<span>Concurrent powers are powers that are shared by both the State and the federal government.</span>
Old Stone Age is another name for the Paleolithic Period, a prehistoric cultural stage or degree of human evolution that was marked by the use of crude chipped stone tools.
<h3>How to explain the information?</h3>
These first hunters and foragers typically used hand axes and cleavers. The major tools used throughout the Lower Paleolithic era were hand axes, choppers, and cleavers. These implements were primarily used to cut, dig, and skin the prey.
Pebble tools were typically utilized by individuals throughout the Lower Paleolithic Age (rock with cutting ability). However, there were some Homo erectus populations in the Eastern Hemisphere that were more developed and used chopping tools. The majority of tools were created during the Lower Paleolithic Age from materials like stone, wood, and bone.
Some stone tools were used for chopping fruits and roots as well as for cutting flesh and bone, removing bark from trees, and cutting into hides, or animal skins. A few of them served as handles. Some were used to create hunting spears and arrows.
Learn more about Paleolithic on:
brainly.com/question/540822
#SPJ1
Answer:On the morning of 7 December 1941, at 7.55am local time, 183 aircraft of the Imperial Japanese Navy attacked the United States Naval base at Pearl Harbor on the island of Oahu, Hawaii. ... Within two hours, 18 US warships had been sunk or damaged, 188 aircraft destroyed and 2,403 American servicemen and women killed.
Yes I think that each side has good things to say about the other side. This is because I think that many people's political viewpoints don't always perfectly align to one party or the other. In reality, life is much more complicated than picking one side. Sure some people might agree with policies from the Democrat's side, but they might see other Republican views to be valid as well. I like to think of it as a buffet of ideas, where people tend to pick and choose which talking points they magnetically snap to. We could have for example a socially liberal person but who supports conservative financial measures; or we could have someone who has very religious conservative morals, but supports liberal monetary policies.
In other words, it's unrealistic to assume people will be purely one party. Those who seem that way tend to be stuck in a bubble where it's like a feedback loop of talking points fed to them. Fox News is one example of this on the conservative side, while MSNBC is an example of this on the liberal side. Those stuck in this bubble would likely not have much nice things to say about the other side, if they have anything nice to say at all. However, I think to some (if not many) people, politics has become very toxic that they simply turn the tv off entirely. By "turn off", I mean literally turn it off or change the channel to something else. These people I'd consider somewhere in the middle in a moderate range. Furthermore, these moderates are likely to have some nice things to say about both sides, but they might have their complaints about both sides as well.
In short, if you pick someone from either extreme, then it's likely they'll have nothing nice to say about the other side. If you pick someone from the middle, then they might have nice things to say about both sides. It all depends who you ask. Also, it depends on how politically active they are.
Answer:
World war 2 era marked the end of colonialism. If you look at what happened after ww2 you'll see that both in Africa and in Asia, new countries were born from French and British colonies.
This is a direct consequence of the USA being the western superpower, she obliged her former allies to free their colonies. On one hand that has to do with their history, that is to say, a republic born after fighting a king. But it also has an economic explanation; independent countries will probably buy more American goods than colonies.
That worked fine in some countries (Egipt, Irán, India) but did not work at all in others: Vietnam, Iraq, Siria, Uganda, etc.
Finally, all this happened because European colonialist countries did not have any power to achieve any different deal with the USA.
