1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Varvara68 [4.7K]
3 years ago
15

Which of these costs seem justified? Which costs seem unjustified? France debt

History
1 answer:
dimulka [17.4K]3 years ago
3 0

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

Although there are no options attached or further references or context, we can say the following.

Regarding the French debt, the costs that seemed justified were the French intervention in the Seven Years War, because France had a great rivalry against England, and France had to send troops to the North American territory and other parts of the European continent.

Another justified cost was the support the government of France offered the Continental Army when it was fighting against the British troops during the Revolutionary War of Independence. At that time, the United Kingdom was the natural enemy of France.

Now, the costs that seemed unjustified were the following. First the construction of luxurious buildings such as the Versailles Palace, in the outskirts of Paris. This was an excessive massive luxurious building in a time where most of the French people were very poor.

The other unjustified cost was the extravagant parties and luxurious lifestyle of the King of France Louis XIV and his wife Maria Antonieta. Fancy parties, fancy clothes, and fancy food, when the Third State in France was dying of hunger.

We then can say that a class conflict started the revolution.

The French Revolution began in 1789. The Storming of the Bastille started the hostilities in Paris, France. French people were tired of the tyranny of the monarch. The class system had produced social inequality and the tax burden on the thirds state (the commoners, the poor people) angered the French.

You might be interested in
The Constitution gives the federal goverment many important duties: making laws, raising money and deciding how to
Mama L [17]

Answer:

National defense is the priority job of the national government.

National defense is the only mandatory function of the national government. Most of the powers granted to Congress are permissive in nature. Congress is given certain authorities but not required by the Constitution to exercise them. For example, Article One, Section Eight gives Congress power to pass a bankruptcy code, but Congress actually did not enact bankruptcy laws until well into the 19th century.

But the Constitution does require the federal government to protect the nation. Article Four, Section Four states that the “United States shall guarantee to every State a republican form of government and shall protect each of them against invasion.” In other words, even if the federal government chose to exercise no other power, it must, under the Constitution, provide for the common defense.

National defense is exclusively the function of the national government. Under our Constitution, the states are generally sovereign, which means that the legitimate functions of government not specifically granted to the federal government are reserved to the states. But Article One, Section 10 does specifically prohibit the states, except with the consent of Congress, from keeping troops or warships in time of peace or engaging in war, the only exception being that states may act on their own if actually invaded. (This was necessary because, when the Constitution was written, primitive forms of communication and transportation meant that it could take weeks before Washington was even notified of an invasion.)

The great irony of our time is that the bigger the federal government has become, the less well it has performed its priority function of providing for the national defense. For example, Congress spent $787 billion in the “stimulus” bill last year, yet not a dime of it was spent on military procurement or modernization—despite the fact that America is in greater danger today than it has been at any time since Communism was threatening Europe in the late 1940s.

The Heritage Foundation has written extensively on the risks facing America and the state of our defenses. Here is a brief summary of the salient facts.

America has no strategy for victory in the war on terrorism—we’re not even calling it a war anymore—and the momentum has shifted to the terrorists. The outcome in Afghanistan is in doubt. If the terrorists succeed there, they can reconstitute their safe havens, plan further attacks on the United States, and threaten to gain control of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal.

The Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism, a bipartisan commission with the status of the 9/11 Commission, found unanimously that the terrorists would “more likely than not” develop and use a weapon of mass destruction against a Western city by 2013. The Director of National Intelligence publicly agreed with that assessment.

The international regime for controlling nuclear weapons is broken. Pakistan has a substantial and growing nuclear arsenal. Its intelligence organization has been penetrated by the Islamists. Both North Korea and Iran are steadily increasing the range, payload, and accuracy of their ballistic missiles. No one seriously believes that the Iranians will voluntarily stop their nuclear program or that the West (except perhaps the Israelis) will use force to stop them.

According to our Pacific commander, China is increasing its military strength far more quickly than our intelligence predicted. The Chinese have already acquired an arsenal of advanced fighters and missiles that threatens to deny the American Navy access to the Taiwan Strait. They are building as many as five submarines per year and have established a modern submarine base on the island of Hainan. They have announced plans to build a variety of the ships necessary to field a blue water capability.  

The American military is significantly weaker than it was at the end of the Cold War.  Most of our tankers are equally as old; they will not be replaced, if at all, until the 2030s. The Department of Defense wants to close our most modern cargo aircraft production line and will close our most sophisticated fighter line. The missile defense budget has been cut, and according to most reports, the Obama Administration will cut modernization budgets even further.

As important as it is for the federal government to restrain itself from interfering where it does not belong, it is equally important that the government perform its constitutionally mandated function of providing for the national defense.

America’s global influence is being checked and rolled back, and even the homeland is no longer safe from attack.

The situation can still be recovered, but only if our leaders understand their duty, regain their confidence, and reenergize the defense of freedom here and abroad.

7 0
3 years ago
Because he was Aristotle’s pupil, Alexander the Great:
Scorpion4ik [409]
1 is correct to my opion
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How did Portugal gain an advantage in trading in comparison to other European nations?
erastovalidia [21]

Answer:

The biggest changes were in rigging. At first they concentrated on lateen sails, then added a mix of square sails and lateen for deeper penetration into the South Atlantic, with further changes for the much longer route round the Cape. Knowledge of these techniques was protected by forbidding sales of ships to other countries. A third commercial advantage was Portugal's ability to absorb “new Christians” — Jewish merchants and scholars had played a significant role during Muslim rule

Hope this helps! If so please mark brainliest and rate/heart to help my account if it did!!

3 0
3 years ago
8. The American colonies were more like each other than like England in every way EXCEPT
d1i1m1o1n [39]

Answer:

The second option

Explanation:

They had to deal with an ethnically and racially diverse population

6 0
3 years ago
Generate Explanations:Why did European countries compete to expand their power in North America?
aleksandr82 [10.1K]

Answer:

The English and French were turning profits by growing tobacco in Virginia, fishing off the North Atlantic Coast, and trading furs from New England and Canada with Europe.

Explanation:

hope this helps

7 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Population growth in developing countries is high primarily because of the availability of .
    12·2 answers
  • Who won the election of 1860 and what was the central issue of the election?
    8·2 answers
  • Saint Domigue's economy was dependent on<br> plantations.<br> What does this mean
    8·1 answer
  • 3. Energy policy has been a major focus for the U.S. government for some decades now. Use the
    10·1 answer
  • Which important goal did L'Ouverture want to achieve?
    7·1 answer
  • What does the United Nations estimate will happen to the population of developed countries between now and 2025?
    14·2 answers
  • Cause and effect. Cause Supported arts and education<br> what is the effect
    5·1 answer
  • What would you do if your teacher starts screaming at one of your classmates?
    13·1 answer
  • Question 4 of 35
    11·2 answers
  • When did james madison die and what caused of death??
    5·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!