The answer is:
D. slowed the arms race between the Soviet Union and the United States.
Divided in two rounds of conversations the Strategic Arms Limitations Treaty (SALT) were a couple of treaties that were held between the USA and the URSS to find a way to keep the armmamentary race undercontrol. There were a lot of issues to be discussed, anti-ballistic misiles zones, that stated that only one was allowed by country which meant that the countries would only have this for the capitol, it slowed down the arms race up to the end of the cold war.
What Lynn Novick means by sell their story is to make the story go public in a way that it reaches a lot of audience as well as influencing the story.
<h3>The filmmaker Lynn Novick</h3>
This film maker said this due to the fact that she was working on a movie called the Vietnam war.
She was taking on President Nixon who had said that he was modulating the message that he was telling about the events.
Read more on the Vietnam war here
brainly.com/question/182779
Answer:
he pushed through a British victory in the Seven Years' War
Explanation:
Answer:
<u><em>Emperor Justinian</em></u><u><em>, I was a </em></u><u><em>master legislator</em></u><u><em>. He reorganized the administration of the </em></u><u><em>imperial</em></u><u><em> government and outlawed the </em></u><u><em>suffragia</em></u><u><em>, or sale of</em></u><u><em> provincial governorships</em></u><u><em>. He also sponsored the </em></u><u><em>Codex Justinianus</em></u><u><em> (Code of Justinian) and directed the </em></u><u><em>construction</em></u><u><em> of several new </em></u><u><em>cathedrals</em></u><u><em>, including the</em></u><u><em> Hagia Sophia</em></u><u><em>.</em></u>
Explanation:
<u><em>Hope this helps:)</em></u>
Answer:
Explanation:
The problem is they don't. One day you will take a history class that talks about Hiroshima or the Holocaust. They were both tragedies of a kind that is almost impossible to record with no bias.
But what would happen if you read the history from another point of view. Suppose, which I don't think has been done in any school in North America, you were to read about Hiroshima from the point of view of the Japanese. What have they said about it? What will they teach their children? What is the folklore about it from their point of view? Undoubtedly their best historians will record it without bias, but will be the same as what we read? I'm not entirely sure.
That does not answer your question, but I have grave doubts that it is possible. Personal bias always comes into everything. I will say this about your question: we must do our best to present the facts in an unbiased manner. That's important because we need to have a true picture of what happened. Many times it is because historians don't want humanity committing the same errors as the events they are trying to make sense of.
So far we have not dropped an atomic weapon on anyone else. But there have been holocausts after the European one. What have we learned? That six million is a number beyond our understanding, and we have not grasped the enormity of the crime, bias or no bias.