A money economy begin to replace the barter economy in the high middle ages because : B. as trade expanded to cover greater distances, a unit of exchange became more important
Answer:
I hope it helps u.
Explanation:
Arms races have generated a great deal of interest for a variety of reasons. They are widely believed to have significant consequences for states' security, but agreement stops there. In the debate over their consequences, one side holds that arms races increase the probability of war by undermining military stability and straining political relations. The opposing view holds that engaging in an arms race is often a state's best option for avoiding war when faced with an aggressive adversary. Debate over the causes of arms races is just as divided. One school believes that arms races are primarily rational responses to external threats and opportunities, whereas arms race skeptics believe that arms buildups are usually the product of a mixture of internal, domestic interests, including those of the scientists involved in research and development (R&D), the major producers of weapons systems, and the military services that will operate them. The policy implications of these contending views are equally contradictory; critics see arms control as a way to reduce the probability of war and rein in domestic interests that are distorting the state's security policy, and proponents argue that military competition is most likely to protect the state's international interests and preserve peace.
Arms buildups and arms races also play a prominent role in international relations (IR) theory. Building up arms is one of a state's three basic options for acquiring the military capabilities it requires to achieve its international goals; the other two are gaining allies and cooperating with its adversary to reduce threats. In broad terms, choosing between more competitive and more cooperative combinations of these options is among the most basic decisions a state must make, and it is often the most important.
Mark me as brainlist answer,
Have a nice day,
Thank you ☺
Answer:
His emphasis on equality had widespread appeal.
Explanation:
Answer:
The correct answer is: Roger Sherman.
Explanation:
The statesmen Roger Sherman (1721-1793) created the Compromise for the Constitution by creating the Connecticut Compromise. The compromise was based on combined proposals from the Virginia plan and the New Jersey plan. He determined the legislative structure and representation of each state under the U.S. Constitution and based the representations in the House of Representatives on population, while each state would have an equal two senators in the Senate.
According to his Great Compromise, there were two national legislatures in Congress, while the members of the House were elected by each state’s population.
His proposal was approved on July 23, 1787.
The Indian Appropiation Act contained several acts enacted by the US Congress between the late 19th century and the early 20th century.
One of the most outstanding acts was the Indian Appropriations Act from 1871. According to it, Indians would not be treated anymore as an "independent nation, tribe, or power". In turn, Indians would be considered as "wards" of the federal goverment. This provision considers Indians somehow like children, as if they needed a tutor.
From this moment onwards, the US goverment did not have to mantain endless negotiations to sign treaties with the different Indian tribes. Also treaties that had been signed before the Act were not enforceable anymore.
The act made much easier for the US government to exercise control over lands which were previously dominated by the Indians.
