The two phrases that best support how the author uses language to convey the king's feelings about the lands he views in the atlas are:
- Islands like emeralds.
- Tiny houses with red walls.
Discussion:
A phrase simply is a small group of words standing together as a conceptual unit, typically forming a component of a clause.
Also, a phrase is a sequence of two or more words arranged in a grammatical construction and acting as a unit in a sentence.
In essence, the two phrases as requested are:
- Islands like emeralds.
- Tiny houses with red walls.
Read more on phrases;
brainly.com/question/14641161
The long term consequence of the historical development discussed in this 1893 letter was that Turkey began to adopt a more modern Western outlook, and Islamic clerics dominated Turkey's government.
<h3>What was the 1893 letter?</h3>
1893 letter was backhand by Douglass while he was the Haitian representative at the World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago.
In a short letter, Frederick Douglass reveals that his passion for the freedom struggle took a toll on his life as a private individual.
Turkey adopted a more modern Western outlook as a result of the historical developments discussed in the 1893 letter, and Islamic clerics dominated the government.
Learn more about the 1893 letter, refer to:
brainly.com/question/841711
#SPJ1
The correct answer is Lao Tzu wrote the quote.
<em>Lao Tzu was an ancient Chinese philosopher and the quote belong to </em><u><em>Taoism.
</em></u>
The <u>meaning</u> of the quote is the following.
A good leader has to set the example and let their people do the things that need to be done. The evidence that he is a good leader is when he lets his people do their job alone, without the presence of a boss that is always at their backs. So when they finish the task at hand, the followers/employees can have the satisfaction to say that they reach the goal on their own. Under the supervision of the leader who is ultimately responsible of the group, but people have the freedom to do things their way.
Answer:
The main reason why France attacked Germany, was to take the revenge and get the region of Alsace-Lorraine back from Germany.
During 1800s, in a battle between France and Germany, Germany defeated France and captured the regiuon of Alsace-Lorraine. This was the main reason why France attacked Germany.
Explanation:
Hope this helps
On 2 August 1990, the people of Kuwait City awoke at 5am to the sound of Iraqi tanks rolling down their streets. Iraqi President Saddam Hussein intended to annex the small Sheikhdom of Kuwait, Iraq’s “19th province,” and tap its massive oil reserves. The invasion did not come entirely out of nowhere. Iraqi troops were massed at the border as the result of an oil dispute with its tiny neighbor, and the United States tried to persuade Iraq to solve its problems with Kuwait peacefully. This action was the first time one sovereign state had invaded and annexed another since Indonesia annexed East Timor in 1975; and it was the first major challenge to world order since the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall. This chapter examines key events in US foreign policy in the Middle East from Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Iraq in 1990 to Donald Trump’s announcement of US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018. It shows how America’s strong position at the end of the Cold War and the end of Operation Desert Storm in 1991 led to a period of American hyper-involvement in Middle Eastern politics that ultimately weakened its regional standing.
The global reaction to Saddam Hussein’s invasion and annexation of Kuwait was virtually universally negative. The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) issued Resolution 660, demanding that “Iraq withdraw immediately and unconditionally all its forces to the positions in which they were located on 1 August 1990.” Saddam Hussein’s blatant act of aggression and territorial aggrandizement put an end to decades of stalemate in the Security Council when the USSR and the US voted together on UNSCR 660.
It was not immediately obvious how the United States would react to Saddam’s aggression; and it was by no means certain that the US had any interest in fighting a war to restore Kuwait’s sovereignty. Congress was divided. The Senate approved the use of force against Iraq by a vote of just 52–47, significantly closer than the 77–23 approval of the 2003 Iraq War. President George H.W. Bush saw an opportunity to establish a “new world order” in which territorial aggrandizement was a product of the past, and adherence to global norms was the wave of the future. He supported a war and it was his decision to make.
Bush wanted a grand coalition operating with UN approval, not a purely American intervention. UNSCR 678 passed on 29 November 1990. It gave Saddam Hussein “one final opportunity” to withdraw from Kuwait. If he did not, the resolution, “Authorize[d] Member States… to use all necessary means” to compel him. “Operation Desert Storm” began on 17 January 1991. Nearly every country in the world joined the coalition – Yemen backed Iraq and Jordan remained neutral. Americans fought alongside 31 diverse countries’ armed forces. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Japan, South Korea, and Germany were the major funders of the war effort. In the end, the US Congress’s General Accountability Office found that Desert Shield and Desert Storm were, “fully financed from allied contributions without using US taxpayer funds” (Conahan 1991, 12). The Warsaw Pact did not provide support, but it did not interfere. The zero-sum world had ended, and the Warsaw Pact dissolved itself on 1 July 1991.
Desert Storm ended on 28 February 1991. Saddam Hussein was still president on 1 March. President Bush and Brent Scowcroft, Bush’s national security advisor, said of the decision not to remove Saddam Hussein from power, “Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream… and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs…. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq…. Had we gone the invasion route, the US could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land” (“Bush on Iraq” 1998, par. 3). The world would later learn just how accurate that assessment was.
The defeat of Saddam Hussein is often described as the peak of American power and global influence. One headline called it, “the pinnacle of American military supremacy” (Blair 2016). It resulted in the establishment of new American bases in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia (bases that were soon used to establish “no fly” zones to protect Iraq’s Kurdish and Shia populations), and record personal popularity for President Bush. Bush decided to use the high standing of the United States, and his personal popularity, to bring an end to the Israeli/Arab conflict.
United States support for Israel has been a consistent feature of US foreign policy in the Middle East for more than 40 years. The US/Israel relationship is often portrayed as unwavering, but there are periods of tension and stark disagreements.
