1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
sattari [20]
3 years ago
14

In what way were puritans involved in the english civil war?

History
2 answers:
Evgen [1.6K]3 years ago
7 0
D. Many fought in forces against the king.
dolphi86 [110]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

The best answer is "D"

many fought in forces against the king.

Explanation:

The Puritans were the more outrageous Protestants of the Church of England; they needed to sanitize their national Church by killing the Catholic impact. In 1642 he was asked to give up his command of the armed forces; he refused and this brought about the emergence of the Civil War.

You might be interested in
Which of the following was a similarity between classical mesoamerican and south American civilization?
Inessa05 [86]
The real answer to the question is A
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which correctly describes the significance of the Punic Wars?
brilliants [131]

Answer:

Answer is Option B: Defeating the Carthaginians, The Romans established control over the Mediterranean Sea.

Explanation:

Punic wars were three wars fought between Rome and Carthage. Rome won all the three wars. They therefore became one of the dominant military powers in the Mediterranean Sea.

Carthage was destroyed by the Roman Empire. In the second war, Rome punished Macedonia for his intervention from Carthage's side. They conquered the eastern Mediterranean then. The surviving Carthage's citizens were sold into slavery. Soon after their victory, they spread their influence outside Italy.

Thus, Option B is the statement describing the significance of Punic wars.

5 0
3 years ago
Read the excerpt from "A Quilt of a Country." When photographs of the faces of all those who died in the World Trade Center dest
Nikitich [7]
The answer is wonderful.
6 0
3 years ago
Please help meeee please
RoseWind [281]

Answer:

The U.S. donated two food production factories ($6,924,000), a petroleum refinery ($29,050,000), a repair plant for precision instruments ($550,000), 17 steam and three hydroelectric plants ($273,289,000).

Later, Dresser Industries [whose directors included Prescott Bush --ed] built a $146 million plant at Kuibyshov, to produce high quality drill bits for oil exploration. The C. E. Lummus Co. of New Jersey built a $105 million petrochemical plant in the Ukraine ($45 million would be put up by Lummus through financing from Eximbank and other private banks, which was guaranteed by the O.P.I.C.). Allis-Chalmers built a $35 million iron ore pelletizing plant in Russia, which is one of the world's four largest. The Aluminum Co. of America (ALCOA) built an aluminum plant, which consumed "half the world's supply of bauxite." We sent the Russians computer systems, oil drilling equipment, pipes, and other supplies. The ball-bearings used by Russia to improve the guidance systems on their rockets and missiles, such as their SS-18 intercontinental ballistic missies, were purchased in 1972 from the Bryant Grinder Co. in Springfield, Vermont.

All of this financial aid to Russia was advocated by Henry Kissinger and the U.S. Government. The reasoning behind it was to allow Russia to increase their industrial and agricultural output to match ours, because by bringing the two countries closer together, hostilities would be eased. They were not. The Illuminati, through the U.S. Government, had allowed the Soviet Union to have a technology equal to our own. Congressman Otto Passman, who was the Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee, said: "The United States cannot survive as a strong nation if we continue to dissipate our resources and give away our wealth to the world."

Explanation:

4 0
3 years ago
How do you think a regions geography influenced industrial growth?
aev [14]
<span>Have you ever noticed that the countries with the hottest temperatures tend to be poor, while the colder countries tend to be richer? You can see this but looking at the maps below; the map on the left colors countries according to income per capita, while the map on the left shows average temperature. There are some exceptions to this rule, but the correlation is striking. Surely this is no coincidence; there must be something about climate which influences economic growth.</span>
4 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • How to do please help me ........
    5·1 answer
  • the wall street crash caused unemployment all over europe, not just the united states. True or False?
    15·1 answer
  • Which statements describe FDR's presidency?
    7·2 answers
  • What Native Tribe helped Cabeza de Vaca?
    12·1 answer
  • Lawmakers want to keep a positive public opinion of themselves because
    14·2 answers
  • Which of the following is an example of due process?
    9·2 answers
  • Why were most white southerners loyal to the Democratic Party?
    7·1 answer
  • How can the foreign policy agenda of the U.S. be defined after the Monroe Doctrine speech? Nationalistic Imperialistic Neutral I
    6·1 answer
  • What statement best describes the concept of civic duty?
    11·2 answers
  • Summary of tariff policy in 1920
    15·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!