Why did the United States provide military assistance to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan during the 1980s?
Explain the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan in the 1990s, and why the regime became an enemy of the United States. In light of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, do you think the United States could have adopted a different policy toward Afghanistan in the 1980s?

Using the map to determine, the true statement is most European nations are part of the European Union. Thus, option (D) is correct.

The European Union (EU) is a political and economic union which was basically created to serve it's member nations. The EU was established  in 1993, and its main purpose is to promote peace, stability, and economic prosperity in Europe.

The EU has its own currency, the euro, and its institutions include the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and the European Court of Justice.

Thus, the ideal selection is option D.

Learn more about European Union here:

https://brainly.com/question/497078

#SPJ1

The complete question might be:

Use the map to determine which statement is true.

Most eastern European nations are candidate countries.

All of the Western European nations are part of the European Union.

All European nations want to be part of the European Union.

Most European nations are part of the European Union.

Points earned on this question:

Answer:

Christopolis is not the name of an actual city or organ. However, "Christo" is a Greek word meaning "anointed one" or "messiah", and "polis" means "city". Therefore, "Christopolis" could be interpreted as a hypothetical city named after Jesus Christ.

Monrovia is the capital city of Liberia, a country located in West Africa. Monrovia was named after James Monroe, the fifth President of the United States, who played a significant role in the founding of Liberia in the early 19th century. The city serves as the political, economic, and cultural center of Liberia, and is home to several important institutions such as the University of Liberia and the National Museum of Liberia.

Liberia is a West African country bordered by Sierra Leone, Guinea, Côte d'Ivoire, and the Atlantic Ocean. Founded in 1847 as a republic for freed American slaves, it boasts a rich heritage, beautiful beaches, dense rainforests, and diverse wildlife. Home to over 4 million people, Liberia's capital city is Monrovia.

Several descriptions are shared by Huey Long's "Share Our Wealth" mission and President Roosevelt's "New Deal": their focus on fighting poverty and financial inequality.

Both initiatives catered to those enduring the Great Depression with proposals of government inducement in the economy, investments in public sector projects, reforms of banking and finance sectors, higher taxes levied on wealthy class and business entities, plus incentives intended to develop the economy and generate jobs.

Nevertheless, these plans been heavily criticized for being too unrefined or extreme in their outlooks.

Read more on Huey Long here:https://brainly.com/question/27335556

#SPJ1

The best description of the Battle of Bunker Hill was C The British attacked head-on and eventually won the hills, but only after losing more than a thousand men.

On June 17, 1775, the Battle of Bunker Hill occurred during the early stages of the American Revolution. The British Army was commanded by General William Howe in a frontal attack on a fortified position atop Breed's Hill (previously known as Bunker Hill) in Charlestown, Massachusetts.

The colonists were forced to abandon the hill after running out of ammunition, allowing the British to declare victory. While the British won the fight, the steep cost of their triumph and the persistence of the colonial resistance demonstrated that the colonists were a deadly opponent, laying the groundwork for the long and hard war that followed.

Find out more on Bunker Hill at https://brainly.com/question/15152623

#SPJ1

In my opinion, the Provisional Government's lack of legitimacy and failure to address the issues facing Russia made it vulnerable to a coup, which was eventually carried out by the Bolsheviks.

A provisional government, also known as an interim government, an emergency government, or a transitional government, is a governmental authority formed to handle a political transition in the case of a newly founded state or the collapse of the previous governing administration.

Accordingly, alluding to the Temporary Government of Russia in 1917, which was built up after the February Insurgency and gone before the Bolshevik government, one reason why it may not have been able to halt the Overthrow from happening is due to a need of prevalent bolster and authenticity.

Learn more about  Provisional Government here: https://brainly.com/question/29816979

#SPJ1

Perceptions of human variation have had a significant impact on the lives of people throughout history, often leading to discrimination, inequality, and prejudice against individuals who are perceived as different. One example of this can be seen in the treatment of people with albinism.

Albinism is a genetic condition that results in a lack of melanin, the pigment that gives color to the skin, hair, and eyes. In many societies, people with albinism have been stigmatized and discriminated against due to their appearance, which is often seen as abnormal or even supernatural.

