Explanation:
In simpler words, the multi-part question is asking for you to first analyze the three sources, then pick a side and have knowledge to defend your point on the question 'to what extent should nations pursue their national interests'.
In source 1, it shows that the majority of Canadians are opposed to sending troops to Afghanistan, with 36% voting for, 5% unsure, and 59% voting against.
Source two is clearly depicting the nazi's, at a rally held in Nuremberg. Although the source does not state if the protesters are pro or against Nazi regime, I am assuming they are pro. This would lead to the assumption that the people of Nuremberg are pro-Nazi empire.
The source 3 is a timeline, that goes from 1920 to 2005. This time period is very significant, because it captures many important battles, such as world war 2, Persian Gulf War, and the Iraq invasion.
After reading these three sources, you must decide if you think it is good for nations to pursue their national interests, or bad.
Hope this long explanation helped clarify the troubling question for you!
5 vowels, 21 <span>consonant.</span>
<span>So vowels are about 23%</span>
C)They allow multiple votes, from multiple voices to be heard
Political parties foster multiple elections. Most famously, the primary and general presidential elections. In the primary election the candidate that will represent each political party is voted into candidacy for the general election. In the general election voters choose between the candidate from each party to become president.
Answer:
pros and cons
Explanation:
I would convince them by telling them that there is a lot of gold and many other things to be found and you may be the only person to get it.
pros: gold and hopes of getting a new life with the things you get and not worry about any diseases because you have money to help get you through, don't have to worry about your children's schooling.
cons: family may get sick, may waste more money on the way than the money you get, you or your family member may die.
It was challenging because there wasn't many tools then and not a lot of relying resources. As early New England was developing, some crops would die off from livestock eating it, and lack of knowledge of what they were farming. This was some major things in the development of new England's agriculture.
