Answer:
It was a success in my opinion.
Explanation:
Reconstruction was both a success and a failure because the goal of united America was accomplished by defeating the army of Confederate while the goal of implementation of fourteen amendment i. e. providing civil rights to all slaves in the whole country was not accomplished which was a failure of Reconstruction. Reconstruction was a success because it achieved its goal of united America by defeating Confederate army.
Not all industries prospered in the Boom in the 1920s of America.
Old industries such as Coal and Cotton did terribly in the Boom as people became interested in the new products such as clothes made from artificial material(polyester). Coal was an old source of power, in the 1920s oil and electricity became greatly used.
Agriculture was also poor many farmers left the farmland to find work in the city. As new people emerged, new demands also appeared. Instead of fresh fruits and vegetables, Americans preferred cereals and bread which lead to the decrease of demands in fruits.
In the 1920s, Argentina and Canada began to supply the world crops which lead to the drops of demands from USA directly. Later in the year Prohibition(anything related to alcoholic drinks was made illegal) was introduced which caused an instant drop to the demands of barley(barley was used for making alcoholic drinks such as beer)
They both have multiple different ethnic groups and cultures within the union.
Answer:
I hope it helps u.
Explanation:
Arms races have generated a great deal of interest for a variety of reasons. They are widely believed to have significant consequences for states' security, but agreement stops there. In the debate over their consequences, one side holds that arms races increase the probability of war by undermining military stability and straining political relations. The opposing view holds that engaging in an arms race is often a state's best option for avoiding war when faced with an aggressive adversary. Debate over the causes of arms races is just as divided. One school believes that arms races are primarily rational responses to external threats and opportunities, whereas arms race skeptics believe that arms buildups are usually the product of a mixture of internal, domestic interests, including those of the scientists involved in research and development (R&D), the major producers of weapons systems, and the military services that will operate them. The policy implications of these contending views are equally contradictory; critics see arms control as a way to reduce the probability of war and rein in domestic interests that are distorting the state's security policy, and proponents argue that military competition is most likely to protect the state's international interests and preserve peace.
Arms buildups and arms races also play a prominent role in international relations (IR) theory. Building up arms is one of a state's three basic options for acquiring the military capabilities it requires to achieve its international goals; the other two are gaining allies and cooperating with its adversary to reduce threats. In broad terms, choosing between more competitive and more cooperative combinations of these options is among the most basic decisions a state must make, and it is often the most important.
Mark me as brainlist answer,
Have a nice day,
Thank you ☺
