1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Butoxors [25]
3 years ago
7

What steps do you think the Mexican government and Texans could've taken to prevent fighting and war? Do you think that the war

was justified? Why or why not? Explain your answer.
History
2 answers:
krek1111 [17]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

The same answer the other person wrote just rewritten so your teacher doesn’t know

Explanation:

Texas Revolution, likewise called War of Texas Independence, war battled from October 1835 to April 1836 among Mexico and Texas pioneers that brought about Texas' independence from Mexico and the establishing of the Republic of Texas (1836–45). Albeit the Texas Revolution was bookended by the Battles of Gonzales and San Jacinto, equipped clash and political strife that hollowed Texians (Anglo-American pilgrims of the Mexican province of Coahuila and Texas) and Tejanos (Texans of blended Mexican and Indian descent) against the powers of the Mexican government had happened irregularly since at any rate 1826.

mihalych1998 [28]3 years ago
5 0

Answer:

Explains Below :)

Explanation:

Texas Revolution, also called War of Texas Independence, war fought from October 1835 to April 1836 between Mexico and Texas colonists that resulted in Texas’s independence from Mexico and the founding of the Republic of Texas (1836–45). Although the Texas Revolution was bookended by the Battles of Gonzales and San Jacinto, armed conflict and political turmoil that pitted Texians (Anglo-American settlers of the Mexican state of Coahuila and Texas) and Tejanos (Texans of mixed Mexican and Indian descent) against the forces of the Mexican government had occurred intermittently since at least 1826.

You might be interested in
What did the Berlin Conference do to the continent of Africa?
Ad libitum [116K]

Answer:

The Berlin Conference of 1884–1885, also known as the Congo Conference (German: Kongokonferenz) or West Africa Conference (Westafrika-Konferenz),[1] regulated European colonization and trade in Africa during the New Imperialism period and coincided with Germany's sudden emergence as an imperial power. The conference was organized by Otto von Bismarck, the first chancellor of Germany. Its outcome, the General Act of the Berlin Conference, can be seen as the formalisation of the Scramble for Africa, but some scholars of history warn against an overemphasis of its role in the colonial partitioning of Africa and draw attention to bilateral agreements concluded before and after the conference.[2][3] The conference contributed to ushering in a period of heightened colonial activity by European powers, which eliminated or overrode most existing forms of African autonomy and self-governance.[4]

The conference of Berlin, as illustrated in "Die Gartenlaube"

The conference of Berlin, as illustrated in "Illustrierte Zeitung"

7 0
3 years ago
2. The Hutu and Tutsis are the two
Softa [21]

Answer:

ethnic groups created by Europeans

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
"[The Constitution] intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs.
katrin2010 [14]
Its a.supports the Supreme Courts authority in Judicial review

8 0
3 years ago
How was the civil rights act of 1968 designed to improve the economic status of african americans?
Elina [12.6K]
The civil rights Act of 1968<span> is housing problem as the refusal to sell or rent a place or house  to any person because of his race color religion, or His/her original place  Title VIII of this </span>Act<span> is commonly referred to as the Fair Housing </span>Act of 1968<span>.</span>
8 0
3 years ago
Please help me this is and an exam and i am currently failing world history...
Nitella [24]

Two problems that led to the dissolution of the League of Nations were:

  • Its inaction when some of its members engaged in aggressive actions.
  • The fact that some powerful nations were not members.

<h3>Why was the League of Nations dissolved?</h3>

The League of nations failed to properly act when Italy and Japan attacked Ethiopia and China even though all four countries were in the League. This led to a loss of confidence.

Two powerful nations were also not members which were Russia and the U.S. which made it hard to enforce policies.

Find out more on the League of Nations at brainly.com/question/14108935.

#SPJ1

5 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • Ancient Egypt's Late Period occurred between 664 – 332 BCE. According to the map below, the Persian Empire was in existence ____
    10·2 answers
  • In this image, a politician is pictured giving a speech to this crowd. If the crowd moves off of the plank he is speaking on, he
    13·1 answer
  • What is the job of a renaissance poet? ASAP please!
    8·1 answer
  • Which of the following is the primary benefit of the federal government investing in physical capital?
    7·2 answers
  • What was the actual purpose of allowing the slaves six days of celebration between Christmas and New Year’s?
    11·1 answer
  • Sourcing: Who wrote this secondary source and<br> when was it written
    15·2 answers
  • What two islands were the farthest north on Egyptian trade routes?​
    12·1 answer
  • Help pls ‍‍ I need help
    10·2 answers
  • In approximately what year did the Mycenae Greeks establish their first fortification?
    11·2 answers
  • Now that i asked what your thoughts were for ww2. whats your thoughts for ww3?
    13·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!