline etc). These therefore could also be judged as illusory.

Similarities-  

  • Both used concessions/reform in order to maintain control. Nicholas with the October Manifesto and the creation of the Duma and Lenin with the NEP to appease the SR's and the rightists of the Bolsheviks.  
  • They both 'backtracked' on the reforms however with Lenin calling the NEP a 'tactical retreat' and would've  
  • reverted it had he been alive and Nicholas made the 1906 constitution/ Fundamental laws which limited  the Duma's powers and maintained his position as an autocrat.
7 0
3 years ago
Why were the first Americans committed to personal freedom?
frozen [14]
The pioneers were the first Americans committed to personal freedom.During the colonial times, the English and criminal common law made criticizing the government a crime and personal freedom became important.

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Why did Thomas Paine question British authonty to rule the colonies in Common Sense?
frozen [14]

Answer:

bcuz then they would reallyy mess up

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Write a sentence with the word relative location including the word map
    8·1 answer
  • The book of Mark is probably the first Gospel to be written.<br> a. True<br> b. False
    9·1 answer
  • What did the British navy do that affected the colonies during the war?
    6·2 answers
  • (MC)What was the main purpose of the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887?
    6·1 answer
  • Identify the risks these women are taking by demonstrating in this parade.
    8·2 answers
  • List three clauses the Framers added to the Constitution to address commerce.
    7·1 answer
  • How did trusts and holding companies create unofficial monopolies?​
    7·1 answer
  • What limits US growth to the, North, South, East, and west
    9·1 answer
  • Generally, where did women
    8·1 answer
  • Which statement best explains why the issue of slavery contributed to the outbreak of the Civil War?
    9·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!