<span>1.) Why is the study of genocide important, and how can it be intellectually enlightening?
2.) </span><span>How could such powerful nations stand by as these slaughters were being committed?</span>
I think it was Richard Pryor
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Although there is no source document attached or any other reference, we can say that Henry Wallace’s background and previous disagreements with President Truman might have biased his thoughts because Wallace had a different political perspective as the former Presidential Candidate of the Progressive Party. His own point of view and political tendencies made Wallace bias his opinions and criticized the way President Truman acted during the Cold War years. Wallace had been Truman's Secretary of Commerce but never get along well with Truman. Wallace's liberal approach biased their opinions about Truman's decision to change the New Deal legislation and the foreign policy to contain Communism.
I believe that the answer should be c
I would have to say that Augustus was more important because he started the Roman Empire on a stable footing, and ushered in the Pax Romana.
