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
Paraphin [41]
3 years ago
9

When was the tipping point at which the United States could no longer be considered an isolated nation? At what point could the

United States no longer avoid involvement in World War II?
(pls put in paragraph form)
History
2 answers:
777dan777 [17]3 years ago
8 0
Hi buddy I’m so excited have to get back in the shower
Degger [83]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

One of the tipping points was when the Nazis invaded Poland and started moving in on other countries.  We sent troops out to the Europe area to help stop the Nazis and push them back into Germany.  Another time when we couldn't avoid getting involved was when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.  This was because we had to defend ourselves from the bombing.  This was considered another act of war, so we returned the message.  The United States bombed Hiroshima as a warning for Japan to surrender.  The Japanese refused so we bombed another one of their cities.  They still refused and we were getting ready to make another bomb when they finally unconditionally surrendered.  From there, we took their armed forces and guns.  We protected them and signed a peace treaty.  The tipping point at which the United States could no longer be considered an isolated nation was when we got involved with World War Two in 1940.

Explanation:

I have had a question similar to this, so If I'm wrong, I'm very sorry.  This question may be asking about a different time when the UNited States wasn't considered an isolated nation.

You might be interested in
How did the american public respond to the growinf conflict and tensions in europe and asia?
Stolb23 [73]

Answer:

they turned inwards

Explanation:

until they got involved in germany and France and japan....

5 0
3 years ago
Why did the anti federalists not want a national bank?
Dafna1 [17]

Because that would mean the government was too strong which was what they were against. They preferred a small government

5 0
3 years ago
1
OLga [1]

Answer:

Crime and economics: a critical review of the economic explanations of crime

 

Luis David Ramírez de Garay *

 

* Doctor of Sociology with a specialty in Crime, Violence and Comparative Studies from Bielefeld University in Germany. He has a master's degree in political sociology at the Mora Institute and a degree in sociology from the Faculty of Political and Social Sciences of the UNAM. As of January 2013, he is a professor-researcher at the Center for Sociological Studies at the Colegio de México. Previously, he worked as a consultant for the United Nations and for the private sector in Mexico.

 

Resume

The link between crime and the economy is wide, full of edges and with interesting theoretical and empirical problems. For this reason, this article seeks to offer an overview of the scope and limits of this traditional nexus. For this, the explanations from sociology, economics and criminology were organized into three groups: criminal rationality, political economy of crime and economic deprivation. Each group was reviewed in the light of its origins, its basic arguments, its theoretical limits and its most relevant empirical problems; with special attention to the results that the investigation has had in the comparative study of crime. In conclusion, the text provides a clearer perspective on the status of economic explanations of crime;on the lines to follow to study the economic characteristics of crime; and an extensive Bibliography that will serve to guide future research.

Keywords : crime, economics, criminology, sociology of crime, political economy of crime, economic deprivation.

 

Abstract

The link between crime and the economy is wide and with appealing theoretical and empirical problems. In view of this the present paper offers a review of the advantages and the limits of this almost traditional link. For this purpose, different approaches from the sociology, the economy and the criminology were selected and classified into three groups: rationality, political economy and economic deprivation. The review of each group included its origins and its basic arguments so as its more important theoretical limits and empirical problems. To gain a better insight, the applicability of each approach to the comparative study of crime was also considered.As a result this text presents a wider and critical view of the actual status of the economic explanations of crime and an accurate map of the most important research puzzles related with the economic characteristics of crime. It also offers an extensive bibliography to guide students' interests and future research.

Key words : crime, economy, criminology, crime sociology, crime political economy, economic deprivation.

 

Introduction

A review of the relationship between the economy and crime

The interest in explaining crime based on economic conditions has been present for a long time in the history of social thought. In the 19th century, before the appearance of the social sciences, a proto-meaning of the relationship between economic phenomena with the emergence of the concept of deviant behavior can already be found. Deviance or abnormal behavior appeared as social problems alongside the industrialization processes of western Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries. The abrupt changes in the social structure and economic production were accompanied by the rapid growth of urban centers, the emergence of urban crime, and the growth of the so-called new “dangerous classes”.These suboptimal products of industrialization quickly became the object of study of the social thought of the time, thus becoming the first link between economic processes and criminality.

Towards the end of the 19th century, this link was already occupying an important place on the agenda of an incipient but modern social science. In

5 0
3 years ago
Answer True or False
Nimfa-mama [501]

Answer:

FALSE BIG FAT FALSE

Explanation:

4 0
3 years ago
Key Characteristic of:
AleksandrR [38]
I’m not sure if I am doing it correct but this is what my answers based on the question and what I understood from it


Winston: Independence

Franklin: confidence

Dwight: Faithfulness

Adolf: Dishonest

Hideki: Decisive
4 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What forms the border between the piedmont and coastal plain?
    11·1 answer
  • What was the main message of the resolution made by the ladies of Edenton?
    12·2 answers
  • Help !!! Urgent! Please.
    6·1 answer
  • the dred scott case claimed the missouri compromise was unconstitutional because congress was not allowed to
    14·1 answer
  • Which of the following names an NAACP member who became the first African American Supreme Court justice?​
    10·2 answers
  • What does Paine say about the argument that Britain has defended the colonies in the past?
    5·2 answers
  • 10. The states can ask the Department of Health and Human Services for grants to
    10·1 answer
  • What danger did scientists face for telling the truth about the world ?
    7·1 answer
  • What does Gdp measure, and what are the four components of gdp?​
    12·1 answer
  • What is the meaning of the term pre-Columbian?
    10·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!