A. Ratification of the Constitution
Checks and Balances was designed to keep each branch from assuming too much power. Presidential power is checked and balanced in many ways. While he can veto various bills and keep them from becoming laws, he can be overridden by a 2/3 vote in both houses. SO if the Congress feels like the President is over stepping his bounds then they can in turn overrule him. The Supreme Court is also in the mix in that if they deem a law to be unconstitutional then they can rule it so and the law is no more. Presidents can influence Supreme Courts by whom they nominate for open positions (or in the case of one President, attempt to add more judges to the Court). However, after the nomination is made and the Senate approves and confirms them then they are free. The only way a Judge can be removed is they are found to be doing something illegal, deemed incompetent and unable to continue doing their job, resign, or die. This allows judges to "operate outside the realm of politics." The idea is that they can focus and not worry about politics and we can assume that decisions will be made free from political influences and bribery.
Answer:
<em>Jose de San Martin</em> is the correct answer.
Explanation:
Jose de San Martin was the Argentine general who successfully led the independence movement of South American nations from spain. San Martin and Simon Bolivar are considered as the liberators of south America. He is worshipped as a national hero in Argentina. He worked as as lieutenant in the Spanish army and fought for them in African colonies. In 1812 he came back to Argentina and offered his services to the revolutionary forces. He captured Lima on 9th July 1821 and declared its independence on 9 December 1824.
The correct answer is <span>d.Pershing refused to allow British and French units to use his soldiers as replacements and instead kept the AEF operating as an independent army under his command.
This proved to be a good plan because the squad that he was leading managed to beat Germans on numerous occasions, although he did send some help like sending an African-American unit to assist French commanders, and there were also some Americans who fought under British command.</span>
<span>How did the Russians defeat both Hitler and Napoleon?
</span>
<span>First
off, they started pretty well. When the Germans first invaded, the
people thought they were being liberated (tells you a lot about the
government at the time) and were treated pretty well. But then they
started killing people and things went downhill. Now, Hitler had this
grand idea to take over Stalingrad (mostly for its namesake, Stalin). He
thought it would be a massive blow to the Russian morale. But instead
of basing his military strageties on logic, he did on feelings (he
wanted to beat Stalin); which is never a good thing. Unforunately, he
didn't anticipate Russian winter (which, luckily for the Russians, came
early that year and ironically the same year for Napoleon). So the
German army was stuck in Summer gear, rather then the proper Winter gear
(which was promised but never came through). AND look at Russia as a
whole: It's a huge country (I heard it takes around 8-10 days to just
get through Russia straight across). Now, to the other guy above me.
Russia isn't known for having the strongest armies ever. Actually,
compared to the Germans they were undisclipined, untrained and from all
types of backgrounds, and all ages, etc. Hardly sounds like an ideal
army. But the Russian people were stubborn and burned everything, so in
that way the German army failed. Plus, Russia had an endless supply of
men. Hitler was shocked to notice, there was always a fresh supply of
men waiting to fight.
So in conclusion, Russia's massive land(s) and brutal winters
contributed to both the fails of Napoleon and Hitler's conquer of
Russia. </span>