In some cultures, people with albinism have been treated as outcasts or even killed for their body parts, which are believed to have magical or medicinal properties. This has led to widespread violence and discrimination against people with albinism in many parts of the world, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.

For example, in Tanzania, people with albinism have been targeted by witch doctors who believe that their body parts can bring good luck or cure diseases. This has led to a wave of brutal attacks, including the mutilation and murder of individuals with albinism, as well as the kidnapping of children for the purpose of selling their body parts.

To know more about variation

https://brainly.com/question/15621252

#SPJ1

Answer:

Appeasement was a policy adopted by European powers towards Hitler's actions in the 1930s, which involved giving in to his demands in an attempt to avoid war. The policy was motivated by the fear of another world war, given the devastation caused by World War I, and the belief that Hitler's demands were reasonable and could be satisfied without the need for military action.

One example of appeasement was the Munich Agreement of 1938, in which France and Great Britain agreed to let Germany annex the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia, with the hope that this would satisfy Hitler's territorial ambitions and prevent war. Another example was the Anschluss of Austria, in which Germany annexed Austria in 1938 without any significant opposition from other European powers.

The response of the leaders from France and Great Britain at the time was to adopt a policy of appeasement towards Hitler's aggressive actions. The French leader, Édouard Daladier, and the British Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, believed that appeasement would prevent another devastating war and that Hitler's territorial demands were reasonable.

However, this policy of appeasement ultimately failed, as Hitler continued to expand his territory and increase his military power. The invasion of Poland in 1939 finally led to the outbreak of World War II.

In hindsight, the world should have reacted differently to Hitler's actions in the 1930s. Instead of appeasement, a more firm and united response from European powers, particularly France and Great Britain, could have deterred Hitler and prevented the outbreak of war. For instance, economic sanctions or a military alliance could have been formed to counter Hitler's aggression. The lack of a strong and united response allowed Hitler to pursue his ambitions and ultimately led to the devastation of World War II.

Answer:

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict is a long-standing dispute between Israelis and Palestinians over territory and sovereignty in the Middle East. It has its roots in the early 20th century when Jewish immigrants began to settle in Palestine, then a part of the Ottoman Empire. The conflict has since escalated, with both sides claiming the same land and fighting for control over it.

The One State Solution is a proposed solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict that calls for a single state to be shared by Israelis and Palestinians. Supporters of this solution argue that it would allow both sides to live together peacefully, without the need for borders or walls. However, critics argue that this solution would be difficult to implement due to deep-seated cultural, religious, and political differences between the two sides.

The Two-State Solution is another proposed solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict that calls for the creation of two separate states, one for Israelis and one for Palestinians. Supporters of this solution argue that it would allow both sides to live in peace and would help to address many of the underlying issues that have fueled the conflict. However, critics argue that this solution would be difficult to implement due to issues such as the location of borders, the status of Jerusalem, and the rights of Palestinian refugees.

The pros of the One-State Solution include the potential for increased cooperation and understanding between Israelis and Palestinians. It would also eliminate the need for a divisive border, which has been a point of contention for both sides. However, the cons include the potential for ongoing conflict due to cultural and religious differences, as well as the difficulties associated with creating a shared government.

The pros of the Two-State Solution include the potential for both Israelis and Palestinians to have their own independent states. This would allow for greater self-determination and could help to reduce tensions between the two sides. However, the cons include the difficulty of creating a viable and sustainable Palestinian state, as well as the potential for ongoing conflict over issues such as borders and refugees.

Based on the readings, it is difficult to say which solution is best, as both have their pros and cons. Ultimately, the best solution will depend on the willingness of both sides to compromise and work towards a peaceful resolution.

Explanation:

The republicans would most likely to consider student loan forgiveness to be unfair.

However, those who prioritize personal responsibility, self-reliance, and avoidance of government interference in the economy are more likely to oppose student loan forgiveness.

Conversely, those who prioritize social justice, view student debt as a barrier to upward mobility and financial security, and support government intervention in order to ameliorate systemic issues within society will likely champion this cause.

Read more on student loan here:https://brainly.com/question/29332020

#SPJ1

Answer:

Portuguese soldiers came to Ethiopia in 1541 to help the Ethiopian emperor, Gelawdewos, fight against the Muslim Adal Sultanate, which was threatening Ethiopia's sovereignty. The Portuguese soldiers were led by Cristóvão da Gama, the son of the famous explorer Vasco da Gama. The Portuguese and Ethiopian forces were successful in defeating the Adal Sultanate in the Battle of Wayna Daga, which helped to secure Ethiopia's independence.

Explanation:

Answer:

b. unconstitutional

Answer:

a) Briefly explain ONE major difference between Bailey's and Patterson's interpretations. Bailey's interpretation emphasizes the importance of social context in shaping behavior, while Patterson's interpretation focuses on the role of reinforcement in behavior modification.

b) Briefly explain how someone supporting Bailey's interpretation could use ONE piece of evidence from the period between 1945 and 1955 not directly mentioned in the excerpt. For instance, they could point to the fact that during this period, the United States government implemented policies aimed at containing the spread of communism, both domestically and abroad. This could be seen as evidence supporting Baileys interpretation that the Cold War was a result of American imperialism and expansionism.

c) Briefly explain how someone supporting Patterson's interpretation could use ONE piece of evidence from the period between 1945 and 1955 not directly mentioned in the excerpt. For instance, someone supporting Patterson's interpretation could use the fact that during this period, African Americans continued to face discrimination and segregation in various aspects of their lives, such as education and housing. This evidence supports Patterson's argument that the civil rights movement was necessary to challenge and dismantle these unjust systems.

Explanation:

The sentence that best described Bunker Hill battle was C The British attacked head-on and eventually won the hills, but only after losing more than a thousand men.

On June 17, 1775, at the beginning of the American Revolution, the British Army, led by General William Howe, waged war against colonial militia on Breed's Hill in Charlestown, Massachusetts. This fortified point was frequently known as Bunker Hill.

In spite of their ammunition shortage and being outnumbered, the colonists managed to cause substantial harm to the English troops resulting in over a thousand casualties, with many officers among them. Nevertheless, due to limited supplies, the colonists evacuated the hill, enabling the British army to seize it, thus claiming triumph in the battle.

Find out more on Bunker Hill at https://brainly.com/question/15152623

#SPJ1

The choice to use the atomic bomb had additional political and strategic repercussions, such as the arms race and the Cold War, which influenced world politics for decades to come.

The author's choice to drop the atomic bomb had a significant impact on how war is fought, posing ethical dilemmas regarding the use of WMDs and the duty of leaders to safeguard civilians.

On August 6, 1945, Japan's Hiroshima was struck by the first atomic bomb. August 9, 1945, saw the detonation of the second bomb over Nagasaki. With the job achieved, the Japanese capitulated.

As  a result, the significance of the  Russia does the author not agree with are the aforementioned.

Learn more about on atomic bomb, here:

https://brainly.com/question/28739270

#SPJ1

Answer:

The KKK's organizational structure has MOST likely influenced its ability to survive as an active extremist group by making it easier for the group to withstand challenges. The KKK has a hierarchical structure with a centralized leadership that has enabled the group to withstand crackdowns by law enforcement and continue its activities in secret. The group's leadership structure has also made it easier to maintain secrecy, discipline, and loyalty among its members. Therefore, option (a) is the correct answer.

(1) A political party is an organized group of individuals with similar political beliefs and goals that seek to gain political power and influence through elections.

Proportional representation is a voting system in which seats in an elected body are allocated based on the proportion of votes received by a political party or candidate.

A "winner takes all" system is a voting system in which the candidate with the most votes wins the election, regardless of whether they receive a majority or not.

(2) A primary election is a preliminary round of voting where political parties choose their candidate for the general election. A general election is a national election where voters choose their representatives to hold public office.

(3) The Democratic Party tends to attract more voters who are non-white, female, less religious, more educated, and younger, while the Republican Party tends to attract more voters who are white, male, more religious, less educated, and older.

(4) Emphasis on civility, empathy, and collaboration in political discourse is needed to change the volatile political situation in the U.S. Politicians and voters need to prioritize the common good over party loyalty by listening and considering opposing viewpoints.

Learn more about general election here:

https://brainly.com/question/11185151

#SPJ1

When the Monarchy was brought back to power was known as the Restoration. The Option B.

The Restoration was a period after English Civil War and the Commonwealth period that was marked by the return of the monarchy with the restoration of King Charles II to the throne.

The monarchy was abolished during the Civil War and replaced with the Commonwealth of England which was a republic but with the Restoration, the monarchy regained its position as the dominant political institution in England although Parliament also retained significant power.

Read more about Restoration

brainly.com/question/12881158

#SPJ1

B. Spain was able to establish colonies in large areas of both continents.

Answer:Trench Warfare: Soldiers during World War I had to endure long periods of trench warfare, where they had to live in narrow, muddy, and rat-infested trenches. The constant threat of enemy fire, disease, and exhaustion made it difficult for them to maintain their physical and mental well-being.

Battle of the Somme: One of the bloodiest battles of World War I was the Battle of the Somme. On July 1, 1916, British forces launched an offensive against German lines. In just one day, over 19,000 British soldiers were killed, and many more were wounded. The battle lasted for months, and the total number of casualties on both sides exceeded one million.

Supplies and Logistics: In addition to the dangers of combat, soldiers during World War I had to deal with shortages of food, water, medical supplies, and ammunition. The logistical challenges of supplying troops in the front lines were enormous, and soldiers often had to go without basic necessities for days or even weeks at a time. This made their already challenging lives even more difficult, and many soldiers suffered from malnutrition and other health problems as a result.

Being a soldier during World War I was an arduous and challenging experience. One concrete detail was the grueling daily routine that soldiers endured, which included long marches, regular drills, and the constant threat of enemy attack. Another detail was the horrific conditions in the trenches, with soldiers having to contend with mud, rats, and disease. In battles, soldiers had to face terrifying weapons, such as gas attacks and machine guns, which could kill many in a matter of seconds. Supplies, such as food and ammunition, were also scarce, and soldiers often had to make do with limited resources. Additionally, the loss of friends and missing life back home added to the psychological burden that soldiers carried.

Explanation:

Answer:

Explanation:

Soldiers in World War I needed to know how to repair things, like trench networks, and camps. Basic things like this could be learned on duty, but was very useful to have already known. Another thing they did was inspect riffles, or riffle inspections, which is finding out which riffles weren't safe to fire. They also check for rust and carbon. The last thing they did was write letters to their families, because the war then was overseas, depending on where they lived. It was a very had life as a soldier in WWI.

Answer:

Appeasement was a policy adopted by European leaders towards Nazi Germany in the 1930s, which involved making concessions to Hitler in the hope of avoiding war. The term was coined by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, who sought to avoid conflict with Germany at all costs. The policy of appeasement was based on the belief that Hitler's demands were reasonable and that he could be appeased by making concessions.

One of the most notable examples of appeasement was the Munich Agreement of 1938, which was signed by the leaders of France, Great Britain, and Italy. The agreement allowed Hitler to annex the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia, which was home to a large German-speaking population. The leaders of France and Great Britain believed that by allowing Germany to annex the Sudetenland, they could avoid war and maintain peace in Europe.

Another example of appeasement was the Anglo-German Naval Agreement of 1935, which allowed Germany to build up its navy and violate the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. This agreement was signed by the British government under the leadership of Neville Chamberlain, who believed that it would help to maintain peace in Europe by giving Hitler what he wanted.

The leaders of France and Great Britain at the time acted as they did due to a combination of factors. They were still reeling from the devastation of World War I and were hesitant to engage in another war. They also underestimated the extent of Hitler's ambition and believed that by making concessions, they could avoid conflict and maintain peace in Europe.

In hindsight, the world should have reacted differently. The policy of appeasement only emboldened Hitler and gave him the impression that he could achieve his goals through aggression. The world should have taken a stronger stance against Hitler's expansionist policies and sought to contain German aggression. It is possible that a more forceful response earlier on could have prevented the outbreak of World War II and the atrocities that followed.

Answer: mormons

Explanation:

Answer:

Walt Disney was hired to help with the Home Front of WWII. He produced a number of propaganda films for the US government during the war, including "Der Fuehrer's Face" and "Victory Through Air Power".

The option that contributed to the Rwandan Genocide is European colonial policies had reinforced ethnic prejudices

Rwanda was under the governance of Germany and subsequently Belgium throughout the epoch of European colonization. An ethnic hierarchy was established by the colonial powers through their preference of the Tutsi minority while overlooking the larger Hutu population.

