I would also have to say the answer is B. "New World" is how Europeans of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries referred to the contents of North and South America.
Because the land that Christopher Columbus landed on was only inhabited by Indians (not from India), they called the new territory the new world. They had "accidently" discovered land that they didn't know existed.
Hopefully this helps.
B) Davis was being impatient.
C) The Southern blockade was working.
D) He had a much larger army.
Answer:
The North had far more men.
Explanation:
Not only was the South unable to replenish its economic infrastructure, but it could not maintain a strong army. Mounting casualties drained the Confederacy of its manpower. Not counting slaves, the South could only boast about 6 million people, compared to more than three times that in the North.
This was part of the reason Robert E. Lee risked invading the North.
He realized the Confederacy could not continue fighting forever.
Answer:
He had military experience during the French and Indian War and was known to be a man of character.
Explanation:
took the test (k12)
President Bill Clinton strongly opposed the ousting of Aristide from presidency in Haiti, arguing for his reinstatement. This was based on upholding democratic values and rejecting military coups. Eventually, in 1994, Aristide was reinstated, partly due to Clinton's intervention.
The given question pertains to President Clinton’s stand on Aristide’s oust from power in Haiti. Jean-Bertrand Aristide, a populist priest, was elected president of Haiti in 1990. However, he was soon ousted from power in a military coup. During his presidency, Bill Clinton took a strong stand against this, arguing for Aristide’s reinstatement. Clinton's stance was based on the principle of upholding democratic processes and preventing military coups. In 1994, under pressure from the international community, including a forceful intervention by the United States under the Clinton administration, Aristide was restored to power.
#SPJ6
During the research process, however, the student finds very little research that supports her claim and much evidence that contradicts it. Which of the following would be the most appropriate revision for her thesis?
The options of the question are, A) Although only few scientist claim that bee colony collapse poses only a short-term food-production problem, this clearly must be the truth. B) Bee colony collapse is such a new development that not a lot time has passed to allow enough skeptics to develop evidence against its potential threat. C) Once bees have stopped dying in sufficient quantity, there will be ample evidence to support a claim that bee colony collapse is an invention of the human imagination. D) while someone believe the bees will recover, albeit slowly, it is becoming increasingly clear that our food crops may be in danger.
The correct answer is D) while someone believes the bees will recover, albeit slowly, it is becoming increasingly clear that our food crops may be in danger.
The most appropriate revision on her thesis would be “while someone believes the bees will recover, albeit slowly, it is becoming increasingly clear that our food crops may be in danger.”
Although the student found little research that supports her claim and much evidence that contradicted, the most appropriate revision on her thesis would be that while someone believes the bees will recover, albeit slowly, it is becoming increasingly clear that our food crops may be in danger. This is correct because the text says that food production as we know is not well supported and will end due to the collapse of bee colonies.
As Kiev increased its trade and contacts around the region, the most significant result was that
Kiev became the center of cultural exchange.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
This statement contrasts with the laissez-faire approach of the Gilded Age in that President Woodrow Wilson had a totally different approach to guarantee fair competition between businesses and industries in the United States. He believed that the role of the government was to create the proper conditions and legislation that allowed all of the American citizens to grow, prosper, and thrive, having no preferences in the application of the law.
Let's have in mind that during the Gilded Age, the Robber-Barons created multi-millionary industries that eliminated the competition and formed monopolies, as was the case of the Standard Oil company of John F. Rockefeller or the Steel company of Andrew Carnegie.
Wilson's assertion is at odds with the laissez-faire approach of the Gilded Age because he advocated for government intervention to ensure fair interaction between individuals and trusts, whereas laissez-faire proposed minimal government interference.
Wilson's statement contrasts significantly with the laissez-faire approach of the Gilded Age, which believed in minimum government intervention in the economy. Wilson argued that the government had a responsibility to intervene and protect individuals from the power of the trusts, large corporate entities that were prevalent during this time.
This underscores a key difference between laissez-faire capitalists who believe in unrestricted competition and minimal restrictions, and those who, like Wilson, argue for government regulation to achieve fair play and equality. This is a fundamental debate within economics and political theory that has persisted into the modern day.
#SPJ11