What was the Marshall Plan? How did this contribute to tension between the U.S. and the Soviet Union?

2 answers:

5 0

The Marshall Plan was an economic initiative funded by the United States that provided aid to Western European countries following the end of WW2. This helped contribute to the growing post-war tensions between the US and Soviet Union because the Soviet Union and its satellite states refused all aid from the Marshall plan because it was believed to be an attempt to weaken Soviet influence over their satellite states.

sergey [27]3 years ago

5 0

it was a movement after ww2 where america gave billions of dollars to parts of europe to help them revcover

You might be interested in

What does Galarza mean by using the Spainsh saying about the mule?

Dimas [21]

Galarza means by using the Spanish saying about the mule, —the mule isn’t born stubborn, he’s made stubborn.” It refers to the fact that the mistreatment causes people to change their behavior, becoming distrustful.

3 0

3 years ago

Huge ranches that covered thousands of acres and were owned by Spanish speaking peoples in California were called missions.

tatyana61 [14]

Answer:

your answer is false

Explanation:

i got it wrong on my test because i said it was true so the answer is false

6 0

4 years ago

What branch wrote the bills that become laws

fenix001 [56]

Legislative branch squaaaa

6 0

3 years ago

How many votes did the Senate need to override the presidential veto, and how many senators and representatives voted to overrid

bagirrra123 [75]

A two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and in the Senate is required to override a presidential veto. The exact number depends on how many representatives vote; therefore, the actual number is subject to chance

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Would the U.S government be better if it were a more direct democracy?

blagie [28]

Answer:

I don't know...call me crazy, but I don't think this would be such a bad idea (at least sometime in the future.) With the advent of the internet, there really is no reason why people can't have more input on legislation. Remember, congressmen act as representatives of the people for logistical reasons. Were voting allowed via internet, mail, or permanent polling places, the logistical roadblocks are reduced.

This country has an annoying quality where senators and representatives are elected and then inject their own personality into their voting. They are supposed to represent the people of their district. If 60% of the people in their district feel a certain way about an issue, why is the congressman/woman allowed to vote a different way? Why do their personal beliefs really matter at all? They are supposed to be voting the way their district wants regardless of what they personally believe.

I know, I know, things can be horribly complicated and the average person can't possibly understand all the issues they are voting on, but last I checked their is no intelligence requirement to be in the government...many people in governement now are dumb as a box of rocks. They don't have to be smart to be elected, they have to be personable and have good advisors working in the background.

Imagine being able to directly vote on education issues, warfare issues, and being able to prioritize budget items. Instead of blaming the morons in congress we would only be able to blame ourselves when things went horribly wrong. Of course, some form of standing governement would still be needed for a lot of reasons.

Again, I know the technology is not hot enough right now to provide the secruity that would be needed, etc, but it won't be long...

3 0

3 years ago