I believe the answer is: It delayed or extended nationalist struggles.
The nationalist struggles come after different nations started to fully embodied nationalist movement, which make them tend to incline to prove their nation's superiority over another nations. This type of thinking often lead to conflicts among these european nations.
Answer:
2.had twice as many soldiers as lee
Explanation:
The Siege of Petersburg, Siege of Petersburg, Campaign of Petersburg, or also Campaign of Richmond-Petersburg was a prolonged military conflict during the Civil War that took place around Petersburg, Virginia, from June 9, 1864 until April 3, 1865. Although the campaign is generally known as "Petersburg Siege" it was not really a classic military siege in which a city is surrounded and all its sources of supply are interrupted, and military actions are not they found themselves limited only against the city of Petersburg.
After nearly ten months of siege, the federal victory at Fort Stedman on March 25, 1865, was a devastating blow to the Confederate army, which was weakened by defections, disease and shortages. The federal army outnumbered the Confederates by more than double. On April 1 the Confederates were defeated at the Battle of Five Forks, on April 2 the Union advanced towards the city initiating the Third Battle of Petersburg and finally, at dawn on April 3 the city of Petersburg was surrendered.
The political principle that is reflected in the phrase "We the People" is Consent of the governed.
<h3>What is the meaning of the principle of Consent of the governed?</h3>
The meaning of Consent of the governed means that the government is operating based on the legitimacy that it gets from being approved by the people.
This is shown in the declaration that "We the People" are the underpinning source of power for the U.S. Constitution.
In conclusion, the political principle represented is consent of the governed.
Find out more on the principle of the Consent of the governed at brainly.com/question/1920172
#SPJ1
Answer:
A new generation of builders is devising daring structures that celebrate natural materials, push for eco-consciousness — and argue for a more democratic future
Explanation:
UNTIL LESS THAN a century ago, the Ayoreo peoples of Paraguay lived nomadically in the Chaco, a hot, dry region of savannas and thorn forests covering nearly 200 million acres spread across western Paraguay, southeastern Bolivia, northern Argentina and a small fringe of southern Brazil, a region once known by the Spanish as the infierno verde, or “green hell.” The Ayoreo were resourceful in building their modest shelters: Depending on the materials available to them, they might construct a low dome of leaves over branches cut from quebracho (ax breaker) trees, dig the hot earth out from underneath until they reached the cooler subsoil, then mix that excavated dirt with cactus sap, spreading the resultant thick paste between the leaves of the roof above to waterproof it. Settled into the hollowed ground beneath the dome, the interiors were cool and dim, a reprieve from the forest’s hostility. “These shelters don’t get recognition for being ‘green’ or ‘eco-friendly,’” says the 50-year-old architect José Cubilla, who’s based in Asunción, Paraguay’s capital, a slow-paced riverside city built at the point where the Chaco in the west meets the iridescent meadows and forests that unfurl across the country’s east. “But this is what interests me: obvious things, obvious solutions, simple materials.”
