Answer:
One risk of the government restricting citizens' Second-Amendment
Explanation:
Answer:
No
Explanation:
First of all, who would be the one giving the task?
Second of all, the people must be able to accept change for them to experience change.
Third of all, who would take on the task? Which country/people? Who would provide the resources, fundings, & volunteers to help "improve" the world.
Fourth, what kind of improvements are we talking about? Is it really beneficial, or does it just help with foreign government agendas?
Fifth, would there be any "extra's" that those parts of the world have to take on? Would they be called upon later on to help even when they cannot? Help usually have strings attached, and they would force obligation on the beneficiary to return the favor at a later time.
Of course, if the parts of the world wants to be improved, and there is the resources and funds to do so, then yes, Roosevelt is right in "improving" those parts of the world.
~
They were not treated well, they were immigrants looking for a better life in the US and they worked for lower wages which took away jobs from people that had been in the US in many industrial cities
They both wanted equality.
King wanted rights for blacks.
Malala wanted rights for women.
