It helped because it enabled other fronts to open up because the American Offensive in the area ended with a victory, which meant that they could move to other areas and bother Germans there. They didn't' do this however because the fighting ended since the Germans became aware of their losses and signed an armistice.
<span />
Answer:
which language is it even i cant understand
The Intercoastal Highway in South America is a highway that connects the western and the eastern coast of the continent, running through the countries of Peru and Brazil. The big positive of this highway is that it is connecting the eastern and western part of the continent, enabling for easier transportation of goods, and easier movement of people, which is of great economic benefit for everyone involved. On the other hand, there are also negatives, with the two biggest being the destruction of lot of tropical rainforest, and deaths of animals. In order for this highway to be built, enormous amount of trees and other vegetation have been cut down, which is always a problem. Also, the wild animals are not used to a highway running through their habitat, so they do not know how to react, very often being run over by the vehicles passing through.
Answer:
An arms race denotes a rapid increase in the quantity or quality of instruments of military power by rival states in peacetime. The first modern arms race took place when France and Russia challenged the naval superiority of Britain in the late nineteenth century. Germany’s attempt to surpass Britain’s fleet spilled over into World War I, while tensions after the war between the United States, Britain and Japan resulted in the first major arms-limitation treaty at the Washington Conference. The buildup of arms was also a characteristic of the Cold War between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, though the development of nuclear weapons changed the stakes for the par
Over the past century, the arms race metaphor has assumed a prominent place in public discussion of military affairs. But even more than the other colorful metaphors of security studies–balance of power, escalation, and the like–it may cloud rather than clarify understanding of the dynamics of international rivalries.
An arms race denotes a rapid, competitive increase in the quantity or quality of instruments of military or naval power by rival states in peacetime. What it connotes is a game with a logic of its own. Typically, in popular depictions of arms races, the political calculations that start and regulate the pace of the game remain obscure. As Charles H. Fairbanks, Jr., has noted, “The strange result is that the activity of the other side, and not one’s own resources, plans, and motives, becomes the determinant of one’s behavior.” And what constitutes the “finish line” of the game is the province of assertion, rather than analysis. Many onlookers, and some participants, have claimed that the likelihood of war increases as the accumulation of arms proceeds apace.
Explanation:
