History Middle School

20 pts! hurry pls! Match these items. IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION PLEASE PUT IN THE COMMENTS NOT AN ANSWER
1. area of Venezuela
1,800 miles
2. Caribbean seacoast
Margarita
3. large island
350,000 square miles
4. petroleum center
Gran Sabana
5. high waterfall
anaconda
6. plateau
Lake Maracaibo
7. hydroelectric power
Angel Falls
8. large water animal
manatee
9. reptile
"Cerro Bolivar"
10. mountain of iron
Orinoco River

Answers

Answer 1

Answer: 2 6 8 4 1 3 5 7

Explanation:

Answer 2

The order is going to be 26841357 due to these being correct and you agree

Related Questions

Explain the 3 threats to British security leading to the expulsion of the Acadians?

I know one of the threats is
The Acadians presented a military risk since they had refused to take a loyalty oath to the British.

but i don't know the other 2

PLEASE HELP!!! due at tonight!!

Answers

The Acadians posed three types of threats to British Security which were Military Threats, Economic Threats, and Cultural Threats.

Military Threat

The British believed that the Acadians posed a military threat due to their close proximity to the French settlements in Nova Scotia, as well as their unwillingness to swear loyalty to the British Crown.

This fear was exacerbated by the ongoing war between Britain and France, which had been ongoing for nearly a century. As a result, the British felt that the Acadians could potentially provide military aid to their French allies, and therefore posed a threat to British security.

Economic Threat

The British also felt that the Acadians posed an economic threat to their colonies in Nova Scotia. The British had been attempting to establish a strong economy in the area, based on fishing and agriculture, and were concerned that the Acadians would undermine this effort.

The British also feared that the Acadians would be able to monopolize the trade in the area, thus depriving the British of the economic benefits that they had hoped to gain by settling the region.

Cultural Threat

Finally, the British were concerned that the Acadian culture would undermine the British culture in Nova Scotia. The British were staunchly Protestant, while the Acadians were Catholic, and the British feared that the Acadians would be resistant to assimilation into British culture.

The British also feared that the Acadians would be able to spread their culture throughout the region, thus undermining the British presence and potentially leading to the creation of a separate French-speaking enclave within the British colonies.

To know more about Acadians:

https://brainly.com/question/31345253

The Acadians posed three types of threats to British Security which were Military Threats, Economic Threats, and Cultural Threats.

Before You Begin
Part One: Imagine that you have just voted in a local election. As you are walking out of the polling station, you notice a van of mentally disabled people out in front. As you walk past, you see the van driver give each of the people in the van a $20 bill and hear him tell the people to go inside and vote for the candidate that you want to win. He asks them to chant the name of the candidate over and over, until they understand what they are to do. What do you do?

Write a paragraph describing what you saw and what you should do next. Explore your feelings, and defend your actions. Remember to include what your responsibilities are as a citizen.

Part Two: It is brought to the attention of local authorities that, in the last election, someone paid a van full of mentally disabled people to vote for a candidate who won the election by just ten votes. The case has come to trial as a case of voter fraud. You are selected to serve on the jury. Write a brief summary of the case, then argue for each side of the case using 1-2 paragraphs per side.

Part Three: Now, imagine yourself in a room with the other jurors trying to decide the verdict in the case described in Part Two. Is this a criminal case or a civil case? Imagine yourself in the courtroom. What does the defendant look like? Does that make you think the defendant is guilty or not guilty? What are the lawyers saying? Is there any evidence that turns the tide, or is it just a steady stream of evidence that seems to favor one side?

Write an essay that sets the scene of the courtroom and the jurors' deliberations and decision on the case.

Begin by making an outline of the essay. Decide the details of the case, the courtroom and the jury's deliberations. Flesh out your topic paragraph and overall thesis for the essay. In a paragraph or two, thoroughly describe the key evidence, evidence that turns the tide or seems to weight the argument toward one direction. Explore the adjournment and how the jury deliberates. Offer differing viewpoints of the jury based on the different evidence. What do you think? How does the jury come to a unanimous decision? Write persuasively and clearly, taking into account how your emotions and perception may influence your decision about the case, the defendant, and the other jurors.

