This is more of a personal question so it might not have a wrong answer but i would go with either C or D
Answer:
The Real Reason: Plain Natives were always on the move, sort of like nomads
What WASN'T the reason: Plains Natives had settlements and never migrated
Explanation:
Plains natives were difficult to defeat because they were always on the move, so the U.S. or Mexican Army couldn't catch up to them. While natives who weren't on the move and had established settlements, were situated in a single place which would allow europeans to raid and destroy their settlement.
so, the wrong reason for why the plains nations were so difficult to defeat would be to say they were a situated settlement and were never migratory or "on the move"
North strengths:
1.) large navy and fleet of trading ships
2.) 70% of nations rail lines to transport food and troops
3.) 4x free population to volunteer in army and work in factories
4.) 90% of nations industry including factories to produce weapons and war supplies
South Strengths:
1.) fight a defensive war - knew the territory they were fighting on
2.) trained soldiers - hunting skills and attended military school
3.) believed in the cause because it was for their independence
North Weaknesses:
1.) Few factories to make supplies and weapons
2.) travel into unknown territories
3.) long distances to transport troops and supplies
South Weaknesses:
1.) few railroads to transport troops and supplies
2.) small population to volunteer for army and make supplies
3.) Few factories to make supplies and weapons
Since this question is in the "History" section, I'm assuming you were talking about back then. Being a merchant you would be prosperous and gain riches, and you would also be a higher class in the social order.<span />
Food surpluses led to population growth
