Answer:
The United States believed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction which posed a great threat at the hands of the dictatorial leader Saddam Hussein. It also believed that terrorists were supported and even harbored by the country. So, to remove the dictator from power and to get rid of any weapons and eliminate or drive out terrorists were the main objectives behind the attack on Iraq.
Explanation:
The rationale behind the motive to invade and attack Iraq was to primarily <u>end the regime of the dictatorial leader Saddam Hussein</u>. Other purposes were to <u>end the harboring of terrorists in the land</u> and <u>eliminate any weapons of mass destruction that Iraq was believed to be in possession of</u>.
The attack on Iraq by the United States in 2003 was based on US's beliefs that the Arab nation has disobeyed the demands of the United Nations and had harbored and supported terrorists. Moreover, the need to eliminate the dictator Saddam Hussein and establish a democratic government and provide peace to the Iraq people also became the main objective behind the invasion. The US also believed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction which can act as a huge threat to the overall safety of everyone around the world. So, the need to identify, isolate and destroy such weapons before they are actually put into use also led to the attack. US military continued to stay in Iraq till 2011 after which all troops were withdrawn.
Answer: B) Angela is a single mother with two young children.
Explanation: Most appropriate reason amongst all the options can be Angela being a single mother of two young children. Usually a working mother is not found highly flexible with working hours and schedule.This can provoke the employer to become bias and hire the other candidate.
Other options are not as appropriate as option(B) because even if other candidate speaks french fluently, it can make the employer bias but Angela still persist more experience in French and other restaurants so it cannot be a major reason for not hiring her. Hospitality management is not a major need because Angela has good experience in restaurant field.
Angela learning about the job from friend and lounge caters to pick business clientele is not relevant with the mentioned situation in the question. Thus, the appropriate option is option(B).
Grant and Sherman used the strategy of total war to shorten the war in their favor, using the many deaths of enemies to save lives on their side. We may never know if more would've died if they didn't use the tactic, but in my opinion civilian lives were not theirs to take. Soldiers agreed to die, but civilians didn't, making total war, in my opinion, not right. Others may say that their lives were a necessary sacrifice towards a common goal, but, in my opinion, if one side uses total war, can't the other side use it too for a horrible end? Form your own opinion, but that is mine.
Answer:
Correct answer is A. They are both democratic countries.
Explanation:
A is correct answer because both countries are democratic republics, that have political bodies, who are representing them, such as Assembly, President... Members of this bodies are selected on elections.
B is not correct as there are dictators in Kenya.
C is also wrong as there are monarch or oligarchs in these countries.
D is also wrong because this countries are not confederations.
“Yankee Doodle” and "The Star Spangled Banner"
