This question is incomplete, here´s the complete question.
Which best explains the successful development of agriculture in the desert climate of the American Southwest by American Indian cultures such as the Pima, Hopi, and Hohokam?
a) People of the Southwest were instructed in cultivating drought-tolerant crops by traders from civilizations in present-day Mexico.
b) People of the Southwest developed systems of canals to divert water from nearby rivers to irrigate their crops.
c) People of the Southwest developed a seasonal calendar that allowed them to predict the best times of year to plant and harvest.
d) People of the Southwest primarily cultivated drought-resistant grasses for animal feed and subsisted on meat from livestock.
Answer: b) People of the Southwest developed systems of canals to divert water from nearby rivers to irrigate their crops.
Explanation:
The Hopi were part of the western Pueblo tribes, while the Hohokam were the ancestors of the Pima and Tohono O’odham, and were located in the western and southern limits.
Their developments in agriculture required access to rivers, smaller streams, and seasonal waterways, so they built stone canals to irrigate their fields.
By Pamela Kline and Paul Pavao<span>"Though we consider thee as a public enemy, we regard thee as a private friend. While we detest the cause thee fights for, we wish well to thy personal interest and safety." </span>
Answer:
Explanation:
One big thing was the Arms Race
While Russia had no strict human rights policy and favored economic advantage, US was falling behind and their economic policy differed from Russia’s in many ways. One specific instance of the two fighting was the Cuban Missile Crisis. The USSR thought that they should stake missiles in Cuba to ward off the lead the US was obtaining in missiles and such. This example shows just how deadly the feud between Russia and the US was mainly because their economic goals differed. (Communism vs capitalism)
Answer:
It became a better country, and we have not had a huge war like that again, yet.