Use the Internet, newspapers, and other media outlets to learn about similar cases. Be sure to begin writing with an outline, and develop your arguments using correct grammar and sentence structure in order to make your point.

Answers

Part One:

As a citizen, my responsibility is to ensure that every vote is cast fairly and without coercion. In this scenario, I witnessed a van of mentally disabled people being paid to vote for a particular candidate. This is a clear violation of their rights as voters and is an act of voter fraud. I feel uneasy witnessing this, and I believe that it is my responsibility to report this behavior to the authorities. It is important to ensure that every vote is cast freely and without coercion, and that everyone's voice is heard equally. By reporting this, I am upholding the democratic process and ensuring that the integrity of the election is maintained.

Part Two:

The case of voter fraud involves the payment of a van full of mentally disabled people to vote for a specific candidate in the previous election. The defendant is accused of orchestrating the scheme and bribing vulnerable voters to cast their ballots in favor of the candidate they support. The case is brought to trial as a criminal case, as voter fraud is a serious offense that undermines the democratic process.

On one side, the prosecution argues that the defendant committed voter fraud by coercing mentally disabled people to vote for a specific candidate. They argue that this behavior undermines the integrity of the election and is a direct violation of the voting rights of those who were coerced. The prosecution presents evidence of witnesses who saw the defendant paying voters to cast their ballots.

On the other hand, the defense argues that the defendant did not coerce the voters and that they cast their ballots freely. They argue that there is no evidence to suggest that the defendant bribed voters, and that the accusations are based on hearsay. The defense presents witnesses who testify that the voters cast their ballots of their own free will.

Part Three:

As a member of the jury, I find myself in a room with my fellow jurors trying to determine the verdict of the case. The defendant is a middle-aged man who appears nervous and anxious throughout the proceedings. His lawyers argue that there is no concrete evidence to prove that the defendant committed voter fraud and that the accusations are based on hearsay.

The prosecution presents witnesses who saw the defendant paying voters to cast their ballots. The defense argues that the witnesses' testimony is unreliable, as they cannot provide concrete evidence to support their claims. The defense presents witnesses who testify that the voters cast their ballots of their own free will.

The key evidence in this case is the testimony of the witnesses who saw the defendant paying voters to cast their ballots. This evidence turns the tide in favor of the prosecution, as it provides concrete proof that the defendant committed voter fraud. The prosecution's evidence is a steady stream of testimony from witnesses who saw the defendant in action, while the defense's evidence is mainly hearsay.

During the adjournment, the jury deliberates on the evidence presented in the trial. There are differing viewpoints among the jurors, with some believing that the evidence presented by the prosecution is convincing, while others are skeptical of the witnesses' testimony. However, as the deliberation continues, the majority of the jurors come to a unanimous decision that the defendant is guilty of committing voter fraud.

In conclusion, the case of voter fraud is a serious offense that undermines the democratic process. As a member of the jury, it is important to evaluate the evidence presented in the trial and make a decision based on the facts of the case. While emotions and perceptions may influence our decision, it is important to remain impartial and make a decision based solely on the evidence presented in court. By upholding the integrity of the democratic process, we ensure that every vote is counted fairly and without coercion.

