Which country did germany conquer in september 1939?

D.) Franklin

Franklin D. Roosevelt was president from 1933-1945.

| Search bar_ |

|was Stalin politically a fascist?_|

{System: Please wait while loading your question}

[Loading...]

[Loading...]

[Loading...]

[Access!]

——————————————————-

X - [_]

[Website:Wikipedia.com]

Answer:Stalinism is the means of governing and related policies implemented from around 1927 to 1953 by Joseph Stalin (1878–1953). Stalinist policies and ideas as developed in the Soviet Union included rapid industrialization, the theory of socialism in one country, a totalitarian state, collectivization of agriculture, a cult of personality[1][2] and subordination of the interests of foreign communist parties to those of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, deemed by Stalinism to be the leading vanguard party of communist revolution at the time.[3]

Stalinism promoted the escalation of class conflict, utilizing state violence to forcibly purge society of the bourgeoisie, whom Stalinist doctrine regarded as threats to the pursuit of the communist revolution. This policy resulted in substantial political violence and persecution of such people.[4] "Enemies" included not only bourgeois people, but also working-class people with counter-revolutionary sympathies.[5]

Stalinist industrialization was officially designed to accelerate the development towards communism, stressing the need for such rapid industrialization on the grounds that the Soviet Union was previously economically backward in comparison with other countries and asserting that socialist society needed industry in order to face the challenges posed by internal and external enemies of communism.[6] Rapid industrialization was accompanied by mass collectivization of agriculture and by rapid urbanization.[7] Rapid urbanization converted many small villages into industrial cities.[7] To accelerate the development of industrialization, Stalin imported materials, ideas, expertise and workers from Western Europe and from the United States[8] and pragmatically set up joint-venture contracts with major American private enterprises, such as the Ford Motor Company, which under state supervision assisted in developing the basis of the industry of the Soviet economy from the late 1920s to the 1930s.[9] After the American private enterprises had completed their tasks, Soviet state enterprises took over.

———————————————————

{System:I hope this helps! Comment below if you need any more help! ^^}

Final answer:

No, Stalin was not politically a fascist. He was a communist and embraced Marxist-Leninist principles.

Explanation:

No, Joseph Stalin was not politically a fascist. While fascism and communism share some characteristics, they are distinct ideologies. Fascism is a far-right ideology characterized by dictatorial power, extreme nationalism, and suppression of dissent. On the other hand, communism, which Stalin adhered to, is a far-left ideology that advocates for the abolition of private property and the establishment of a classless society.

Stalin's political ideology aligned with communism, not fascism. He embraced Marxist-Leninist principles and implemented policies that aimed to eliminate class distinctions and achieve collective prosperity. Despite the totalitarian nature of his regime and the mass purges, his political ideology did not align with fascism's core principles.

It is important to understand the differences between political ideologies to accurately assess historical figures and their beliefs.

Answer:

C i just took the test

Explanation:

Answer: C is correct, keep Japan from ever developing or using nuclear weapons. Hope this helps, please mark Brainliest :)

The greatest impact could be when Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was killed. this could of led to people rioting around the place because they ha lost all their hope because Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was the only person who actualy got india to have at least the bare minimum of peace and without him they can't do annything or some thing like that. i hope this is good enough for you. I hope you are happy

Mahatma Gandhi played a pivotal role in the freedom struggle of India. His non violent ways and peaceful methods were the foundation for gaining independence from the British. ... One of the first series of non violent protests nationwide was the non cooperation movement started by Mahatma Gandhi.

HOPE THIS HELPED!!!

Can I have crown? please

Despite the abolishing of the slavery, and the free movement of the African Americans in the USA, as well as gaining officially most of the rights, they still faced a lot of difficulties.

Thinking that the North would be a much better place for them to live and prosper, lot of African Americans moved in this states. Unfortunately for them, things were not as they imagined. There was worked for them indeed, the problem was that they were given the jobs that were payed less, and were also harder. Also, they were settled in neighborhoods that were not properly urbanized on the edges of the cities, and where the living conditions and the infrastructure were not on adequate level. In general, it turned out that they ended up as unofficial ''slaves'' in the factories, and continued to live in poverty and without any big chance of progress as that was still very limited on racial basis in that period.

The correct answer is - The United States.

Mexico controlled the western, southwestern, and the westernmost part of the Midwest of what is now the United States. But the United States were growing stronger, and the Spanish support and power was declining, putting Mexico in a position to control very large territory which was not really able to properly defend. The United States had already started with expansionist politics, and once they saw that there's a good opportunity in taking over some of the Mexican territories, they did so, and managed to conquer them, incorporated them into their territory, and gained and even better strategical position.

Answer:

a

Explanation:

great britain

The Suez Canal was controlled by the French and British via a company called the Suez Canal Company.

The Suez Canal is a sea-level water channel that runs from the north to the south of the Isthmus of Suez in Egypt.

It connects the Mediterranean and Red Seas. The Suez Canal was important because it was a channel that was used to transport energy, commodities, and consumer goods from Asia to Europe.

Thus the correct answer is A.

See the link below for more about Suez Canal:

https://brainly.com/question/1050424

The sovereignty of all the states in the union was weakened.

Answer:

The answer is the sovereignty of all the states in the union was weakened.

Explanation:

Ordinance may refer to: Law Ordinance (Belgium), a law adopted by the Brussels Parliament or the Common Community Commission Ordinance (India) Ordinance (university), a particular class of internal legislation.

The correct answers are A) he supported federal aid for schools and C) he supported federal aid for disabled students.

The statements that describe Kennedy's education policies are he supported federal aid for schools and C) he supported federal aid for disabled students.

President John F. Kennedy always believed that education was of the utmost importance for America. He had a famous quote on education that said: "Liberty without learning is always in peril; learning without liberty is always in vain." President Kenedy supported federal aid for schools and federal aid for disabled students. He promoted the Council of Great City Schools, vocational training for at-risk students, and the Mental Disabled Paning Act.

Answer:

The first one is A and C and the second part is A

Explanation:

Land-Grant College Act of 1862, or Morrill Act, Act of the U.S. Congress (1862) that provided grants of land to states to finance the establishment of colleges specializing in “agriculture and the mechanic arts.”

HOPE THIS HELPED!!! XD

The Land Grant College Act made it so public colleges were PUBLIC to all citizens. This was passed in 1862,  all west colleges could be public after this passed. Therefore, citizens would go to college as the Easterns could go as-well. So as it made fair rights.

The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 established the following order for succession to the presidency in the event that the President dies or resigns or becomes incapacitated while in office:

There had been earlier Presidential succession acts.  A 1792 act had placed the President pro tempore of the Senate next after the Vice President, and Speaker of the House after that.  (The President pro tempore of the Senate is a Senator who is designated to lead the Senate in the absence of the Vice President, who serves as the usual President of the Senate.)

In 1881, Chester A. Arthur went from Vice President to President when James Garfield died.  It happened during a time between sessions of Congress, and there was no Senate President pro tempore and no Speaker of the House.  So it was seen as possible that there could be a time when there was no Vice President or President pro tem of the Senate or Speaker of the House.  In 1886, Congress passed a Presidential Succession Act that went straight from the Vice President to Cabinet officials in order that their Cabinet office was created (in historical order).

The 1947 Presidential Succession Act was urged by President Harry Truman, after his succession to the Presidency after the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt.  The 1947 Act put the Speaker of the House and the President pro tem of the Senate back in the order, but placed the Speaker of the House next in line after the Vice President.

A final installment of US$94 million was made on 3 October 2010, settling German loan debts in regard to reparations.

The Freedmen’s Bureau, formally known as the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands, was established in 1865 by Congress to help millions of former black slaves and poor whites in the South in the aftermath of the Civil War. The Freedmen’s Bureau provided food, housing and medical aid, established schools and offered legal assistance. It also attempted to settle former slaves on land confiscated or abandoned during the war. However, the bureau was prevented from fully carrying out its programs due to a shortage of funds and personnel, along with the politics of race and Reconstruction.

