Answer:
I hope it helps u.
Explanation:
Arms races have generated a great deal of interest for a variety of reasons. They are widely believed to have significant consequences for states' security, but agreement stops there. In the debate over their consequences, one side holds that arms races increase the probability of war by undermining military stability and straining political relations. The opposing view holds that engaging in an arms race is often a state's best option for avoiding war when faced with an aggressive adversary. Debate over the causes of arms races is just as divided. One school believes that arms races are primarily rational responses to external threats and opportunities, whereas arms race skeptics believe that arms buildups are usually the product of a mixture of internal, domestic interests, including those of the scientists involved in research and development (R&D), the major producers of weapons systems, and the military services that will operate them. The policy implications of these contending views are equally contradictory; critics see arms control as a way to reduce the probability of war and rein in domestic interests that are distorting the state's security policy, and proponents argue that military competition is most likely to protect the state's international interests and preserve peace.
Arms buildups and arms races also play a prominent role in international relations (IR) theory. Building up arms is one of a state's three basic options for acquiring the military capabilities it requires to achieve its international goals; the other two are gaining allies and cooperating with its adversary to reduce threats. In broad terms, choosing between more competitive and more cooperative combinations of these options is among the most basic decisions a state must make, and it is often the most important.
Mark me as brainlist answer,
Have a nice day,
Thank you ☺
War, Political Freedom, Religious Persecution, Unemployment, Low Wages
Answer:
a. The Permanent University Fund was used by the Texas legislature to put a halt to the expansion of oil production in Northern Texas.
Explanation:
Option A provides the statement that is false. In this question, we learn about the Permanent University Fund (PUF). This fund was not used by the Texas legislature to put a halt to the expansion of oil production in Northern Texas. Instead, the Permanent University Fund (PUF) was created by the state of Texas in order to fund public education in the state. The fund can only be used in public universities located within Texas.
France was on the verge of a general election and would not act without Britain’s support. Britain felt that the Treaty of Versailles was unfair and harsh on Germany, so they decided not to tale any action. As a result of this, so did France.
The Louisiana Purchase treaty. the Louisiana Purchase treaty was an agreement between Thomas Jefferson and Napoleon Bonaparte in 1803 for the US to obtain the Louisiana territory (a large region from Louisiana to Montana) from the French for $15 million. This fits the concept of Manifest Destiny perfectly as Manifest Destiny was the US desire to expand westward across the North American territory. Purchasing the Louisiana territory allowed the US to expand westward and explore new territory while spreading American people and culture.
