Answer: Choice C.
They worried that Lincoln would try to end slavery in the United States.
==========================================================
Explanation:
The issue of slavery was debated and fought over for many years before the election of 1860. It was only until Lincoln became president that sparked the southern states to secede, which led to the Civil War. Proof of this is found in the many Declaration of Secession documents produced by each state that left the union. This is basically a document explaining why they left the United States to form the Confederate States of America (CSA) aka the Confederacy.
In modern times, some people mistakenly claim that the Civil War wasn't over slavery but rather states' rights. This is simply false. The documents I mentioned prove that slavery was the core issue. More proof is the various states having issues with the fugitive slave act, in that the northern states didn't really adhere to the law to the level of the southern states' liking. I guess you could argue that states' rights were involved, but specifically the south fought to have the right to own slaves. In short, it's all about getting the correct context. Expanding that context, simply look at the decades preceding the war and notice all of the tension involving whether a new state was a free state vs a slave state.
Answer: B is correct.
Explanation: historians who hold there was no holocaust are considered revisionists. Today there is a strong tendency in Ucraine (for example) to rewrite history of the WW II and reject some fundamental thesis infused to its inhabitants to previous Soviet historiography. In France (for example) after the WW II there was a so-called "immunity thesis" (author: René Rémond) according to which French did not have their own sort of fascism but the fascism was imported to France (this thesis started being questioned and rejected by foreign historians Paxton and Sternhell much later). Revisionists are also those who reject using traditional terminology. In Brazil historians traditionally spoke about "discovery of Brazil" (1500), today some of them use word "invasion" or even "genocide". The question is to which degree we project our contemporary situation (political, social) to the past.
Answer:
The answer is "Option A".
Explanation:
In 1740-86, Friedrich II became King of Prussia, he was a great military strategist, that expanded Prussia and making Prussia, via a succession of political strategies and wars with Austria and other nations, the main army force in Europe, and he also tests the power of the maria Theresa, which is the new empress, that's why in this question only option "A" is correct.
Answer:
there is still animals
Explanation:
if there was no animal the world's would ne differnt right
