Hi there.
The answer is railroads connected the port of savannah
Answer: What if the Crusades’ history was told from an Arab perspective? In fact, in 2016 al-Jazeera TV did just that. It released a four-episode documentary on the Crusades, and the trailer introduced the subject in the following words: “In the history of conflict between East and West. The mightiest battle between Christianity and Islam; a holy war in the name of religion. For the first time, the story of the Crusades from an Arab perspective.” It is clear that the producers of the al-Jazeera documentary wanted their viewers to understand the Crusades as one out of many episodes in the continuous clash between two civilizations: East/Islam and West/Christianity. All three documentaries share the same plot about the clash of civilizations fuelled by the religious ideologies of holy war and jihad. The only difference is that the al-Jazeera documentary alleges to tell the story of the Crusades “for the first time” from an Arab perspective, which actually means that it is the turn of the Muslim Arabs to tell, not a different story, but rather the same story of the clash of civilisations.
Explanation: I do hope this helps, I looked up your question and found this.
Answer:
b
Explanation:
notify his parents via telephone
Correct answer: SPLIT TICKET
A "split ticket" is when a person casts votes for candidates from different political parties for different positions up for election. For instance, the voter may support a presidential candidate who is a Republican but casts ballots for congressional candidates who are Democrats Voting a split ticket requires a knowledge of the qualifications of each candidate because you are voting according to each candidate's qualities and credentials, not just because of the political party backing the candidate.
The opposite of a "split ticket" is a "straight ticket" or "straight-party voting." This means a voter selects all candidates for all offices on the ballot according to the political party they represent. So, a solidly Republican voter might cast a straight ticket for all Republican candidates, or a committed Democrat might do straight-party voting for all Democrat candidates on the ballot. In this case, the voter is supporting a particular party's ideology, and thus siding with any and all candidates from that party.
I would argue that whether you vote split ticket or straight ticket, as a voter you really should know the qualifications of each candidate for whom you cast your ballot. If a candidate belongs to the political party that you generally support, does that mean you still support that candidate even if he or she has minimal qualifications to serve in the office they seek? Or if the candidate's record is marred by scandal or questionable performance?
A split ticket vote assumes you are judging each candidate on that candidate's individual merits. But even if voters opt for a straight ticket approach, knowledge about individual candidates' qualifications still matters.
Answer:The Romans established a form of government — a republic — that was copied by countries for centuries In fact, the government of the United States is based partly on Rome's model than they modifyed it
Explanation:look it up
