Answer:
B. Military force is an easy way to replace an unfriendly foreign leader
Explanation:
The US has been using its military way to often as a tool of its foreign policies in the past century. While it was understandable during the Cold War, after it ended it is simply absurd. It seems that whenever the US has problems with some leader of another country where it has some interest, it employs its military, attacks the country, and takes down the unwanted leader. While some may argue that the US military has acted as peacekeeper, society builder, bringing democracy, in practice it has been the total opposite, and we have Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria to witness for it, being left in ruins, total chaos, and becoming fertile grounds for terrorist basis.
I think it's war but I'm not really 100% sure on it
I'm actually ending this unit of Napoleon in class tomorrow.
Basically Napoleon was a dictator of France who loved to carry out conquests. During the beginning of his reign he had man victories, heck in the battle of Austerlitz he was able to beat an even large Austrian and Russian army with only the french army. I'm not sure how many people were in the armies. This battle ended in a peace treaty by Austria, Treaty of Pressburg. So you can say that the Europeans thought of him as a god, for the first handful of battles. However later on he was just a shell of his glorious past. He became too selfish and ignorant in his victories, and pursued to fight England and Prussia, at the battle of waterloo. Two of the major citis that posed a threat to his conquests.
To answer your question, Europeans would have though of him differently during his first years of his ruling, and his last years of his ruling because of the victories and losses he had in battles to try to take over all of Europe. He was a crazy dictator.
The answer is cedar my dude
<u>These two quotes pronounced by President Herbert Hoover, express his viewpoint on the Great Depression</u> and his opinion about the different formulas adopted to overcome it:
- <em>"Let me remind you that credit is the lifeblood of business, the lifeblood of prices and jobs.
"</em>
- <em>"You cannot extend the mastery of government over the daily life of a people without somewhere making it master of people's souls and thoughts.… Every step in that direction poisons the very roots of liberalism. It poisons political equality, free speech, free press, and equality of opportunity. It is the road not to more liberty but to less liberty."</em>
Hoover became one of the main detractors of Roosevelt's New Deal which, based on Keynesian economics, fostered goverment interventionism in order to boost the depressed demand levels as the mechanism to create employment and economic growth. Such interventionism was materialized by increasing public spending.
In opposition, supporters of free markets and<em> laisez-faire</em> economic policies, such as Hoover, criticized this recovery plan because they believed that markets on their own would reach the most efficient outcomes and that the country would get innecessarily indebted. Moreover, they believed that the situation would be worsened by interventionist policies that hampered certain individual liberties.
