I don't understand the question
Answer:
South
Explanation:
Because the higher cost of the toll financially.
b.Monroe Doctrine
c.Compromise of 1850
d.all of the above
Answer:
b.Monroe Doctrine
Explanation:
The Monroe Doctrine, synthesized in the phrase "America for the Americans", was elaborated by John Quincy Adams and attributed to President James Monroe in 1823. It established that any European intervention in America would be seen as an act of aggression that would require intervention of the United States of America The doctrine was presented by President Monroe during his sixth speech to Congress on the State of the Union. It was taken with doubts, at first, and then with enthusiasm. It was a decisive moment in the foreign policy of the United States. The doctrine was conceived by its authors, especially John Quincy Adams, as a proclamation by the United States of its opposition to colonialism in response to the threat posed by the monarchical restoration in Europe and the Holy Alliance after the Napoleonic wars.
The correct answer is pathos.
This passage of the Declaration of Independence supports the pathos of the document.
Pathos is the emotional appeal and tries to persuade the public by appealing to their emotions.
That is clear in the excerpt of the passage of the Declaration of Independence when it says “He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.” With those words used in that part of the Declaration of Independence, the author tries to appeal to the emotion of the audience and generate a reaction. The author did not use logos or logic, reasons, he directly appealed to the emotions.
The other options of the question were b) theme, c) thesis, d) ethos.
Answer:
* American fear of communist attack.
* Truman's dislike of Stalin.
* USSR's fear of the American's atomic bomb.
* USSR's dislike of capitalism.
* USSR's actions in the Soviet zone of Germany.
* America's refusal to share nuclear secrets.
Explanation: I added more just in case you need more.
Barbarians are your answer.
However, they were not barbarians, but tribes from the North and other regions. They were given the term "barbarians" by the Roman Empire, for the tribes were inferior in build-up of their communities and fighting skills, and were extremely culturally different from the Romans (As we can see that the Romans did not call Greeks "barbarians" because the Greek civilization looked more built-up).
However, the Barbarians were only one of the factors of the decimation of the Western Roman Empire. Civil War, civil unrest, famine, governmental problems, social injustice, insane emperors, failure of leadership, etc, were all reasons for the Roman Empire to start collapsing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the western half of the Roman Empire started to crumble and fall, the Eastern half by the name of the Byzantine Empire continued to last, and carried on the Roman tradition. However, they soon fell during the Crusader's age to the Seljuk Turks, and the Roman Empire was non-existent until the so-called "Holy Roman Empire" arose. However, while it was called, " ' Roman" ", it had nothing in common with the Roman Empire other than in name.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So in this case, we must look at what you meant by the "Roman Empire". Do you mean the western half? If so, then your answer is Barbarians. If you meant the eastern half of the Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire), then it would be the Turks.
~
The barbarian tribes from Germany and Britain conquered the Roman Empire.