how each of these "w"? im guessing it means work. and three weapons from then that are "new"? are:
Rifles. All nations used more than one type of firearm during the First World War. The rifles most commonly used by the major combatants were, among the Allies, the Lee-Enfield .303 (Britain and Commonwealth), Lebel and Berthier 8mm (France), Mannlicher–Carcano M1891, 6.5mm (Italy), Mosin–Nagant M1891 7.62 (Russia), and Springfield 1903 .30–06 (USA). The Central Powers employed Steyr–Mannlicher M95 (Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria), Mauser M98G 7.92mm (Germany), and Mauser M1877 7.65mm (Turkey). The American Springfield used a bolt-action design that so closely copied Mauser’s M1989 that the US Government had to pay a licensing fee to Mauser, a practice that continued until America entered the war.
Machine guns. Most machine guns of World War 1 were based on Hiram Maxim’s 1884 design. They had a sustained fire of 450–600 rounds per minute, allowing defenders to cut down attacking waves of enemy troops like a scythe cutting wheat. There was some speculation that the machine gun would completely replace the rifle. Contrary to popular belief, machine guns were not the most lethal weapon of the Great War. That dubious distinction goes to the artillery.
Flamethrowers. Reports of infantry using some sort of flame-throwing device can be found as far back as ancient China. During America’s Civil War some Southern newspapers claimed Abraham Lincoln had observed a test of such a weapon. But the first recorded use of hand-held flamethrowers in combat was on February 26, 1915, when the Germans deployed the weapon at Malancourt, near Verdun. Tanks carried on a man’s back used nitrogen pressure to spray fuel oil, which was ignited as it left the muzzle of a small, hand-directed pipe. Over the course of the war, Germany utilized 3,000 Flammenwerfer troops; over 650 flamethrower attacks were made. The British and French both developed flame-throwing weapons but did not make such extensive use of them.
there are many more, but here are 3 i found from a trustworthy source!
Answer:Directly related to the list price of the good
Explanation:
"Without engaging in international trade, Freedonia and Lamponia would have been able to consume at the after-trade consumption bundles" is FALSE.
<u>Option:</u> B
<u>Explanation:</u>
Specialization refers to countries' propensity to focus in certain items they exchange for other commodities, rather than to manufacture all the consumer goods on their own. As the PPF production possibilities frontier displays that production is impractical, Freedonia and Lamponia had to engage in international trade.
Both countries are able to consume the goods they produce.When a country is skilled in manufacturing a good, it can manufacture this good at a lower cost of opportunity than its trading nation. For this comparative advantage, both countries benefit from competing and trading with one another.
