I believe the answer is D
The American colonists were justified in doing this simply because their colonies had become too big and too important to be treated as a colony by the British. The British should have given the colonies some autonomy, but they did not. The analogy I like to use is that of teens and their parents. Parents have to give teens more independence as they grow up. If they do not, the teens may justifiably rebel.
The British were not, on the whole, brutal or oppressive towards the colonists. However, they would not let the colonists have much in the way of self-rule. This had been fine when the colonies were still small and economically weak. By the 1760s and 1770s, however, the colonies were "teenagers." They were big and strong enough to expect some autonomy. When Britain reacted to requests for autonomy by being more strict, the colonists were justified in rebelling.
D. It provided democracies and communist countries with an opportunity to indirectly fight one another. (Apex)
Answer:
A: Arabs
Explanation:
The Arabian Peninsula is where nations like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the UAE, majority of the population is Islamic/Arabian.
Answer:
South.
Explanation:
South Vietnam's army had extremely low morale, and many didn't want to fight for the corrupt government that was ruling in Saigon. This led to low army counts and desertion when soldiers were given the chance.
~
