Safety reasons is not a reason why nations conquered and created empires in the lands.
These nations conquered lands for different reasons
- For economic reasons. They conquered lands because of trade reasons and also to get the raw materials that were in these areas
- Religious reasons. The spread of Christianity was a reason for colonization
- Military reasons, The colonists arrived in America to escape warfare in their own countries.
- Philosophical ideologies was also a reason
- Political reasons was also part of the reasons for colonization
Read more on brainly.com/question/2074154?referrer=searchResults
The correct answer is C) He said the USSR would not give in because the US was being unfair.
Khrushchev responded to President Kennedy's demands saying that the USSR would not give in because the US was being unfair.
We are talking about the tense moments between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cuban Missiles Crisis of October 1962. Indeed, Khrushchev sent a strong letter to Kennedy on October 24, 1962, stating that <em>"What would it mean to agree to these demands? It would mean guiding oneself in one’s relations with other countries not by reason, but by submitting to arbitrariness. You are no longer appealing to reason, but wish to intimidate us."</em>
Those were the difficult years of the Cold War in which the United States and the Soviet Union fought in the arms race and later on the space race. There were many moments were tensions were so high that the world was on the brink of another war.
The correct answer for this question is this one: "D Britain and the Cunard line were humiliated when Germans had captured the trophy for the fastest transatlantic crossing." That is not a motivation for the Cunard line to build the lusitania.
Hope this helps answer your question and have a nice day ahead.
Answer:
Things that relate or denote to the stone age.
example- old stone sculptures
The stone age was when primitive stones were used for things about 2.5 million years.
How did great statesmen such as Henry Clay, John C. Calhoun, and Daniel Webster help keep national harmony?
Henry Clay, John C. Calhoun, and Daniel Webster were three senators that dominated US politics in 1812. They were responsible for many compromises during a time of instability because of the issue of slavery. Clay was responsible for the Missouri Compromise and for the Compromise Tariff of 1833. Calhoun defended that the Federal Government should protect slavery so the southern states could feel comfortable staying in the Union. Daniel Webster accepted Calhoun’s proposal, he pleaded with northerners to accept the south state's demands for the sake of the Union.
Can there be true harmony when compromising on a moral issue such as slavery? Why or why not?
Today is not possible to comprehend true harmony with the moral issue as slavery. But morality was not an issue in that time and they opted to remain a Union than to deal with the slavery “problem”. The problem was that this issue became bigger and bigger until it became the main problem of the nation, leading to the Civil War. This way. Lincoln took the matter as the main problem and objective of the War.
