Answer:
Among its negative effects, the Compromise of 1950 led to increased division between North and South because of the provisions requiring Northern cooperation in the capture of fugitive enslaved people.
...and...
Among its negative effects, the Compromise of 1850 led to increased division between North and South because of the provisions requiring Northern cooperation in the capture of fugitive enslaved people.
Answer:
Offices closed and many people were laid off leaving them without jobs
Explanation:
Just had to guess since there was no answer elsewhere
The vice president presides over the senate,but president pro tempore is the highest ranking senator.The president pro tempore preside senate only the vice president is absent.The other junior senators preside the senate when the president and vice president are absent
Answer:
(A) To promote the Native American culture.
Explanation:
The bureau of Indian affairs (BIA) set up native American boarding schools with the aim of educating and impacting knowledge on the children on the native American culture.
Christian missionaries were the first to establish the boarding school. The children were forced to cut their hair, give up their traditional mode of dressing and their native languages and embrace the native American culture
Answer:
An arms race denotes a rapid increase in the quantity or quality of instruments of military power by rival states in peacetime. The first modern arms race took place when France and Russia challenged the naval superiority of Britain in the late nineteenth century. Germany’s attempt to surpass Britain’s fleet spilled over into World War I, while tensions after the war between the United States, Britain and Japan resulted in the first major arms-limitation treaty at the Washington Conference. The buildup of arms was also a characteristic of the Cold War between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, though the development of nuclear weapons changed the stakes for the par
Over the past century, the arms race metaphor has assumed a prominent place in public discussion of military affairs. But even more than the other colorful metaphors of security studies–balance of power, escalation, and the like–it may cloud rather than clarify understanding of the dynamics of international rivalries.
An arms race denotes a rapid, competitive increase in the quantity or quality of instruments of military or naval power by rival states in peacetime. What it connotes is a game with a logic of its own. Typically, in popular depictions of arms races, the political calculations that start and regulate the pace of the game remain obscure. As Charles H. Fairbanks, Jr., has noted, “The strange result is that the activity of the other side, and not one’s own resources, plans, and motives, becomes the determinant of one’s behavior.” And what constitutes the “finish line” of the game is the province of assertion, rather than analysis. Many onlookers, and some participants, have claimed that the likelihood of war increases as the accumulation of arms proceeds apace.
Explanation:
