During the Suez Crisis President Dwight Eisenhower refused to support the Anglo-French action against Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt. Afterwards his Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, became concerned about the growing influence of the Soviet Union in the Middle East.
<span>In January 1957 made a speech in Congress where Eisenhower recommended the use of American forces to protect Middle East states against overt aggression from nations "controlled by international communism". He also urged the provision of economic aid to those countries with anti-communist governments. This new foreign policy became known as the Eisenhower Doctrine. </span>
<span>In April 1957 help was given to King Hussein who was under threat from left-wing groups in Jordan. The following year, 10,000 marines went to the Lebanon to protect President Camille Chamoun from Muslim extremists. These two cases created a great deal of anti-Americanism in the Middle East and in 1959 it was decided that the Eisenhower Doctrine should be brought to an end.</span>
Answer:
The Assyrian Empire was a collection of united city-states that existed from 900 B.C.E. to 600 B.C.E., which grew through warfare, aided by new technology such as iron weapons.
Explanation:
Btw brainliest me plss
Answer:
If I were a European leader during the Age of Imperialism, I would attempt to approach my goal of expanding my empire through diplomacy. Much like the control the United States achieved over China through the Open Door Policy, I would try to secure a strong economic influence in the country/territory and create international agreements (which made other countries feel like they had huge influence) to secure my own interests there. Then, I would find a resource that said country/territory could not live without and become the sole provider of said resource. Then, the country would have no choice but to depend on my European power (wah haha). Basically, I would manipulate the country/territory I want into needing my power while making other international powers think that they have a good deal while in reality I have the economic spoils and they have only a little. By using diplomacy rather than force or "international bullying," I have not created much of a conflict. Instead, everyone is blissfully ignorant of the fact that my country has completely taken over. Therefore, this is the perfect solution with definitely no disadvantages.
*Please note that a good bit of this answer was quite sarcastic, but I think you get the gist. :))
Answer:
The Iran hostage crisis as well the soviet invasion of Afghanistan
Explanation:
