<span>The man who tried
to discourage Ishmael and <span>Queequeg was Elijah.
Elijah was introduced as the man who was strange, shabbily dressed and the one
who was suddenly in the picture trying to tell them about the journey to Pequod.
He asked if Ishmael and his mate belonged to the “ship”. Ishmael asked for
confirmation if the ship he was referring to was the one going to Pequod.
Elijah tried to discourage them by asking questions regarding whether what will
happen to their souls if they will continue to sign up for the ship who was led
by Ahab. Elijah said that to sign for Ahab’s ship meant that they have to sign
their souls away. Elijah in the story was depicted as unwilling to say to
Ishmael and Queequeg </span> straight out what he saw in his prophecies regarding
the ship and its crew.</span>
Both freedom of religion and freedom of press, i believe.
I hope this helps you.
The correct answer is:
A) and B).
Mass production allowed weapons to be made faster than ever before, including new ones such as moveable machine guns, choline gas, flamethrowers, zeppelins, and torpedoes. At the same time, vehicles such as tanks, planes, and cars were also mass produced, and trench railways were a military adaptation of the railway technology to the problem of keeping soldiers supplied during the static trench warfare phase of World War I.
I agree with Pavlov that Nicholas and Alexandra were not suited by personality to be rulers of a country such as Russia. In that sense, they contributed to the start of the Revolution;however, there were other factors at work, because the forces that led to the Revolution happening had been developing for years in Russia, long before the birth of Nicholas II, even. So these factors seem to have been more at work than Alexandra's personality and actions in causing the Revolution. Also, Queen Mary, King George V and the British royal family were constituentional monarchs, it must be kept in mind, which is rather different than being an autocrat like Nicholas II was, or an autocrat's consort, as Alexandra was. I think Nicholas would have made an excellant constitutional monarch, but he wasn't suited to be an autocrat. So the difference that the Romanovs, especially Nicholas and Alexandra had a lot of power, whereas the British royal family actually had very little power must be borne in mind, although it's true that Alexandra's personality and attitude was likely not suited to even being the consort of a constituentional monarch, and also Nicholas II was not a good autocrat.
<span>At the start of Franklin Roosevelt's presidency he was a strong and outspoken isolationist, as were most of the American citizens. Later in his presidency Roosevelt decide that it was more important to fight for democracy than to keep America out of foreign conflicts. Many Americans were in favor of isolationism after America's controversial involvement in World War I, a conflict which cost hundreds of thousands of American lives in Europe in the midst of a war that did not directly concern American interests. </span>