The 3 nations signed the NAFTA to lift all trade embargoes between the 3 countries. This meant free trade, without them being taxed for bringing their goods into the country
hope this helps
It could be argued that the interim revolutionary government in Russia in 1917 claimed to be democratic, but it did not have popular support because "<span>it was a compromise government made up of many parties with many views, pleasing everyone a little, but satisfying no one," since it's main objective was to "please the masses". </span>
This is opinionated...
The world solely dense on fossil fuels. In 2011 fossil fuels accounted for approximate 82 percent of the worlds primary energy use. The use of fossil fuels is expected to be on a decline by 2040 but that doesn’t mean we can keep the environment safe while trading. We need fossil fuels to help deliver good and/or services around the world to build bonds with other countries. So no, we cannot protect the earths environment while expanding trade around the world.
<span>Assuming that this is referring to the same list of options that was posted before with this question, <span>the correct response would be the one having to do with a historian comparing the "Middle Ages to the Renaissance," since this is compartmentalizing two very distinct periods in time. </span></span>
