Answer:
This answer relates to the 1930's.
Explanation:
Appeasement was a policy pursued by European powers, in their dealings with Nazi Germany in order to avoid a repetition of WW1, namely another conflict engulfing Europe.
Many in the West supported Hitler as someone who was bringing stability to Germany and was an effective bastion against the Soviet Union and communism.
There was also the feeling that the Treaty of Versailles had been too harsh on Germany and Hitler had justification for his territorial requests.
In 1935 the Saar once more became part of Germany after over 90% voted in favour in a plebiscite.
In 1936, Germany entered and remilitarised the Rhineland, in direct contravention of the Treaty of Versailles. Had this been stopped it may have led to a different path being taken by Hitler. however the West did nothing.
This encouraged Hitler to make further claims including the Anschluss with Austria in 1938.
Also in 1938, the Munich Agreement signed away the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia. The rest of Czechoslovakia was taken over in 1939.
Only when Germany attacked Poland did the West act with Britain and France declaring war.
He took office while the nation was in the depths of the great depression
Answer:
For one it could be seen as undemocratic, For example if a candidate loses the popular vote, the electoral college could still let that candidate in even if they lose the popular election. It also has a winner-takes-all approach which cancels the votes of the losing candidates in each state.
Explanation:
Answer:
It is there history of there creativity of making the design of the Rock for Kings and other richer people so that their place can look better then any other
Explanation:
Indian rock-cut architecture has more examples than any other form of rock-cut architecture in the world.
[1] Rock-cut architecture defines the practice of creating a structure by carving it out of solid natural rock. The craftsman removes rock not part of the structure until the architectural elements of the excavated interior constitute the only rock left. Indian rock-cut architecture, for the most part, is religious in nature.
[2] In India, caves have long been regarded as places of sanctity. Enlarged or entirely man-made caves hold the same sanctity as natural caves. The sanctuary in all Indian religious structures, even free standing ones, retain the same cave-like feeling of sacredness, being small and dark without natural light.
Curiously, Buddhist monks created their cave hermitages near trade routes that crossed northern India during the time of Christ. As wealthy traders became aware of the Buddhist caves, they became benefactors of expansion of the caves, the building of monolithic rock-cut temples, and of free-standing temples. Emperors and rulers also supported the devotional work and participated in the spiritual devotional services. Very likely, traders would use the hermitages for worship on their routes. As Buddhism weakened in the face of a renewed Hinduism during the eighth century C.E., the rock structure maintenance, expansion, and upgrading fell to the Hindus and Jains. Hindu holy men continued building structures out of rock, dedicating temples to Hindu gods like Shiva, until mysteriously they abandoned the temples around the twelfth century C.E. They abandoned the structures so completely that even local peoples lost knowledge of the awesome structures in their midst. Only in the nineteenth century, when British adventurers and explorers found them, did India rediscover the awesome architecture that comprises world treasures.
Answer:
Rocks expand and contract when they are heated and cooled which cause them to break.
Explanation:
