John O'Sullivan thought America represented democracy, liberty, and destined progression, upholding a unique global role to spread these values worldwide. This belief is part of the 'Manifest Destiny' concept, which he himself coined.
John O'Sullivan is a significant figure within American history, particularly known for his contributions towards defining the concept of American Exceptionalism. He advocated for the belief that America holds a unique mission to spread liberty and democracy around the world. His view of what America stands for is strongly connected to the idea of Manifest Destiny, a term he coined himself.
This phrase encapsulates O'Sullivan's belief that America is destined by God to spread its influence and democratic structures across the North American continent and perhaps even globally. He proposed that this expansion was not only justified but also virtually inevitable.
As such, for John O'Sullivan, America stands for liberty, democracy, and destined progression. It was his conviction that America had the superior social system, and its expansion would serve to usher the rest of the world into a more democratic and free era.
#SPJ6
Correct answers:
Context/detail:
Public outrage in the US against the Germans swept the nation following the sinking of the British ocean liner, Lusitania -- but that happened before 1917. When a German U-boat (submarine) sank the Lusitania in May, 1915, over 1,000 persons were killed, including more than 100 Americans. The passenger liner was targeted by the Germans because they suspected weapons were being shipped to Britain in the cargo hold of the ship.
Germany managed to stave off American entry into the war at the time by pledging to stop submarine attacks. But a couple years later they resumed such attacks, and there was also an intercepted telegram (the "Zimmerman Telegram") that showed Germany was trying to secure Mexico as an ally against the United States.
In 1917, the US declared war on Germany in response.
A. New trade and economic opportunities.
Answer:
i will work on this give me a minute
Explanation:
The debate over renaming monuments and parks like Nathan Bedford Forrest State Park relates to historical memory and education. The decision depends on how we view the purpose of such public spaces, whether they are to honor the named individuals or serve as reminders of history.
The issue of renaming historical monuments and parks that are currently named after individuals with a racist past, such as the Nathan Bedford Forrest State Park in Tennessee, resides in the broader context of historical memory and education. Major General Nathan Bedford Forrest, under whom Southern forces executed African American Union defenders rather than taking them prisoner, is a contentious figure.
Those who argue for preservation of these names emphasize the necessity to remember all aspects of history, even those that are uncomfortable, as to ensure that we learn from past mistakes. However, opponents suggest the renaming or removal of these landmarks as a means of no longer commemorating figures that instigated and upheld racial discrimination. They argue it's part of a necessary process of social reconciliation and change that acknowledges the wrongdoing of these individuals.
Ultimately, it comes down to a question of the primary function of public memorials and sites. If the purpose is viewed as honouring the person, it would be hard to justify maintaining the name of someone with a racist history. If, instead, it is seen as a means of historical education, then it could be argued that renaming or removal could erase a vital teaching tool about a regrettable part of our past.
#SPJ3
Answer:
From life after death to the benefits of worldly living.