When the Europeans had arrived in their kingdom and encountered them, they were able to know and learn about them and in a way they had taken advantage of the existence of slavery, making them turn into slaves and to be set as a property for their owners.
It was "(B) John C. Calhoun" who was not a candidate in the 1824 presidential
<span>election, since Calhoun was focused more on state politics and political theory during this time. </span>
Historically it has always been to get rid of the disagreement itself. This would be by imprisonment, torture, and mass murder. It could also be trickier, such as controlling the media, education system, and political arena and simply claim that there is no opposition, which I am sure people have noticed of late regarding science and economics.
Answer:
I would say that I stand between these two arguments. Many criminals have sadistic minds and do not care for what happens to them. Thus, to them it would not matter whether they get the death penalty or not. They would just see it as a way of 'fun' in their own minds. Also, many criminals could have their own ways of getting away the crimes that they have committed. It is successful because many fear death, unlike those with twisted minds. In the end, all minds are twisted are they not for committing murders or such? Overall, I think that it is acceptable for murder yet not for convincing people to not commit crimes.
Answer:
If its a true or false question i choose true. The united states were financially struggling because the raging wars were draining the money that the us had
Explanation: