<u>Options A, C, E.</u>
<u>Here is why:</u>
It lost interest in progressive causes.
Before and during World War I, many people who were progressive supported the war. Woodrow Wilson, who was the president of the United States at the time, made it seem like World War I was the "war of all wars" and it would end violence around the world. This seems very contradicting, but progressives believed in what he was saying along with other citizens. All of this caused progressivism to fall after World War I, as people started to realize the cruelty and death that happened during the war and associated being progressive with wanting war.
~
It wanted to return to a normal lifestyle.
After World War I was over, many American citizens just wanted to return to a normal lifestyle. World War I came with many casualties, hardships, and cost the United States a lot of money. Many people were tired and wanted to return back to normal and wanted to avoid another huge conflict. This caused the debate if whether or not the United States should back away from foreign affairs and even try to ignore them.
~
It was very concerned with the question of isolationism or internationalism.
Although some people in the United States wanted to back away from foreign affairs, isolationism and internationalism was always a question. Isolationism is the act of ignoring and not getting involved in foreign affairs and wars, even if a friendly foreign country needed help. Some people wanted this, as they didn't want anymore American casualties and debt and wanted to always remain in a normal and comfortable lifestyle. Internationalism is the exact opposite and is the act of getting involved in everything important in outside affairs and occurrences. Many people argued that this was correct, as it was important that America evolved with the country to exert and bring peace and prevent wrong doings, harmful ideologies and some countries from becoming too powerful.
It would be that "(B) Only Congress has the power to declare war" was not part of the 1973 War Powers <span>Act, since this had already been established in the Constitution. </span>
The leaders which were key to the independence movement in South America were b) Simon Bolivar and d) Jose de San Martin. Jose de San Martin "was an Argentine general and the prime leader of the southern part of South America's successful struggle for independence from the Spanish Empire." Simon Bolivar was "a Venezuelan military and political leader who played an instrumental role in the establishment of Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Peru, and Colombia as sovereign states, independent of Spanish rule."
The English had a poor relation with the natives because of the distinct cultural differences.
<span />
Answer: C.) British officers were often forced to serve in subordinate roles to their colonial counterparts.
For the most part, this was the opposite. The frustration was on the part of the colonial forces as they were often forced to serve in subordinate roles.
The clash of command was a serious problem for the militias. British officers generally regarded themselves as higher than colonial ones, which colonial officers considered an offence. The solution was to divide each militia unit into smalled commands, and to recommisision militia officers with a rank of captain and above with a rank of captain. This demoted all the high-ranking colonial officers and placed them as subordinate to British captains. The new system was extremely unpopular with colonials and caused many of them to resign from the military.
