Answer:
The United States believed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction which posed a great threat at the hands of the dictatorial leader Saddam Hussein. It also believed that terrorists were supported and even harbored by the country. So, to remove the dictator from power and to get rid of any weapons and eliminate or drive out terrorists were the main objectives behind the attack on Iraq.
Explanation:
The rationale behind the motive to invade and attack Iraq was to primarily <u>end the regime of the dictatorial leader Saddam Hussein</u>. Other purposes were to <u>end the harboring of terrorists in the land</u> and <u>eliminate any weapons of mass destruction that Iraq was believed to be in possession of</u>.
The attack on Iraq by the United States in 2003 was based on US's beliefs that the Arab nation has disobeyed the demands of the United Nations and had harbored and supported terrorists. Moreover, the need to eliminate the dictator Saddam Hussein and establish a democratic government and provide peace to the Iraq people also became the main objective behind the invasion. The US also believed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction which can act as a huge threat to the overall safety of everyone around the world. So, the need to identify, isolate and destroy such weapons before they are actually put into use also led to the attack. US military continued to stay in Iraq till 2011 after which all troops were withdrawn.
In 1493, after reports of Columbus’s discoveries had reached them, the Spanish rulers Ferdinand and Isabella enlisted papal support for their claims to the New World in order to inhibit the Portuguese and other possible rival claimants. To accommodate them, the Spanish-born pope Alexander VI issued bulls setting up a line of demarcation from pole to pole 100 leagues (about 320 miles) west of the Cape Verde Islands. Spain was given exclusive rights to all newly discovered and undiscovered lands in the region west of the line. Portuguese expeditions were to keep to the east of the line. Neither power was to occupy any territory already in the hands of a Christian ruler.
No other European powers facing the Atlantic Ocean ever accepted this papal disposition or the subsequent agreement deriving from it. King John II of Portugal was dissatisfied because Portugal’s rights in the New World were insufficiently affirmed, and the Portuguese would not even have sufficient room at sea for their African voyages. Meeting at Tordesillas, in northwestern Spain, Spanish and Portuguese ambassadors reaffirmed the papal division, but the line itself was moved to 370 leagues (1,185 miles) west of the Cape Verde Islands, or about 46°30′ W of Greenwich. Pope Julius II finally sanctioned the change in 1506. The new boundary enabled Portugal to claim the coast of Brazil after its discovery by Pedro Álvares Cabral in 1500. Brazilian exploration and settlement far to the west of the line of demarcation in subsequent centuries laid a firm basis for Brazil’s claims to vast areas of the interior of South America.
Answer:
The Caning of Charles Sumner, or the Brooks–Sumner Affair, occurred on May 22, 1856, in the United States Senate chamber, when Representative Preston Brooks, a pro-slavery Democrat from South Carolina, used a walking cane to attack Senator Charles Sumner, an abolitionist Republican from Massachusetts, in retaliation for a speech given by Sumner two days earlier in which he fiercely criticized slaveholders, including a relative of Brooks. The beating nearly killed Sumner and it contributed significantly to the country's polarization over the issue of slavery. It has been considered symbolic of the "breakdown of reasoned discourse"[1] and the use of violence that eventually led to the Civil War.
Explanation:
Answer:
Under the Missouri Compromise of 1820, designed by statesman Henry Clay, Missouri entered the Union as a slave state, and Maine entered as a free state, thus keeping the number of slave and non-slave states equal at 12 each.
Explanation:
