Answer:
In the excerpt from Richard Wright's autobiography "Black boy" title "the rights to the streets of Memphis" the 2 similes that describe the setting in some way are found in the following sentences:
1. "My mother finally went to work as a cook and left me and my brother alone in the flat each day with a loaf of bread and a pot of tea".
2. "Sometimes, when she was in despair, she would call us to her and talk us for hours, telling us that we now had no father, that our lives would be different from those of other children, that we must learn as soon as possible to take care of ourselves, to dress ourselves, to prepare our own food; that we must take upon ourselves the responsibility of the flat while she worked"
Explanation:
From the excerpt, there are similes in the above sentences that describe the setting of the story. It reveals that the family seem to be a single-parent family where the mother is left to cater for the children. The father has been away for sometime leaving the mother alone with the children. The mother gets a work as a cook in order to cater for the children.
This particular excerpt reveals the attitude of the mother in making her son fearless and to possess the ability to defend himself.
In my parents house the kitchen smells like vanilla and cinnamon
Answer:
A.)
Explanation:
When critical thinkers read a book/text, if needed, they will ask questions about what they read. It gives them a better understanding of of the text/book so they can make sense of it.
It is reliant on the intensity of the attack as well as the power of the attacking nation.
some countries have been attacked and literally never fought back but surrendered if the attacking nation is more powerful in terms of military power.
in case the intensity of the attack can be absorbed, a country can also opt for diplomacy as war is the ultimate sanction in international relation.
in case the country feels it has the capacity to protect its sovereignty then fighting back is the only option.
another way to look at it would be one of the most difficult issues in foreign policy is deciding when the United States should exercise military force. Most people think that military force may be used if a vital national interest of the United States is threatened. The difficulty lies in getting people to agree on what constitutes a vital national interest.
Almost everyone would agree that an attack by a foreign country on the United States threatens a vital interest. Many also would think a vital interest threatened if a country attacked a nation that we had signed a security agreement with. Disagreements emerge when the threat involves the free flow of a precious commodity, such as oil. They also surface over situations that do not pose an immediate threat to U.S. security but could imperil it in the future, such as when a region becomes unstable and the instability may lead to wider conflicts. Another area of debate opens over human rights and humanitarian efforts. The United States is the most powerful democratic nation on Earth. Does that mean we always have a vital interest in promoting human rights and democracy? Or, should we stay out of the affairs of other nations unless they threaten other of our national interests?
Another issue arises over how the United States should exercise military force. Some argue that America should never act unilaterally, but should only act with others, allies or particularly with the United Nations. They believe America has a strong interest in upholding international law. Others agree that it is appropriate to act in coalitions, but they think demanding it in every circumstance would paralyze America’s role as a world leader.
Answer:
the link doesnt work
Explanation:
repost the link so i can do it and get the right answer
