Definitely not. Mount Rushmore is granite so it erodes roughly 1 inch every 10,000 years. In 500,000 years it is predicted that the face would lose some of their definition, but Mount Rushmore could last for 7 MILLION years
As a result of the Yazoo Land Fraud, the western boundary of Georgia was moved from the Mississippi River to the Chattahoochee River.
//I already took the test and this was correct//
Hope I helped :)
Answer:
true
Explanation:
the founder and first king of Wessex. Egbert remained in exile in Francia but Charlemagne seems to have supported Egbert's bid for power and he became king of Wessex.
This is not a fair assessment because it is a generalization about the other presidents due to an event that happened a long time ago and that does not involve them.
The Vietnam War was a warlike confrontation that occurred in the territory of Vietnam in which two sides faced each other. On one side were the North Vietnamese who had a Communist ideology, while the South Vietnamese had a Capitalist ideology.
This confrontation involved several foreign countries such as the Soviet Union and the United States. In the case of the United States, many American citizens rejected the idea of involving the country in an alien confrontation because it had not affected American interests.
The president of the United States did not take into account citizen requests not to get involved in this confrontation and lied to be able to get involved in it. From that moment the credibility of the government is lower.
The credibility of the next government was also affected because now citizens believe that the rulers are lying. This conception is wrong and unfair because the management of all the presidents and public servants cannot be generalized due to the wrong action of one of them.
Therefore, I believe that it is not a fair evaluation that is expressed by the war veteran Karl Marlantes because he is generalizing about all the rulers because of what one of them has done.
Learn more in: brainly.com/question/11375126?
It was the
strategy of Attrition.<span>Washington saw, particularly
after the fall of New York in 1776, that, despite the fact that his little
armed force couldn't guard every one of the urban areas in America, its
presence only guaranteed that the revolution would proceed. Without a genuine
normal armed force, he stayed away from any definitive conflict with the expert
English forces in favor of a strategy of attrition, fighting just when the
chances were unmistakably to support him.</span>
