The answer would be Khrushchev.
At some degree, yes. Sometimes the difficulties arent worth it but that depends on when, where, and what your getting.
A looks to be the correct answer
<span />
This should be false. Under the articles, the states were acceptably stable. The problem was that the national government its self was weak and had no money as they had no authority to tax the states. This change with the constitution which still keep the states as states but adhered much more to the new, divided government that did have the authority to impose a national tax on states. This also brought a bigger sense of unity within the states over time and the national governments strength would grow over time. Hope this helps or answered the question/statement.<span />
We don't blame people of different religions nor race for problems that didn't even involve them, to begin with.
