<span>This meant a great deal to people whose hopes were on change and good governance as they saw this as a way forwards towards making the country a better one through right governance and policy making in America most especially this was seen as a unifying force that place the love for the country utmost . In some parts of the world such as Europe this was seen as an end to imperial rulership</span>
Answer:
It is your decision on if it is right, but I will give insight on the very basics of how our government deals with power distribution and why. And a touch of opinion. Happy New Year!
Explanation:
Giving the president the power of executive authority would make our government the same as a dictatorial one. That is one of the main reasons our government has 3 branches, it’s a checks and balances system that keeps those in power relying on each other to make decisions. The question of if it is right that a president should or shouldn’t have executive authority has raged on every since America first considered becoming independent from Britain, but based on the numerous times a British monarch given executive authority abused it, we can guess the same thing could easily happen with our president. At the very least a president should not have full freedom in passing policies, but the real difficult question is “To what extent should a president be able to pass policies, and congress oversee the affairs of the president?” This question applies to not just the president and Congress, but also the judicial branch and state governments. It’s a tough question.
The weapon that helped continue the stalemate on battlefields during World War I is option<em> D. Machine Gun</em>. A stalemate is a situation in which neither side has a clear victory over the other. The war becomes very long and slow, and armies have to be creative to surprise the enemy. There were many stalemates in WWI, especially in the Western Front.
