<span>This is of course somewhat of a subjective question, but in general most would agree that in general expansion was not justifiable since the Mexicans and Natives were doing nothing to provoke the US. One could argue it was justifiable since Americans needed more land. </span>
I believe the answer to this question is C.
Hope this helps
Answer:
The role of a proconsul under Augustus was acted governor over the province. The White House staff is reported to have concluded after an internal review that the United States does not have a parliamentary system. The lesson deduced from this insight is evidently that we have proconsuls instead, but in neither case is a regime of separated powers treated as more than an inconvenience. Hope this helped.
They were both autocratic ruled by emperors who wielded absolute power.
Both were underdeveloped industrially compared to major western powers, with agrarian based economies at the beginning of the 20th century.
Both had dynasties that had ruled their respective empires since the 17th century. <span />
I would say : C ) The Supreme Court broke up the trust of the Standard Oil Company.
