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
torisob [31]
3 years ago
13

If not the government who controls politics in Columbia A.) army B.)Local police C.) USA D.) drug cartels

History
1 answer:
seropon [69]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

A.) army

Explanation:

Columbia, as all countries in the world, has its own government which is responsible for controlling the country. If the government comes into a situation where it is not able to control the country, or it has been overthrown so there's no government in place, second in charge is the military. The military is the one that will have the obligation of keeping things under control in Colombia in a non-government situation, as that is what the legislative says. In practice that will be incredibly hard though, as the drug cartels in Colombia are very powerful, so there's every chance that they will be able to take over whole regions of the country, or even all of the country in a scenario like that.

You might be interested in
What does Thomas Paine mean by "the sun never shined on a cause of grater worth"
mario62 [17]
That that cause was the greatest cause ever/
8 0
3 years ago
Korematsu v. united states cause and effect
PSYCHO15rus [73]

Effect: Korematsu v. United States was a Supreme Court case that was decided on December 18, 1944, at the end of World War II. It involved the legality of Executive Order 9066, which ordered many Japanese-Americans to be placed in internment camps during the war.


About 10 weeks after the U.S. entered World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt on February 19, 1942 signed Executive Order 9066. The order authorized the Secretary of War and the armed forces to remove people of Japanese ancestry from what they designated as military areas and surrounding communities in the United States. These areas were legally off limits to Japanese aliens and Japanese-American citizens.

The order set in motion the mass transportation and relocation of more than 120,000 Japanese people to sites the government called detention camps that were set up and occupied in about 14 weeks.

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
For immigrants to the united states, the statue of liberty represents the hope for freedom and opportunity.
Greeley [361]
I studied that Liberty would welcome their passengers<span>, many of them being </span>immigrants<span> traveling to the </span>United States<span> for the first time. So it is TRUE :)</span>
5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which best states how responses to the Scott v. Sandford decision differed in the North and South?
eimsori [14]

Answer:

The decision in Scott v. Sandford was received with joy and relief in the south, because much of the region's society owned slaves; while in the north it caused much disgust and annoyance among abolitionists.

Explanation:

Dred Scott was born in slavery around 1799 in Virginia. He moved with his master, Peter Blow, to Missouri in 1830. After Blow died two years later, military surgeon John Emerson Scott bought and brought him to Illinois and then to a town in Wisconsin, places where slaves were prohibited by law.

After Emersons death, Scott tried to buy his freedom and his family's from Emerson's widow, Irene, but she did not accept his offer. Scott, therefore, in 1850, decided to go to trial and demand his liberty in view of the fact that he had lived for eight years in counties where slavery was illegal and received no legal recognition. Henry Taylor Blow, son of Peters Blow and Scott's childhood friend, funded the couple's lawsuit and provided legal advice to them in litigation. After three appeals, the lawsuit was submitted to the Supreme Court in 1857.

On March 6, the Supreme Court ruled against Scott by seven votes against two. The court's finding was that neither Scott nor other African Americans were considered citizens, and therefore Scott was not entitled to litigate for US law. Furthermore, the Supreme Court denied that Scott had been freed by living in Missouri because the Constitution required the government not to deprive anyone of its legal property without litigation. Thus, in fact, all laws that prohibited or restricted slavery in the United States were contrary to the Constitution.

5 0
3 years ago
Need help ergent what makes a great villan
tamaranim1 [39]

Answer:

Joker

Explanation:

i think he's the worst. oh and btw it's "urgent"

3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What greatly influenced the harsh attitude toward homosexuality in the early american colonies?
    10·1 answer
  • Imagine you are a scientist studying ancient civilizations. You come across some ancient artifacts and after careful thought, de
    11·2 answers
  • What is the official job of the Vice President of the United States
    8·1 answer
  • If a business wanted to construct a new office building, replace all its equipment, and hire new employees, what type of bond wo
    6·1 answer
  • Ok so I need to write a short essay on ancient Olympics and modern Olympics. I need to include the difference and I should have
    11·1 answer
  • PLEASE HELP HELP HELP!!!
    13·2 answers
  • Write a 10 paragragh about how can we stop violence
    11·2 answers
  • Answer ASAP and whoever answers correctly can have brainliest<br><br> no links.
    12·2 answers
  • For what reasons may you be disqualified for office in NC?
    10·1 answer
  • What do you see in this photograph? What can you infer about the lives of these boys?
    8·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!