France is the answer. Hope that helped!
Answer:
There is a lot of debate about how much war and medicine have influenced each other. Sometimes war adds to medical knowledge by drawing attention to a particular injury, such as the loss of a limb. Military medicine has also influenced how medicine is done. But sometimes innovations in military medicine result in better ways to treat an injury or advance fields of medicine, such as plastic surgery, psychiatry and emergency medicine. Triage, the system of prioritising multiple casualties, has been adopted for all emergency medicine ever since the First World War.
For some people, the physical and mental damage caused by war lasts a lifetime. Medical teams have had to develop methods to help them adjust to living with disability and illness. The young men who signed up to fight in 1914 had little preparation or support for dealing with the stress and trauma of modern warfare. Some refused to fight and were mistakenly accused of cowardice. During the First World War, 309 British soldiers were executed, many of whom are now believed to have had mental health conditions at the time.
Explanation:
Answer:
Mongol leader Genghis Khan,
After uniting the nomadic tribes of the Mongolian plateau, he conquered huge chunks of central Asia and China.
I would be hard to argue that the Renaissance even impacted everyone directly.
The best answer to this is that the Renaissance created a period of social and economic upheaval that changed people's lives. Change is not always good and people were uprooted and put into new situations as a result.
Numerous originalists would reply "yes," on the grounds that legal audit isn't listed as an energy of the Judicial Branch in the Constitution.
Then again, the legal audit was at that point a setup training when the Constitution was composed, and the Framers, a significant number of whom were attorneys with information of court method, didn't expressly disallow it. Article III makes no say of how the Judicial Branch should practice statute. The absence of direction has a tendency to infer the Framers deliberately permitted adaptability and a level of independence in deciding the courts' operation. In the event that they had no aim for the Judicial Branch to go about as a mind the energy of the other two branches, they could have set more unequivocal rules for the legal to take after.
