The author is trying to establish the point that the food provided to the soldiers was of poor quality and in little quantity.
<h3>How can we identify this?</h3>
- The author shows how the food provided to the soldiers was compared to fodder, that is, food inappropriate for humans.
- The author shows how this food could be compared with the feeding of pigs, which highlights the poor quality of the food.
- The author reinforces how inappropriate food was consumed anyway, as it was all the soldiers had.
In the text, the author wants to draw attention to how the soldiers were neglected and fed in a precarious, unhealthy, and insufficient way, not being possible to compare it with food for humans.
This kind of food left the soldiers hungry and weak, preventing them from being able to fulfill their responsibilities as required.
In this case, the author satirizes food, trying to call attention to a change and showing the dissatisfaction of those who need to eat this way.
Learn more about satire:
brainly.com/question/20772859
#SPJ1
None of the options is correct.
INTERMITTENT ACTIVITY means that you perform said activity at irregular intervals, in a sporadic way. On the contrary, the options mentioned require the subject to participate actively. For example, in order to develop a skill it is important to practice a lot. In the same way, if you focus on what you are hearing, you are paying attention which is the opposite to what an intermittent activity is.
United States,France,Great Britain and the Soviet Union
Explanation:
The United States was alarmed by Soviet control of Eastern Europe at the end WW II because officials believed Soviet expansion would not stop at Eastern Europe.
<u>Explanation:</u>
The Grand Alliance, otherwise called The Big Three, was a military union comprising of the three significant Allies of World War II: the Soviet Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Relations between the Soviet Union and the United States were driven by a perplexing exchange of ideological, political, and monetary elements, which prompted moves between wary collaboration and frequently severe superpower contention throughout the years.
Answer:
I believe there are several definitions of genocide because nobody can agree on just one. It evolves because genocide gets different over the years. I believe that in the future people will believe genocide is nothing at all.
Explanation:
