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
skelet666 [1.2K]
3 years ago
7

1. Which of the following describes a Confederate strategy for winning the Civil War? A. Using its navy to blockade northern por

ts B. Gaining the support of Britain and France C. Taking the northern rivers that fed into the Mississippi River D. Gaining the support of Canada
History
2 answers:
Alisiya [41]3 years ago
7 0

Correct answer choice is :


D) Getting the support from Britain and France


Explanation:


To achieve its purpose of reunification, the Union needed to capture Confederate territory, but the South didn't need or want to attack Union territory, it just had to protect its own turf. In war, the policy is the large-scale way that military power is applied in service of political purposes. Its goal was to defend freedom from the North and to build a sovereign nation free from Northern political abuse and the oppression of captivity.

mamaluj [8]3 years ago
4 0
Pretty sure it's B because they gained support in the civil war
You might be interested in
How and why has Civilization changed over time?
guajiro [1.7K]
At first we had nothing, then hunting. This eventually evolved into farming because it is easier.

Because the people who where farming where making the food, they controlled the population. This means that they started to give out specialized jobs to people to meet their needs. This cycle led to kings and queens then business.

5 0
3 years ago
What is the definition of groups of people who traveled the Silk Road together for safety.
likoan [24]
It would be caravans i think
3 0
3 years ago
What does total war mean ?
lubasha [3.4K]

Answer:A war where the laws of war are disregarded

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Einhard was a member of Charlemagne’s court and described him as “my lord and foster-father”. He also wrote that, “no man can wr
Maurinko [17]

Answer:SINCE I have taken upon myself to narrate the public and private life, and no small part of the deeds, of my lord and foster-father, the most lent and most justly renowned King Charles, I have condensed the matter into as brief a form as possible. I have been careful not to omit any facts that could come to my knowledge, but at the same time not to offend by a prolix style those minds that despise everything modern, if one can possibly avoid offending by a new work men who seem to despise also the masterpieces of antiquity, the works of most learned and luminous writers. Very many of them, l have no doubt, are men devoted to a life of literary leisure, who feel that the affairs of the present generation ought not to be passed by, and who do not consider everything done today as unworthy of mention and deserving to be given over to silence and oblivion , but are nevertheless seduced by lust of immortality to celebrate the glorious deeds of other times by some sort of composition rather than to deprive posterity of the mention of their own names by not writing at all.

Be this as it may, I see no reason why I should refrain from entering upon a task of this kind, since no man can write with more accuracy than I of events that took place about me, and of facts concerning which I had personal knowledge, ocular demonstration as the saying goes, and I have no means of ascertaining whether or not any one else has the subject in hand.

In any event, I would rather commit my story to writing, and hand it down to posterity in partnership with others, so to speak, than to suffer the most glorious life of this most excellent king, the greatest of all the princes of his day, and his illustrious deeds, hard for men of later times to imitate, to be wrapped in the darkness of oblivion.

But there are still other reasons, neither unwarrantable nor insufficient, in my opinion, that urge me to write on this subject, namely, the care that King Charles bestowed upon me in my childhood, and my constant friendship with himself and his children after I took up my abode at court. In this way he strongly endeared me to himself, and made me greatly his debtor as well in death as in life, so that were I unmindful of the benefits conferred upon me, to keep silence concerning the most glorious and illustrious deeds of a man who claims so much at my hands, and suffer his life to lack due eulogy and written memorial, as if he had never lived, I should deservedly appear ungrateful, and be so considered, albeit my powers are feeble, scanty, next to nothing indeed, and not at all adapted to write and set forth a life that would tax the eloquence of a Tully [note: Tully is Marcus Tullius Cicero].

I submit the book. It contains the history of a very great and distinguished man; but there is nothing in it to wonder at besides his deeds, except the fact that I, who am a barbarian, and very little versed in the Roman language, seem to suppose myself capable of writing gracefully and respectably in Latin, and to carry my presumption so far as to disdain the sentiment that Cicero is said in the first book of the Tusculan Disputations to have expressed when speaking of the Latin authors. His words are: "It is an outrageous abuse both of time and literature for a man to commit his thoughts to writing without having the ability either to arrange them or elucidate them, or attract readers by some charm of style." This dictum of the famous orator might have deterred me from writing if I had not made up my mind that it was better to risk the opinions of the world, and put my little talents for composition to the test, than to slight the memory of so great a man for the sake of sparing myself.

Explanation:

did report made 93.6 plz mark brainist

4 0
3 years ago
President Kennedy made the statement in the box in 1961. What
kenny6666 [7]

Answer:

The United States can demonstrate its superiority to the Soviet Union by sending a man to the moon.

Explanation:

The "Apollo program" of the U.S. was<em> a response to the early successes of the Soviet Union,</em> especially when it comes to "outer space." Even before, a Cold War was already happening between the United States and the Soviet Union.

The Apollo program was an opportunity for the Americans to prove themselves that they can demonstrate superiority to the Soviet Union when it comes to science and technology by sending a man to the moon. Thus, President Kennedy made a statement regarding the capability of the nation to achieve the goal. He wanted the nation to focus on the moon race and to add more budget to make it happen. In the end, they were indeed victorious.

So, this explains the answer.

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • What should Jason do when Rob asks him if he wants
    6·2 answers
  • What three major bodies of water surround the Greek peninsula
    12·1 answer
  • Why did the writers of the Constitution create a way to allow amendments?
    10·2 answers
  • 133
    8·1 answer
  • What factor do plessy v Ferguson brown v board of education and regents of California v bakke have in common
    15·2 answers
  • How was the monarchy of Louis XIV<br> characteristic of absolutism?
    12·1 answer
  • What exploration like in the Medieval Period
    13·1 answer
  • What were John lockes thoughts on when the Magna Carta was written​
    10·1 answer
  • Why was the passing of the 14th Amendment important?
    5·2 answers
  • Guys HELP
    7·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!