It is reliant on the intensity of the attack as well as the power of the attacking nation.
some countries have been attacked and literally never fought back but surrendered if the attacking nation is more powerful in terms of military power.
in case the intensity of the attack can be absorbed, a country can also opt for diplomacy as war is the ultimate sanction in international relation.
in case the country feels it has the capacity to protect its sovereignty then fighting back is the only option.
another way to look at it would be one of the most difficult issues in foreign policy is deciding when the United States should exercise military force. Most people think that military force may be used if a vital national interest of the United States is threatened. The difficulty lies in getting people to agree on what constitutes a vital national interest.
Almost everyone would agree that an attack by a foreign country on the United States threatens a vital interest. Many also would think a vital interest threatened if a country attacked a nation that we had signed a security agreement with. Disagreements emerge when the threat involves the free flow of a precious commodity, such as oil. They also surface over situations that do not pose an immediate threat to U.S. security but could imperil it in the future, such as when a region becomes unstable and the instability may lead to wider conflicts. Another area of debate opens over human rights and humanitarian efforts. The United States is the most powerful democratic nation on Earth. Does that mean we always have a vital interest in promoting human rights and democracy? Or, should we stay out of the affairs of other nations unless they threaten other of our national interests?
Another issue arises over how the United States should exercise military force. Some argue that America should never act unilaterally, but should only act with others, allies or particularly with the United Nations. They believe America has a strong interest in upholding international law. Others agree that it is appropriate to act in coalitions, but they think demanding it in every circumstance would paralyze America’s role as a world leader.
The verb is past participle so that would be option A.
The best correction of the error is the sentence <em>Because the last train is leaving the station, it is definitely time to get on board.</em>
<em />
Explanation:
A comma splice, also referred to as a comma fault, is a mistake made when a comma is used to connect two independent clauses without the use of a conjunction. The given sentence can be split into two independent clauses:
- The last train is leaving the station.
- It is time to get on board.
The best correction is the choice C) <em>Because the last train is leaving the station, it is definitely time to get on board</em>, because it is the only choice that has the same meaning as the original sentence. <em>Because</em> is a subordinating conjunction that shows a cause-and-effect relationship between a subordinate clause and the main clause. The subordinate (dependent) clause in the choice C is <em>Because the last train is leaving the station. </em>The train leaving is a cause of what is stated in the independent (main) clause: <em>it is definitely time to get on board. </em>Conjunctions used in other choices don't have this meaning.
Learn more about clauses here: brainly.com/question/1233339
#LearnWithBrainly
Answer:
cons are:
*it may lead to genetic defects
*it limits genetic diversity
*over population
*negative side affects
*unfavorable diversity
pros:
*you have a potential to live longer
*tackling and defeating illness becomes easier
Explanation:
if you need some pros on it just tell me!
<em>~Roma~</em>
Context clues are hints that an author gives to help define a difficult or unusual word. The clue may appear within the same sentence as the word to which it refers, or it may follow in a preceding sentence. Because most of one’s vocabulary is gained through reading, it is important that you be able to recognize and take advantage of context clues.
There are at least four kinds of context clues that are quite common: 1) a synonym (or repeat context clue) which appears in that sentence; 2) anantonym (or contrast context clue) that has the opposite meaning, which can reveal the meaning of an unknown term; 3) an explanation for an unknown word is given (adefinition context clue) within the sentence or in the sentence immediately preceding; and 4) specific examples (an example context clue) used to define the term.
There may also be word-part context clues in which a common prefix, suffix, or root will suggest at least part of the meaning of a word. A general sense context clue lets the reader puzzle out a word meaning from whatever information is available – and this is the most common kind of context clue. Others describe context clues in three ways: 1) semantic or meaning clues, e.g., When reading a story about cats, good readers develop the expectation that it will contain words associated with cats, such as “tail,” “purr,” “scratch,” and “whiskers”; 2) syntactic or word order clues where the order of the words in a sentence can indicate that a missing word must be (for example, a verb); and 3) picture clues where illustrations help with the identification of a word.
