Time will tell the relevance of the Second Amendment in 50 years. Nobody will know what will occur in 50 years, whether there will still be humanity left or not. However, we can always be sure of one thing. For as long as there will be the United States, and so long as the nation is not in turmoil, we can safely assume that the 2nd Amendment will be as relevant as ever. The 2nd Amendment is what guarantees each of the other rights that the American citizens hold. Without the 2nd Amendment, the government, especially under Democratic leadership, will completely take control of each and every citizens lives, and will turn this place into not only a totalitarian communism, but destroy the livelihood of all of us. Without the relevance and us taking direct action to keep the 2nd Amendment relevant, we will soon see a degradation of the quality of life for not only ourselves, but the generations to follow.
~
Answer:
Germany, Japan, and the USSR all explicitly targeted "enemy" or otherwise "undesirable" civilians. Nazi crimes against Jews are well-known, but they also targeted non-Jewish civilians for a variety of reasons - some were considered dangerous for their ability to rally and organize resistance movements (priests and local government officials were particular targets), some were deemed "racially
Explanation:
Education for african americans during reconstruction. People of all ages began to be educated to read,count, and write.
Answer:
President Jimmy Carter authorized the deposed Shah of Iran to enter the United States for medical treatment — with catastrophic consequences. Carter blundered because of vacillation, shortsighted thinking, a disregard for identified risk and inept implementation that included zero precautions to protect against disaster.
As Trump charts a new course with one of the most powerful nations in the Middle East, Carter’s missteps offer him valuable lessons: When dealing with Iran, a president must verify that information is accurate, consider risks carefully and imagine how one’s own actions will be perceived by Iranians, who evaluate circumstances through an entirely different historical prism.
Like his predecessors, Carter considered Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi an ally and friend. In December 1977, he visited Tehran and toasted the shah for making Iran “an island of stability” and for “the admiration and love which your people give you.” It was a delusional toast, one that demonstrated a total lack of understanding of historical legacies and the political fires raging in Iran.
Power was slipping from the shah’s grasp thanks to a growing revolutionary movement inspired by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and nurtured by resistance to royal repression. This revolution reached a tipping point on Jan. 16, 1979, when security risks forced the shah to flee the country.
Explanation:
Answer: The uneven division of the colonies led to war.
Explanation:
The beginning of the 20th century was accompanied by European countries' efforts to acquire as many colonies as possible. France and Great Britain led the way in the colonization of the world. The German Empire and Austro-Hungary wanted a part for themselves. France and Great Britain were not interested in the possible division of the colonies; they were satisfied with the state of dominance in terms of colonization. In such circumstances, nationalism is strengthening on all sides. War rhetoric is being created among those countries, which leads to the strengthening of nationalist propaganda. The uneven division of colonies among European countries was the main factor that led to the First World War. The assassination of Prince Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo in 1914 was just a pretext for starting the war.
