What danger did a european nation face by entering into an alliance

Answers

Answer 1
Answer: The danger faced by the European nation by entering into an alliance are being the forefront in more battles and killings. The european nation formed an alliance inorder to protect themselves , to increase military service and to have diplomatic power. An alliance is an agreement between countries that binds them to protect or defend each other in times of war.
Answer 2
Answer: All though he had the benefit of having help when ever he started or was attacked by another country, at any point he could be forced into war by one of his allies

Related Questions

What are free trade agreements?a. agreements that set new quotasb. laws that create tariffsc. agreements that remove trade barriersd. laws that prohibit trade between countries
The missouri compromise, the compromise of 1850 and the kansas nebraska act all deal with the issue of
What kind of tax is paid when purchasing consumer goods and services?
Stopping the spread of communism was the top priority outlined in _____.the United Nations Planthe Wilson doctrineperestroikathe Truman doctrine
What type of physical conditions did the people face in alaska during the klondike gold rush

Indian involvement in World War I helped ensurea. an Allied victory.
b. the exile of Gandhi.
c. Indian independence.
d. a victory for the Central powers.

Answers

Indian involvement in World War I helped ensure Indian independence - C. 

This is the most correct answer because the main battlefields of World War I were fought in Europe. While Indian soldiers did play their part in the battles of WWI, they still mostly gained by it through gaining their independence as a country. 

yeah its C.indian independence

Which of the following countries allied with the Soviet Union after World War II? A. Italy B. Denmark C. Romania D. France

Answers

Which of the following countries allied with the Soviet Union after World War II?

--> It is Romania ((Eastern European countries)

Read the paragraph from Carla’s personal narrative.Raul and I argued about the science project. He crossed his arms over his chest and spoke in a strained voice. Clearly we had different ideas, but which one of us would have an idea about how to solve our differences? I tried to stay calm and see things from his point of view, but the way he was acting made it hard. Maybe it was time to talk to our science teacher.
Which line from the paragraph uses a narrative technique to paint a picture for readers?
A. Raul and I argued about the science project.
B. He crossed his arms over his chest and spoke in a strained voice.
C. [W]hich one of us would have an idea about how to solve our differences?
D. Maybe it was time to talk to our science teacher.

Answers

Answer:

A. Raul and I argued about the science project.

Explanation:

Narrative passages are often said or written directly through a first person's perspective with the pronoun 'I'. At the same time, it may also use a third person perspective like 'he' or 'she' in the passage.

Here, the sentence "Raul and I argued about the science project." uses both the first person perspective and third person perspective. Thus, the readers can easily understand through this line that the paragraph uses a narrative technique to paint a picture.

Why did the ancient Greek celebrate the Olympic Games

Answers

They celebrated the Olympic Games to honor Zeus

In America there are many public groups with many different opinions. true or false

Answers

Answer:true

Explanation: I personally know about the democrats and Republicans for their differences in view of how they perceive and expect people to go about their lives even though I still think there are a few more people with entirely different opinions an believe systems

The reason for different opinions is due to people having there own mind set, I mean everyone is unique so of course there will be bad opinions and good opinions on everyone. No matter who or what you are

After alexander the great died his empire was divided into which three

Answers

The empire was divided three ways between his three top generals. Some 40 years of internecine conflict followed his death, as leading generals and members of Alexander’s family vied to control different parts of the vast empire he had built. The Battle of Ipsus, fought in Phrygia, Asia Minor (present-day Turkey) in 301 BC between rival successors, resulted in the empire’s irrevocable dissolution. There were four major kingdoms. The kingdom of Cassander (circa 358–297 BC), consisted of Macedonia, most of Greece, and parts of Thrace. The kingdom of Lysimachus (circa 361–281 BC), included Lydia, Ionia, Phrygia, and other parts of present-day Turkey. The kingdom of Seleucus (died 281 BC; later the Seleucid Empire), comprised present-day Iran, Iraq, Syria, and parts of Central Asia. The kingdom of Ptolemy I (died 283 BC) included Egypt and neighboring regions and survived until the death of Cleopatra the last Ptolemaic ruler.

Answer:

sequence of events

The organizing structure a historian would use to explain why the empire of Alexander the Great collapsed would be sequence of events.

This is because there was an order of events that led to the fall of the empire.

Sequence of events is an organizing structure that simply tells the order which events occurred.