Enslaved African Americans demonstrated agency through various slave revolts, including the Stono Rebellion, Gabriel's Conspiracy, and the Nat Turner Rebellion, which were active resistances against slavery and an assertion for freedom and equality.

An event that demonstrates the agency of enslaved African Americans is the occurrence of slave revolts. These uprisings were direct forms of resistance where enslaved individuals asserted their desire for liberty and equality. Notable examples include the Stono Rebellion (1739), the New York City Conspiracy of 1741, Gabriel's Conspiracy (1800), the German Coast Uprising (1811), and the Nat Turner Rebellion (1831). These rebellions showed that rather than being passive, enslaved people actively resisted their oppression. The rebellion not only displayed a fight against physical captivity but also reflected a quest for education, understanding, and ultimately, freedom.

Additionally, enslaved African Americans exhibited agency through covert acts such as espionage on plantations, negotiating statuses, and pursuing education in secret. The formation of communities and the ongoing struggle for civil rights after emancipation further underscores the resilience and agency of African Americans throughout history.

The  British were anxious to get access to Chinese consumers and to access China's products in the West. The Open Door policy was essential for accomplishing this goal.

Britain was eager to have China buy products from Western countries and sell products to them to address the trade imbalance that existed. The British wanted access to the vast Chinese market to sell their manufactured goods, such as cotton fabrics and silverware, but most importantly opium—an item that helped reverse the trade deficit that Britain experienced with China due to the Chinese demand for silver in exchange for their goods. The British insistence and subsequent wars led to the opening of Chinese ports to foreign trade, including the opium trade, significantly impacting the international trade system and weakening China's traditional dominance in East Asia.

The British were dealing with a significant trade imbalance with China. China's products, especially tea, porcelain, and silk, were highly demanded in Britain, but the Chinese were not interested in British goods, resulting in a large outflow of silver from Britain to China. To address this issue, Britain began selling opium, grown in India by the British East India Company, to the Chinese. This proved successful as opium exports to China boomed. However, since opium was illegal in China and its usage was devastating to the Chinese populace, the Chinese government attempted to stop the trade. This led to the First and Second Opium Wars, after which China was forced to concede to opening more ports and legalizing the opium trade. This shift not only solved the British problem of trade imbalance but also marked the end of the traditional East Asian international system with China at its center.

Answer: Israel

Explanation:

In 1854, the Missouri Compromise was repealed by the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Three years later the Missouri Compromise was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott decision, which ruled that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in the territories.

Japanese left china and then the nationalists and the communists started fighting in the war again.

well he built the interstate highway system as a defense measure. he was also interested in getting involved around the world, stop the spread of communism and stuff

Answer:

A company that makes bombs pressures a senator to support US involvement in a proxy war.

Explanation:

C - Many white Southerners support segregation laws.

Many white Southerners wanted to keep segregation, especially in the schools. They did NOT want to repeal the Jim Crow laws and were will to fight for segregation (not desegragation)

Answer:

Many white Southerners support segregation laws.

James Madison said that in Federalist No. ... Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. ... If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on ... through books, or through law review articles), and you'll see plenty of references ...

Alexander Hamilton helped found the Federalists party. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison founded the Democratic-Republican party.

The two party's were, Federalists party and the Democratic-Republican party.

Alexander Hamilton found the Federalists party an Thomas Jefferson and James Madison found the Democratic-Republican party.

HOPE THIS HELPED!!! XD

CAN I GET BRAIN?

Because they both called for civic liberties such as freedom of speech and of press.

D-Day marked the moment that the allies regained a toe-hold in Europe and began the march to Berlin.

In short, D-Day marks the turning point in the war and is the moment when the Axis was put on the defensive.

A ( Ottoman Empire, Safavid Empire, Mughal Empire).

your answer is A

hope it helpez

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, Diane D. Kirstein, U .S. Attorney's Office, San Antonio, TX, Plaintiff–Appellee. Laura G. Greenberg, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Bradford W. Bogan, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Maureen Scott Franco, Federal Public Defender, M. Carolyn Fuentes, Federal Public Defender's Office, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant–Appellant.

In this case, we must decide whether the district court's imposition of a condition of supervised release prohibiting the defendant from “residing or going to places where a minor or minors are known to frequent without prior approval of the probation officer” was plainly erroneous. We conclude it was not and AFFIRM.

I.

In January 1990, Michael Fields was convicted in Wisconsin state court of second degree sexual assault of a child.1 He was sentenced to five years in prison, but only served one year; the rest of his term was probated. Fields was required to register as a sex offender in Wisconsin for the rest of his life. Because of this conviction, he must also register as a sex offender in Texas. Fields has thrice been arrested and convicted for failing to register as a sex offender.2 He has also been repeatedly told by state authorities in both Wisconsin and Texas that he must register as a sex offender, instructions with which it appears he has never complied.3

Fields was arrested by the Austin Police Department for failing to register as a sex offender in April 2013. The next month, he was indicted in federal court and charged with one count of failing to register as a sex offender in violation of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (“SORNA”).4 After unsuccessfully moving to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that SORNA was unconstitutional, Fields pled guilty in July 2013.

In November 2013, Fields appeared before the district court for his sentencing hearing. At that hearing, the court reviewed Fields's criminal history record, and concluded that, even discounting several convictions where it was disputed as to whether Fields committed the crime, he had “a solid criminal record since 1974.” After hearing from counsel, the court then sentenced Fields to a 27–month sentence of imprisonment, followed by ten years of supervised release. The supervision included a number of conditions, including, as relevant here, a requirement that:

The defendant shall follow all other lifestyle restrictions or treatment requirements imposed by the therapist, and continue those restrictions as they pertain to avoiding risk situations throughout the course of supervision. This includes not residing or going to places where a minor or minors are known to frequent without prior approval of the probation officer.

Fields did not object to this condition. This timely appeal follows.

II.

We normally review conditions of supervised release for abuse of discretion.5 In this case, because Fields did not object to his supervised release condition while before the district court, we review for plain error.6 As the Supreme Court has made clear, plain error is a demanding standard:

In the case of United States v. Fields, we are confronted with a complex issue that rests on the delicate balance between individual privacy rights and the government's duty to protect its citizens.

The case centers on the government's use of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), commonly known as a drone, to conduct surveillance on a suspect, Mr. Fields, without obtaining a warrant. The drone's surveillance led to the discovery of evidence that formed the basis for Mr. Fields' arrest and subsequent criminal charges.

After careful consideration of this matter, I concur with the majority opinion, which holds that the warrantless use of drones for surveillance in this case violated Mr. Fields' Fourth Amendment rights.

In line with precedent established in cases such as Katz v. United States and United States v. Jones, we must recognize that individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy even in areas where they may be observed from a public vantage point.

In conclusion, the Fourth Amendment's protections are not static and must evolve to address emerging technologies. In this case, the use of drones for surveillance without a warrant violates an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy and, therefore, constitutes an unconstitutional search.

Find out more on Supreme Court opinion at https://brainly.com/question/31098988

#SPJ3

Correct answer (as highlighted in the choices shown):

Explanation:

The Great Compromise was a measure decided during the United States Constitutional Convention in 1787.  It resolved a dispute between small population states and large population states.  The large population states wanted representation in Congress to be based on a state's population size. The smaller states feared this would lead to unchecked dominance by the big states; they wanted all states to receive the same amount of representation.

The Great Compromise created a bicameral (two-chamber) legislature, with different rules for representation in each chamber. Representation in the House of Representatives would be based on population.  In the Senate, all states would have the same amount of representation, by two Senators.

