I found a link:
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/region/asro/mdtmanila/speeches/miworker.htm
Hope this helps! :D
Answer:
Full Detailed Answer (Ps:I made it long and informative be patient and read it carefully).
The effects of war are widely spread and can be long term or short term.[2] Soldiers experience war differently than civilians, although either suffer in times of war, and women and children[citation needed] suffer unspeakable atrocities in particular. In the past decade, up to two million of those killed in armed conflicts were children.[2] The widespread trauma caused by these atrocities and suffering of the civilian population is another legacy of these conflicts, the following creates extensive emotional and psychological stress.[3] Present-day internal wars generally take a larger toll on civilians than state wars. This is due to the increasing trend where combatants have made targeting civilians a strategic objective.[2] A state conflict is an armed conflict that occurs with the use of armed force between two parties, of which one is the government of a state.[4] "The three problems posed by intra‐state conflict are the willingness of UN members, particularly the strongest member, to intervene; the structural ability of the UN to respond; and whether the traditional principles of peacekeeping should be applied to intra‐state conflict".[5] Effects of war also include mass destruction of cities and have long lasting effects on a country's economy.[6] Armed conflict has important indirect negative consequences on infrastructure, public health provision, and social order.[7] These indirect consequences are often overlooked and unappreciated.
:))))))))))))
Answer:
Hello, Please tell me the quisten!
Explanation:
Uhhhhh, What's the quisten please, so we can answer it! Thanks!
This is in my opinion one of the aspects that makes the central courts and the different lines of thought within a single subject so interesting. The clash of ideas that we have in this case is a perfect example.
- On one side we have those who look at the current 30 million uninsured Americans, which include millions in Texas, and the undeniable success it had in Massachusetts. Most of them conclude that this mandate is a government success.
- On the other hand, we can find those who believe that this is a terrible invasion of the government to the citizen's free will to choose their own healthcare options, they see government overreach, and at the same time an unprecedented intrusion on individual liberties to which there is no justification.
Unfortunately this is something that millions of Americans have been forced into. It's evident how they refused to create a public health care system, and instead give more power to the private sector.
After this short debate of ideas, I will give you one question to ponder on: Which principle is more important? Your freedom, your civil liberties, and your freedom from the government line of thought, or the possibilty of providing health care to millions of uninsured Americans?
I hope this solves your question!
Happy 2019! :)
