Answer:
The short answer is no. A country and even a system never just collapses at once; Rome for example collapsed over centuries. The Soviet Union fell because the American alliance system was better than what the Soviets imperial policy. The Soviets had to spend money to occupy that territory they gained after WW2 while America had no countries that did not cost much because they were politically independent but economically benefited from American trade (Japan, west Germany, south Korea compared to their counter parts of china, east Germany and North Korea for example).
It was also geography that helped each empire (empires aren't necessarily bad or formal) form. America was a maritime power with cheap transport costs and plenty of economic assets while Russia was a land power with rivers that froze and no warm water ports to connect to trade routes. When a country has to choose sides, they usually benefit more with the country that tries people in due to it's opportunities rather than the country that forces people to stay in their territory under the guise of the “people”.
Third problem was timing. Russia relied on high oil prices for their economic growth while America had a diviserfied economy. America wanted more producers of oil in a market and more countries producing stuff while the Soviets wanted only Russia producing anything. You can probably guess which was more popular and sustainable of these two options.
<em>I hope it helps you...</em>
<em>this is written in my book..</em>
Answer:
A:When companies open factories in other countries
Answer:
The dominance of the first colonists that were searching and claiming land.
Explanation:
As the 13 colonies evolved to the United States, the manifest destiny took place. As the Americans continued to move west, the American Indians also had to move to make room for the American Settlers. (How cruel)
Sacramento I think so try that if u get it wrong in sorry
The answer would be B.the fur trade