The Great Compromise resolved the dispute over representation in the federal government at the Constitutional Convention. It established a two-house legislature, offering an equal representation for each state in the Senate and population-based representation in the House of Representatives.

The issue that was resolved at the Constitutional Convention with the Great Compromise, also known as the Connecticut Compromise, was the dispute over representation in the new federal government. More precisely, it was about how states, big and small, would be represented in the Congress. Compromise led to a two-house legislature, comprising of the Senate and the House of Representatives. In the Senate, each state, irrespective of its size, would have equal representation with two senators each, while the House of Representatives would have representation based on population.

https://brainly.com/question/19958240

#SPJ6

The United States Constitution of 1789 provided a strong union between the sovereign states. The first Articles of Confederation in the United States needed a new president elected yearly, and had little to no cohesion between states. This meant that states were often at conflicts with eachother, sometimes bloodshed, business between states was difficult because of the different currency for each state. And forming a formidable Navy was just about impossible, also the national military as a whole was short supplied in general. This all and more, was fixed with the adoption of the United States Constitution in 1789.

As you noted, your answer is that

Allow me to explain a bit, for teaching purposes.

Herodotus (about 484-425 BC) is known as "the father of history," because his writing pioneered the field of historical research.  Indeed, we get the word "history" from him.  He called his writing about the Greeks and their wars with Persia the ἱστορία (historia), which in Greek meant "investigations."  We now call his book The Histories, but it could be called "The Investigations."  In doing his investigations, Herodotus payed attention to all sorts of sources -- myths, legends, oral histories, his own observations, etc.  

The second generation of Greek history-writing featured an even more organized and thorough researcher, Thucydides (about 460-400 BC).  Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War sought to be as fair and objective as possible in his account of what happened in the conflict between Athens and Sparta.

The ancient Greeks essentially began the field of history writing (historiography) in the way that we think of that subject today.

Answer:

The Greeks were the first people to study history in a organized manner.

was the final major battle of the war of 1812

The Battle of New Orleans was a decisive American victory that secured the strategic port for trade, ensured control over the Mississippi River Valley, and launched Andrew Jackson's national prominence, leading to his presidency and the rise of the Democratic Party.

The Battle of New Orleans is a pivotal event both for the state of Louisiana and the broader history of the United States. Taking place on January 8, 1815, it was the last major clash between British forces and the United States in the War of 1812. Under the leadership of Andrew Jackson, the American forces decisively defeated the British troops, which sought to control New Orleans and the invaluable Mississippi River Valley.

The importance of the battle lay in several key areas. Firstly, the victory safeguarded American control of the vital port of New Orleans, a hub for trade and commerce due to the cotton boom and steam-powered river traffic. Secondly, it ensured American dominance over the Mississippi River Valley, a region critical for the country's expansion and economic growth. The successful defense of New Orleans thus guaranteed the continued flow of goods and the potential for American settlement in the region.

Furthermore, the battle elevated Andrew Jackson to national fame, establishing him as a war hero. This newfound prominence contributed significantly to his later election as the President of the United States, also marking the emergence of the Democratic Party. Despite the Treaty of Ghent officially ending the War of 1812 before the battle, the news had not reached the combatants in time, making the Battle of New Orleans an emblematic and dramatic conclusion to the conflict.

Overall, the Battle of New Orleans played an instrumental role in shaping American history, security, and politics in the 19th century, sealing the nation's confidence in its sovereignty and future prospects.

When Europe became aware of the wealth of African Kingdoms, they took control of these territories and extracted valuable resources for themselves, leading to economic dominance and poverty in Africa.

When Europe became aware of the wealth of African Kingdoms, they sought to exploit these resources for their benefit. European powers, such as the British, took control of African territories rich in gold and diamonds, extracting these valuable resources for themselves. Africans were forced to work in mines, while the profits from these resources were sent back to Europe. This resulted in economic dominance by European powers, poverty in Africa, and the continuation of financial control through foreign investments by Western companies.