Therefore, By issuing identity cards categorized by ethnicity, the colonial authorities strengthened the differentiation between the two factions. These regulations caused the emergence of ingrained biases and agitation among different ethnic groups, etc.

Learn more about Rwandan Genocide from

https://brainly.com/question/27330411

#SPJ1

Abraham Lincoln was assassinated in 1865. He was the driving force behind Reconstruction. He implemented a number of policies to heal the wounds of the civil war and address the systemic problems of racism and inequality. After his death, this vision faded and the country did not find a clear direction.

The assassination of President Abraham Lincoln in 1865 had a profound impact on the United States. Some believe his death left a void that national reconstruction cannot fill. While others believe the administration could have continued without Lincoln, I believe his death dealt a significant blow to the nation's ability to heal and rebuild.

First, Lincoln was the driving force behind Reconstruction, with the goal of unifying the country and rebuilding the South. He implemented a number of policies to heal the wounds of the civil war and address the systemic problems of racism and inequality. After his death, this vision faded and the country did not find a clear direction. At the same time, Lincoln was an integral figure respected by both Republicans and Democrats.

He had a special compromising quality that brought together the people necessary for the success of reconstruction. With his death, there was no one left to fill this leadership void and the country was torn apart.

Opponents of this claim may argue that Lincoln's reconstruction plans were flawed and that his death did not significantly affect America's ability to rebuild. However, there are obvious weaknesses in this argument. Lincoln's policies had limited success, and his death left a significant leadership vacuum that prevented further progress.

Ultimately, I believe the death of President Lincoln left a void in America that Reconstruction could not fill. Lincoln's vision, leadership, and ability to bring people together were essential to the success of Reconstruction.

Without him, the country lacks clear direction and leadership, slowing progress and hindering the country's ability to heal and rebuild.

learn more about Abraham Lincoln: https://brainly.com/question/856804

#SPJ1

Answer:

No, elitism in the new democratic South Africa is not helping to maintain apartheid-era privileges. In fact, the new governing elite mistakenly believes that the goal of a democratic South Africa is simply to extend to everyone what whites enjoyed under apartheid, which is a false premise. South Africa needs new thinking for its democracy to work for all. However, the monomaniacal focus on corruption, unthinkingly encouraged by much of the media, has created a situation in which there is a general elite consensus that corruption is our enemy, which is hindering the progress of democracy. The transition away from apartheid changed South Africa in a remarkable way, defying international expectations. South Africa's first democratic election with universal suffrage in 1994 was a success story for democracy.

No, elitism in the new democratic South Africa is not helping to maintain apartheid era privileges. In fact, the new governing elite mistakenly believes that the goal of a democratic South Africa is simply to extend to everyone what whites enjoyed under apartheid, which is a false premise.

No, elitism in the new democratic South Africa is not assisting in the preservation of apartheid-era privileges. In fact, the new ruling class incorrectly believes that the goal of a democratic South Africa is simply to extend to everyone what whites enjoyed under apartheid, which is a false premise. South Africa needs new thinking for its democracy to work for all. However, the monomaniacal focus on corruption, unthinkingly encouraged by much of the media, has created a situation in which there is a general elite consensus that corruption is our enemy, which is hindering the progress of democracy.

The transition away from apartheid changed South Africa in a remarkable way, defying international expectations. South Africa's first democratic election with universal suffrage in 1994 was a success story for democracy.

Learn more about elitism, here:

https://brainly.com/question/31894293

#SPJ2

Any agreement or effort between two parties is called a Bilateral effort or a Bilateral agreement.

Agreements or efforts can take many forms, such as a contract, a treaty, a memorandum of understanding, or a joint venture. The terms of agreement or effort may be negotiated and agreed upon through formal or informal discussions and may be binding or non-binding depending on the circumstances and the parties involved.

Examples of bilateral agreements could include a business partnership, a divorce settlement, a labor contract, a loan agreement or a peace treaty between two countries. Such agreements or efforts can be important for achieving common goals, resolving disputes or establishing mutual benefits.

To learn more about the agreement visit:

brainly.com/question/15420974

The correct question is-

What is the term for "Any agreement or effort between two parties"?