Answer:Part One: Because there are generally police officers present during local elections, I would most likely report the matter to one of the local police officers. I'd then proceed to tell the cops who was who and who was paid. If I had seen the license plate, I would have snapped a picture of it and shown it to the police officers. Part Two: In one incidence of voter fraud, a van full of mentally challenged persons was paid to vote for a certain candidate in the previous election. The defendant is accused of masterminding the operation and paying susceptible people to vote for the candidate they favour. Voter fraud is a severe act that threatens the democratic process, hence the case is being tried as a criminal case. On the one hand, the prosecution claims that the defendant engaged in voting fraud by coercing mentally ill persons to vote for a certain candidate. They claim that this activity jeopardizes the election's integrity and is a blatant violation of the voting rights of individuals who were pressured. The prosecution offers testimony from witnesses who observed the defendant bribe voters to vote. The defense, on the other hand, claims that the defendant did not compel the voters and that they voted freely. They claim there is no proof that the defendant bribed votes and that the claims are based only on hearsay. The defense calls witnesses who attest that the people voted of their own free choice.Part Three: I am seated in a chamber with the other members of the jury while we deliberate the case's verdict. The defendant, a man who seems to be in his early 20s, is tense, nervous, and perspiring throughout the proceedings. His attorneys contend that the claims are based only on rumor and that there is no hard proof to support the defendant's involvement in voter fraud.The defense calls witnesses who observed the defendant buying votes from voters. The defense contends that because the witnesses are unable to offer conclusive proof to back up their statements, their testimony cannot be trusted. The defense calls witnesses who attest that the voters exercised their right to vote voluntarily.The testimony of the witnesses who witnessed the defendant bribe voters to cast their ballots is the main piece of evidence in this case. This evidence shifts the balance in the prosecution's favor since it offers undeniable proof that the defendant engaged in voting fraud. The defense's evidence consists mostly of hearsay, but the prosecution's evidence is a continual stream of testimony from witnesses who witnessed the defendant in action. The jury deliberates on the evidence heard throughout the trial during the break. The jury's opinions vary, with some considering the prosecution's evidence to be persuasive while others finding the testimony of the witnesses to be unreliable. However, as the jury proceeds to deliberate, the majority of them reach a unanimity that the defendant has engaged in voter fraud.Summing it all up, Voter fraud is a serious act that undercuts the democratic process, to sum up. As a jury member, it is crucial to assess the testimony given during the trial and reach a conclusion based on the circumstances of the case. Even if our judgment may be influenced by our feelings and impressions, it's crucial to maintain objectivity and base your choice exclusively on the information that was given in court. Maintaining the democratic process' integrity allows us to make sure that every vote is cast fairly and without interference.

write a paragraph summary of the story of Esther containing 130 words +. Pay attention to the fact that the minimum word count will only get you a 3 in the Content and Development area of the rubric.

-Be sure to include the main ideas.
-Use your own words. Do not copy from the story.
-Indent your paragraphs and use black ink

Answers

In the biblical book named after her, Esther is a young Jewish woman living in the Persian diaspora who finds favor with the king, becomes queen, and risks her life to save the Jewish people from destruction when the court official Haman persuades the king to authorize a pogrom against all the Jews of the empire.

The story of Esther is a captivating tale set in ancient Persia. It revolves around a Jewish girl named Esther who becomes the queen of Persia through a beauty contest orchestrated by King Ahasuerus. Esther keeps her Jewish identity a secret until a wicked advisor named Haman convinces the king to issue a decree to annihilate all Jews in the kingdom. Mordecai, Esther's cousin, urges her to intervene and plead for her people's lives. Esther, risking her own life, reveals her Jewish heritage to the king and pleads for mercy. The king is swayed by her beauty and compassion, granting her request and foiling Haman's evil plan. The Jews are saved, and Esther's bravery and faith are celebrated annually during the feast of Purim. This story teaches us the importance of courage, standing up for what is right, and the power of faith in the face of adversity.

EXPLORING PLACE Why
would it have been difficult for
one ruler to control the Holy
Roman Empire?

Answers

Answer:Emperors attempted to solve these problems through internal reforms.

Explanation: For example, the emperor Diocletian split control of the Roman Empire into two halves, a western and an eastern portion. Diocletian believed the territories throughout the empire would be easier to control and support if they were overseen by two administrations.

Answer:

They couldn't gain full political control

Explanation:

with all of the competing royalty making up the empire they would have to make complicated alliances to stay in control

What was the Gadsden Purchase?
Ps: Can you please do a short paragraph if you do it

Answers

Gadsden Purchase, also called Treaty of La Mesilla, (December 30, 1853), it was a transaction between Mexico and the US on mesilla valley which is now Southern Arizona for the transcontinental railroad.

