Answer:
The reason for the expansion to the thirteen colonies was for religious freedoms as well as other freedoms. Without religion perhaps they may have neverbranched out.
Explanation:
Answer:
None of these choices are correct.
Explanation:
The main difference between MacArthur's and Truman's strategies in Korea was that: "MacArthur wanted to push beyond the 38th parallel, while Truman did not want to risk a conflict with China or the Soviet Union."
During the Korean War, Douglas MacArthur led the American-led coalition of United Nations troops. In their fight against North Korean troops, MacArthur seeks permission to bomb communist China and subsequently use Nationalist Chinese forces from Taiwan against China, however, President Truman refused.
Hence, in this case, and considering the available options, the right answer is "None of these choices are correct."
It doesn't really matter what the public thinks because people have different views on things so can't take an opinion without analysing the situation based on someone else's opinion.
This is a matter of Criminal Law.When you break a law, you are committing a crime. When you break a law, you have a legal punishment. The penalty increases the faster the person travels above the speed limit. The most severe punishments are for those who travel faster than 20 miles per hour above the speed limit.
The law is intended to protect people's safety.The source of the law is a statute – a written law that tells us what to do and what not to do. Since it is a local law that “outlines punishments,” it is also a municipal law.
Many people will be killed on the road if speed limit is not followed.he purpose of the law is to stop people from speeding. Speeding can cause accidents that hurt the driver or other people. The faster you go increases the risk of an accident. The law is intended to protect people’s safety. If it did not exist, people could drive whatever speed they wanted. They could drive 100 mph in a school zone. In the scenario, he was driving 22 mph over the speed limit and his wife and unborn child were in the car. He could have had an accident and killed all of them.
That statement IS arguable because not everyone would agree and also NOT defensible since theres no proof to back it up with, so the answer would be (D)
