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
Ostrovityanka [42]
3 years ago
5

Why had Lenin been imprisoned by the Russian government?

History
1 answer:
maria [59]3 years ago
4 0


still need the answer I have it


You might be interested in
The Constitution gives the federal goverment many important duties: making laws, raising money and deciding how to
Mama L [17]

Answer:

National defense is the priority job of the national government.

National defense is the only mandatory function of the national government. Most of the powers granted to Congress are permissive in nature. Congress is given certain authorities but not required by the Constitution to exercise them. For example, Article One, Section Eight gives Congress power to pass a bankruptcy code, but Congress actually did not enact bankruptcy laws until well into the 19th century.

But the Constitution does require the federal government to protect the nation. Article Four, Section Four states that the “United States shall guarantee to every State a republican form of government and shall protect each of them against invasion.” In other words, even if the federal government chose to exercise no other power, it must, under the Constitution, provide for the common defense.

National defense is exclusively the function of the national government. Under our Constitution, the states are generally sovereign, which means that the legitimate functions of government not specifically granted to the federal government are reserved to the states. But Article One, Section 10 does specifically prohibit the states, except with the consent of Congress, from keeping troops or warships in time of peace or engaging in war, the only exception being that states may act on their own if actually invaded. (This was necessary because, when the Constitution was written, primitive forms of communication and transportation meant that it could take weeks before Washington was even notified of an invasion.)

The great irony of our time is that the bigger the federal government has become, the less well it has performed its priority function of providing for the national defense. For example, Congress spent $787 billion in the “stimulus” bill last year, yet not a dime of it was spent on military procurement or modernization—despite the fact that America is in greater danger today than it has been at any time since Communism was threatening Europe in the late 1940s.

The Heritage Foundation has written extensively on the risks facing America and the state of our defenses. Here is a brief summary of the salient facts.

America has no strategy for victory in the war on terrorism—we’re not even calling it a war anymore—and the momentum has shifted to the terrorists. The outcome in Afghanistan is in doubt. If the terrorists succeed there, they can reconstitute their safe havens, plan further attacks on the United States, and threaten to gain control of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal.

The Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism, a bipartisan commission with the status of the 9/11 Commission, found unanimously that the terrorists would “more likely than not” develop and use a weapon of mass destruction against a Western city by 2013. The Director of National Intelligence publicly agreed with that assessment.

The international regime for controlling nuclear weapons is broken. Pakistan has a substantial and growing nuclear arsenal. Its intelligence organization has been penetrated by the Islamists. Both North Korea and Iran are steadily increasing the range, payload, and accuracy of their ballistic missiles. No one seriously believes that the Iranians will voluntarily stop their nuclear program or that the West (except perhaps the Israelis) will use force to stop them.

According to our Pacific commander, China is increasing its military strength far more quickly than our intelligence predicted. The Chinese have already acquired an arsenal of advanced fighters and missiles that threatens to deny the American Navy access to the Taiwan Strait. They are building as many as five submarines per year and have established a modern submarine base on the island of Hainan. They have announced plans to build a variety of the ships necessary to field a blue water capability.  

The American military is significantly weaker than it was at the end of the Cold War.  Most of our tankers are equally as old; they will not be replaced, if at all, until the 2030s. The Department of Defense wants to close our most modern cargo aircraft production line and will close our most sophisticated fighter line. The missile defense budget has been cut, and according to most reports, the Obama Administration will cut modernization budgets even further.

As important as it is for the federal government to restrain itself from interfering where it does not belong, it is equally important that the government perform its constitutionally mandated function of providing for the national defense.

America’s global influence is being checked and rolled back, and even the homeland is no longer safe from attack.

The situation can still be recovered, but only if our leaders understand their duty, regain their confidence, and reenergize the defense of freedom here and abroad.

7 0
3 years ago
Who institutes or created government in the declaration of independence
LenaWriter [7]

Answer:

Man/people

Explanation:

In the Declaration of Independence, it states the following:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. "

In conclusion, the answer to your question is Men are the ones who institute the government and it is the right of the people to institute a new government or to abolish it.

8 0
3 years ago
Explain how the Soviet declination of the World Bank illustrated a fundamental conflict at the heart
Arada [10]

Answer: Concerns over the Cold War affected these two countries' space endeavors.

After the Soviet Union successfully launched the first satellite, Sputnik, into space, the US was concerned that the Soviet Union would utilize this technology to launch nuclear weapons from orbit.

Explanation: Following World War II, the Cold War was a period of geopolitical tension between the United States and the Soviet Union, as well as their respective allies, the Western Bloc and the Eastern Bloc.

8 0
1 year ago
The nickname for President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative was
Tems11 [23]

Answer:
President Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative was to shoot down missiles in the air.

Explanation:

To be honest, I don't know what the question is so...

The project was an anti-ballistic missile program that was designed to shoot down nuclear missiles in space.

3 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Use the following quote from the North American Free Trade Agreement (1993), to answer the question below:
Dimas [21]

Based on the quote, critics of NAFTA might have claimed that:

A) Mexican workers would be unfairly taken advantage of

<h3>What can be deduced about the critics of NAFTA from the text?</h3>

The critics of NAFTA believe that Mexico was not as strong as the other countries who entered the trade agreement so the possibility that they will be taken advantage of was there.

Having read the above statement from the 1993 agreement of NAFTA, we can see that the reference to the United Mexican states must have proved that the union was needed to stand side by side with the American and Canadian states.

Critics might have believed that Mexico was vulnerable and could be unfairly taken advantage of in the deal.

Learn more about NAFTA here:

brainly.com/question/27372794

#SPJ1

5 0
1 year ago
Other questions:
  • What was Frederick Douglass’ main cause after he returned to the United States from England?
    9·1 answer
  • Help asap please! it’s not A!
    13·1 answer
  • After farmers in the Fertile Crescent developed techniques to transfer water, people no longer needed to____
    11·1 answer
  • In what year is the us determined to have at least 50% spanish spoken
    14·2 answers
  • Put the events in the correct order from first to last stamp act,
    10·1 answer
  • Why was Richard Nixon going to be impeached? Do you agree/disagree with Gerald Ford who issued a presidential pardon for Nixon?
    11·2 answers
  • True/False. At first President Nixon claimed that U.S. troops had not invaded Cambodia.
    9·1 answer
  • Why were the colonists upset with the new taxes that Great Britain pass prior to the American Revolution
    8·2 answers
  • How old was Franklin when he was an apprentice in his brother's printing shop? 28 16 12. 52​
    13·2 answers
  • In 35 words or fewer, come up with one possible historical question you could ask about the on this page.
    15·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!