Answer:

Gadsden's Purchase provided the land necessary for a southern transcontinental railroad and attempted to resolve conflicts that lingered after the Mexican-American War

I Will Go West!" is written from the perspective of a white settler. How were experiences moving and working out West similar or different for other groups?
Please answer

Answers

Answer:

Explanation:

This song was was written in 1875 by J.P. Barrett and was about the westward expansion and how it was great. The song emphasized that moving west is for the greater good of a family, explains how crowded the East Coast was and how amazing the West Coast is.

Furthermore, it tells the listener how costly the cost of living is and how they have gone up tremendously. It say how nice it would be to live on a farm in the country because you wouldn't have to buy your goods and no one would bother you on how you dressed.

Answers

Answer and Explanation:

Option (D) They each had there own language and cultural traditions.

Option D.) They each had there own language and cultural traditions.

Elizabeth I was a great Queen? How far do you agree?
(complete a PEEL for 2 contrasting opinions)

PEEL=Point, evidence, explanation, link

Answers

PEEL for agreeing that Elizabeth I was a great Queen:

Point: Elizabeth I was a great Queen because she provided stability and prosperity to England during her reign.

Evidence: Elizabeth I's reign saw a flourishing of the arts and literature, as well as an expansion of trade and commerce. She also successfully navigated religious tensions and prevented foreign invasion, such as the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588.

Explanation: Elizabeth I's policies and leadership provided stability and growth to England, which led to an increase in wealth and prestige both domestically and internationally. Her strong leadership and diplomatic skills allowed her to maintain peace and prevent conflicts with other countries.

Link: Therefore, it can be argued that Elizabeth I was a great Queen due to her successful reign and contributions to England's prosperity and stability.

PEEL for disagreeing that Elizabeth I was a great Queen:

Point: Elizabeth I was not a great Queen because of her treatment of Catholics and her failure to produce an heir.

Evidence: Elizabeth I implemented harsh measures against Catholics, such as the execution of Mary Queen of Scots, which led to religious persecution and division. Additionally, her refusal to marry and produce an heir caused a succession crisis that led to instability and uncertainty after her death.

Explanation: Elizabeth I's policies towards Catholics and her lack of an heir ultimately had negative consequences for England. Her persecution of Catholics led to resentment and division, and her failure to produce an heir created instability and uncertainty about the future of the monarchy.

Link: Therefore, it can be argued that Elizabeth I was not a great Queen due to her policies and decisions that had negative consequences for England's stability and unity.

I don't have personal opinions. However, I can provide you with two contrasting opinions on whether Elizabeth I was a great Queen.

Opinion 1: Elizabeth I was a great Queen.

- Point: Elizabeth I was a remarkable monarch who achieved political stability and cultural prosperity during her reign.

- Evidence: Under Elizabeth's rule, England experienced a period of relative peace known as the Elizabethan Era. This era saw significant advancements in literature, art, and exploration, with renowned figures like William Shakespeare flourishing under her patronage.

- Explanation: Elizabeth's astute political decisions, such as the defeat of the Spanish Armada and the establishment of the Church of England, contributed to England's rise as a global power. Her leadership and charisma inspired loyalty and admiration from her subjects.

- Link: Overall, Elizabeth I's reign is often celebrated as a golden age for England, marked by stability, artistic achievements, and national pride.

Opinion 2: Elizabeth I was not a great Queen.

- Point: Despite her achievements, Elizabeth I's reign also had its shortcomings and controversies.

- Evidence: Elizabeth's religious policies, particularly her persecution of Catholics, led to division and unrest within her kingdom. Additionally, her refusal to name a successor created uncertainty and ultimately resulted in the turmoil of the Stuart succession.

- Explanation: Elizabeth's emphasis on maintaining her own power and avoiding foreign entanglements limited England's influence abroad and hindered the country's economic growth. Furthermore, her marriage refusal and subsequent lack of an heir created a power vacuum that ultimately led to political instability.

- Link: While Elizabeth I's reign had significant accomplishments, it is important to consider the challenges and controversies that occurred during her time as Queen.

It is important to note that the assessment of whether Elizabeth I was a great Queen can vary depending on the criteria and perspective used.

Other Questions