Answer:
d
Explanation:
I think its D and good luck on that final bro
I think beans were very important crops to Olmecs
The brinkmanship enables the country to manage a strong position without engaging itself in the conflict.
<h3>What is brinkmanship?</h3>
The brinkmanship has been the political policy and the condition that enables the county or the group to use a dangerous event in order to bring forward advantageous results.
The country that has been following the brinkmanship practice will be using the position of strength without being involved in the conflict. Thus, option A is correct.
Learn more about brinkmanship, here:
brainly.com/question/2791581
Answer:
There are widespread misconceptions about numerous aspects of the Chinese revolution. These include a misreading of the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, and the “reforms” of the post-Mao era, and the reaction of the overwhelming mass of the peasantry to these movements. Although the revolutionary programs/movements resulted in significant hardships — on the rural population (the Great Leap Forward, 1958-61) or the intellectuals (the Cultural Revolution, 1966-76) — they both produced concrete achievements in the countryside that led to impressive gains in agricultural production and in people’s lives. In contrast, the post-Mao era “reforms” have resulted so far in a huge growth of inequality in China, with the rural population suffering greatly by the dismantling of public support for health and education. In addition, local and regional officials have sold farmland for development purposes, usually lining their own pockets, with inadequate compensation for the farmers. This has resulted in the current massive unrest in rural areas, involving literally hundreds of thousands of incidents with protesting farmers.
Answer:
Mostly exaggerated.
Explanation:
A study by the BDM Coporation asserts that the actual Soviet Threat was vastly over exaggerated by the U.S. The majority of the report comes from declassified NSA report released in 2009. To quote the report
"the defense industrial complex, not the Soviet high command, played a key role in driving the quantitative arms buildup" and thereby "led U.S. analysts to...exaggerate the aggressive intentions of the Soviets"
There were of course monetary benifits to overstating the danger. Weapons, early warning systems, flash duck and cover films, sirens and so forth all bought at great expense. Another part of the report states;
"The Soviet military high command understood the devestating consequences of nuclear war and believed that nuclear weapons use had to be avoided at all costs."
It is possible to dismiss the report or slander it as revisionist propoganda, but the truth is that new finds and uncovered documents constantly update our view of history.