The Opium Wars were a series of wars between Chine and Great Britain. It started when Chine started to refuse the shipments of Opium. The war was a fail for China, this means that answer A, C, and D are wrong. The only answer left is B. Please contact me if you want more information on the opium war.
Hope this Helps! :)
The Code of Hammurabi can tell us much about ancient Babylonian society, but cannot show us everything. The law code was written for the audience of Babylonian people in its own day, especially the scribes and officers of the law. So there are many questions we would have from a distance much later in history that people then would have understood without needing explanation. The intention of the law code was to inform people of laws and punishments, not to give later generations a full view of the whole of Babylonian life. The law code was prepared by those in power in the government of Hammurabi -- we don't get any response from the people or indication of how the people then viewed the laws. And ultimately, the law code is written in a detached, impersonal way -- as legal documents generally are written. We don't get a feel for the personal lives or feelings of people living at that time in Babylonia.
Answer:
The Mexican army attacked them. The main cause of the war was the westward expansion of the United States. All through the 19th century Americans believed it was their right to expand westward. At the time they believed they could conquer the people already living on the land and take it for the United States.
Explanation:
Answer:
chickens, pigs, goats, and cows
Explanation:
The term Phillip Converse coined about how many people, when asked the same question at different times, will often change their answer, often randomly, is known as "Non-Attitudes."
Phillip Converse was known for being a Political Science Professor at the University of Michigan.
In one of his research which he documented in a book titled "The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Public."
He concluded that normal people who are not political elites don't ideologically take policies but rather flow with the prevailing issues.
Therefore he described these people as "non-attitude" because they don't have the attitude of a typical politician.
Hence, in this case, it is concluded that Phillip Converse defined "non-attitudes" as many people, when asked the same question at different times, will often change their answer, often randomly.
Learn more here: brainly.com/question/1470181
