Most historians would say that Andrew Johnson’s was a failed presidency. It did end in impeachment, after all, and his plan for Reconstruction—his most important responsibility—was not ultimately successfully. On the other hand, Johnson entered his term with some significant handicaps—he became president not by being elected but because his predecessor was assassinated, and he faced a Congressional majority who very much wanted his approach to Reconstruction to fall short. Write a post evaluating Andrew Johnson’s role in the outcomes of Reconstruction. Was it his fault that efforts to rebuild the South in a lasting way failed? Explain your answer thoroughly, using examples of actions taken (or not taken) by Andrew Johnson.

alliances in ww1 were different from ww2 because the entente in ww1 made up of serbia,russia,france,britan,japan and italy later america  and all allied in a sort of balance of power and too keep germany,austria-hungary,and the ottomans down. russia allied the serbians in order to exert its influence in the balkans while france allied the russians because france was still in dismay and insulted after the defeat to the germans during the unification of germany and britian allied the belgians after the germans invasion of belgium.in ww2 the alliances were in a preemptive attempt to deter any further wars into happening while germany and italy allied since they were insulted and humiliated after the previous war while also sharing a similar ideology of facsim along with japan which all 3 had a want for world domination and agreed to assist one another in the endevours 

explanation:

your answer will most likely be a.