GI Bill (1944)offically
known as the Servicemen's Readjustment Act, this law helped returning
World War II soldiers reintegrate into civilian life by securing loans
to buy homes and farms and set up small businesses and by making tuition
and stipends available for them to attend college and job training
programs; it was also intended to cushion the blow of 15 million
returning servicemen on the employment market and to nurture the postwar
economy<span>
</span>
Answer: I'm pretty sure it's C. Even a period of only a few decades can greatly change the historical context surrounding an event.
Explanation:
I’d be glad to help you. May I ask what are “the following”? Feel free to add more details. Thanks!
-Jessi
Answer:
An arms race denotes a rapid increase in the quantity or quality of instruments of military power by rival states in peacetime. The first modern arms race took place when France and Russia challenged the naval superiority of Britain in the late nineteenth century. Germany’s attempt to surpass Britain’s fleet spilled over into World War I, while tensions after the war between the United States, Britain and Japan resulted in the first major arms-limitation treaty at the Washington Conference. The buildup of arms was also a characteristic of the Cold War between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, though the development of nuclear weapons changed the stakes for the par
Over the past century, the arms race metaphor has assumed a prominent place in public discussion of military affairs. But even more than the other colorful metaphors of security studies–balance of power, escalation, and the like–it may cloud rather than clarify understanding of the dynamics of international rivalries.
An arms race denotes a rapid, competitive increase in the quantity or quality of instruments of military or naval power by rival states in peacetime. What it connotes is a game with a logic of its own. Typically, in popular depictions of arms races, the political calculations that start and regulate the pace of the game remain obscure. As Charles H. Fairbanks, Jr., has noted, “The strange result is that the activity of the other side, and not one’s own resources, plans, and motives, becomes the determinant of one’s behavior.” And what constitutes the “finish line” of the game is the province of assertion, rather than analysis. Many onlookers, and some participants, have claimed that the likelihood of war increases as the accumulation of arms proceeds apace.
Explanation:
