Want this question answered?
No, wars are not a good way to end conflict between two countries or individual. Wars bring destruction and nothing else. It results in the loss of resources as well as lives. Wars are not the solution of any conflict. Mutual understanding and conversation are the basis of better results for any conflict. Wars bring down the economic conditions of the country as well. Throughout the history, no war has ever ended a conflict. One war has either led to another war or cold war or war-like circumstances. So wars are not at all a good way to end conflicts between countries or individuals. Gandhi won a war without even fighting one.
No, wars are not a good way to end conflict between two countries or individual. Wars bring destruction and nothing else. It results in the loss of resources as well as lives. Wars are not the solution of any conflict. Mutual understanding and conversation are the basis of better results for any conflict. Wars bring down the economic conditions of the country as well. Throughout the history, no war has ever ended a conflict. One war has either led to another war or cold war or war-like circumstances. So wars are not at all a good way to end conflicts between countries or individuals. Gandhi won a war without even fighting one.
The "Great War" as WW1 was termed depended on the troops and the public's view of national pride, in my opinion. It was not foreseen that the Treaty of Versailles would become such a punishing peace treaty. The treaty met all the demands of the nationalism of the two great European powers, France & England. That nationalism fueled the fighting spirits of the soldiers on both sides seems to be a given product to this 1914 to 1918 war.
The Treaty of Versailles, which ended World War I between the German Empire and the Allied Powers, had a specific clause in Article 231. The clause is known as the War Guilt Clause. It was the opening article of the reparations section of the Treaty of Versailles.
to bring together or unite.
The future tense of "brought" is "will bring."
The future tense of "bring" is "will bring" or "shall bring."
I will bring
The future tense of the word "bring" is "will bring."
The 1783 Treaty of Paris was part of a peace making process that ended a war in which the French were fighting, but it did not specifically effect the French itself. The 1783 Treaty of Paris ended the American Revolution. France was one of the nations that had taken part in this war on the side of the Americans. The Treaty of Paris, however, was between the Americans and the Kingdom of Great Britain, and the a separate treaty was used for the conflict between France and the British.
no
The future tense of bring is will bring.
"will bring" is a verb. It's the future tense of bring.
There were four main aims of the League of Nations: # To encourage global disarmament # To safeguard national independence and frontiers by upholding the terms of the Treaty of Versailles # To stop war and future conflict # To improve global living and working conditions
The Reciprocity Treaty brought prosparity to British North America by
The present form of "bring" is "bring," the past form is "brought," and the future form is "will bring."
The Treaty could be this one: Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. See link below for the entire story of the treaty.