1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Paraphin [41]
4 years ago
8

Do you think natural born Americans should to take a test to show they understand American history ?

History
1 answer:
RUDIKE [14]4 years ago
8 0

Answer:

No I don't think it is needed. People who are American born will go to school in America and learn all about US history. Plus when are you going to make me take this test after college or after high school.  It's not like a kid is going to take an American history test and do any good on it. This makes no sense to me. Here you where born in America let me give you a test to make sure your American enough. I shouldn't have to prove my allegiance to my country.

Explanation:

You might be interested in
Beware of trojan horses is a common piece of advice. explain the historical context of this phrase
fiasKO [112]
The Trojan Horse is a tale from the Trojan War about the subterfuge that the Greeks used to enter the city of Troy and win the war. In the canonical version, after a fruitless 10-year siege, the Greeks constructed a huge wooden horse, and hid a select force of men inside. The Greeks pretended to sail away, and the Trojans pulled the horse into their city as a victory trophy. That night the Greek force crept out of the horse and opened the gates for the rest of the Greek army, which had sailed back under cover of night. The Greeks entered and destroyed the city of Troy, decisively ending the war. Therefor the advice is saying beware of tricks by your enemy and target.
7 0
3 years ago
I
mash [69]
C. Inevitable

They were going to need to expand any way because they were running out of room on the East coast
3 0
3 years ago
Which of these is not something soldiers were expected to do when they were not fighting or migrating to another location?
seraphim [82]

<em> A.) Improving Roman infrastructures.</em>

<em>When they were moving to another location Roman soldiers did not have to improve on other Roman infrastructures they came upon along the way, because the building of the infrastructures was not organized by the Roman troops, more so they were organized by an architect and the architect's workers.</em>

<em>The reason I also chose A was because the Roman troops traveled in their groups and whenever they were injured it was up to them to man the camp hospitals to heal the wounded. Also recruiting more soldiers along the way was also very helpful to the Roman legion and allowed a much broader amount of soldiers that could be used for taking over land. Not to mention that soldiers (traveling strictly inside their troops) were responsible for feeding themselves (what I'm saying is that the troops were responsible for cooking and feeding each other I just used "themselves" as the word to describe it).</em>

<em>Since Roman soldiers traveled in groups they did not (I'm assuming here I don't know for sure) take women or other people along with them and they only took the amount of soldiers that were assigned by their higher ups. In other words Roman soldiers were really only expected to do as they were ordered to (in modern times any disobedience to what they were ordered to do would have resulted in them having it put on a disaplinary record, but they did not do that sort of thing during Roman times meaning that they punished the soldiers in ways that I don't factually now about). Basically the key importance in the Roman soldier was to carry out the order he received and complete the order quickly and efficiently. However, they did recruit soldiers along the way as they were instructed and that was to help them benefit for taking over land. The commanding officer was the one who told the Roman soldiers what to do when they were traveling (simple tasks, not the task assigned by the current ruler) and the soldiers were expected to complete it. A few of the tasks assigned by the commanding officer could have been to cook, preform healing measures, and recruit more soldiers.</em>

<em>Hope this helps.</em>

<em>-Northstar</em>

5 0
3 years ago
What statement about pinochet's regime in chile is true?
kenny6666 [7]
The statement that Pinochet was a fascist is true because he took power with the aid of the CIA and killed Allende and repressed his people with the police  and military with heinous crimes like slitting their stomachs and throwing them into the ocean from helicopters and torturing them for their political views. He disappeared many men who were of progressive politics. 
7 0
3 years ago
How did the government try to help provide jobs
zaharov [31]

Answer:

yes

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Ronald Reagan made his first political appearence in 1964, giving a speech for which conservative Republican presidential candid
    6·1 answer
  • 2. What natural advantage did the kingdoms of West Africa have?
    13·1 answer
  • What caused the 1929 stock market crash?
    5·1 answer
  • to what degree was the Supreme court responsible for undoing the constitutional gains of reconstruction
    12·2 answers
  • 10) Who of the following was not a leader in the Confederation?
    12·1 answer
  • What was James K. Polk's dream for the united states
    10·1 answer
  • What was one effect of the Hartford Convention?
    9·2 answers
  • Which of the following did not lead napleon to his power in europe
    8·1 answer
  • Doc B: Why is Andrew Carnegie comfortable with the fact that some people are rich and some people
    11·1 answer
  • Who was the publisher of Galveston News who owned first telephone in Texas​
    9·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!