Answer:
I think Mac was talking about if they would treat the Japanese well, then they will not be looking for revenge. After World War 1, they treated the Germans really bad in the peace deal and France had ruthless occupation in the Rhineland of Germany. That why the NAZI party took power, people today wonder how can such people vote Hitler in and this is why. If they would treat the Japanese like how they treated the Germans after World War 1 , there would be no peace between the Japaneses and the Americans. America fought world war 2 not to bring japan horrific occupation but a occupation with justice.
Explanation:
The U.S had some Reconstruction plans that would save japan from a new dictatorship. Many people wanted japan to fall and have a ruthless occupation as revenge. What I mean by "ruthless" is take the wealth away from japan and as much of the land resources as possible for revenge. Mac Arthur knew this would not only cause unrest but revenge.
Planned Because it involves much more controlby the government with little to no private ownership.
One of those bands, camped on the Guadalupe River below Victoria, was attacked by Texans in 1840 in retaliation for Karankawa raids on area settlers. Many Indians were killed in the attack, and the survivors fled down the coast where they settled about fifty miles southwest of Corpus Christi.
Answer:
The purpose of Winston Churchill's excerpt was to warn the United State that Europe was threatened by the <em><u>USSR</u></em>.
Explanation:
The "Iron Curtain Speech" was delivered by Winston Churchill to emphasize the need for the US and Britain to act as peacekeepers for the threat imposed by the USSR. He implored on the two nations to spearhead the need to maintain peace against the power of the communist USSR.
In his now-famous speech, former British Prime Minister Churchill stated <em>"From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent."</em> He also went on to express his belief that the Soviet Union's communist stance and desire to expand will <em>"cause new serious difficulties in the British and American zones."</em> He then appealed for <em>"[T]he safety of the world [that] requires a new unity in Europe, from which no nation should be permanently outcast."</em>
Answer:
<h2>Flag burning is an act of violence</h2>
Explanation:
<em>Flag burning is likely to cause violence because it is an act of violence. Let me tell you in a way where you will understand, I do not know if you are talking about the American flag or every flag ever made, but, if you burned the American flag, people might take it as a threat, or just ignore it. Apparently, burning the American flag is legal, this is because in the year 1989, the Supreme Court declared that they couldn't stop people from burning these flags. They also declared that the federal / state laws that protect the flag are in violation of free-speech protections. I think it should be illegal because if people keep doing it, they will just keep doing it! They won't stop and will never stop. It also means that they are disrespecting our country, which I respect, but I do not respect the way that the people act when they burned it. I watched this video and people were cursing, acting like they own the world, and hurting other people with the fire on the flag. I wish the Supreme Court would stand up to this, I understand that the people will always protest, and that it's very hard to get the people to listen, but please, if you can try to, bring this back up and try again.</em>
I got some of these answers from TIME, you can check it out if you want to, and I wrote most of this myself. I also wrote the "Flag burning is an act of violence" so I wouldn't take anyone elses idea.
<em>Hope this helps! <3</em>
