The question is based on your own opinion,I cannot give you direct answer,but here's some idea for you.
yes: the war was caused by extreme nationalism,where the nations had the desire to be strong with and they seek for national glory. It started with this concept,they began to ally,to expand,soon running into conflicts,eventually the scale enlarged to a world war. Yet the chase for national glory was originally to bring a better nation,in the end it just cause loss and destruction. War is not necessary to be started in orfer to gain national glory. Were the nations to back down,it could be avoided. You might want to expand more on the destruction it caused if you choose yes.
No: In spite of WWI did cause a lot of destruction,it pushes the history of human foward. You could talk more on the things achieved and changed in WWI,such as the fall of empires,the uprise of women rights,the establishment of national cooperation system(League of nations), and the develope of more destructive weapons.
hope it helps!
Water gates when he buged his running foe phones
I want to say the answer is C , if not it is A.
The reason why journalists called the Alaska purchase of 1867 "Seward's folly" is because it was the idea of Senator William Seward to purchase the territory, and it was thought that this was a waste of money since it was so distant and seemingly uninhabitable.
Explanation:
They questioned why the United States would want a vast tundra of snow and ice distant from the continental borders.
The Treaty with Russia was allocated and confirmed by Secretary of State William Seward and Russian Minister to the United States Edouard de Stoeckl. Authorities of the deal to purchase Alaska called it "Seward's Folly” or “Seward's Icebox." Complaint to the purchase of Alaska receded with the Klondike Gold Strike in 1896.
