What was the trend in American involvement in the world in the years after World War II? I other words, was the U. S. getting more or less involved in the world? Give two examples.
pts)

a)scientists

explanation:

the national defense education act had two main goals. the first one was to provide personal that was oriented to defense, including scholars, engineering students and so on. the other goal was to provide financial assistance for the students who would be enrolling at colleges and universities in the 1960s.

julius caesar turned the roman republic into the roman empire by coming in and taking the "dictator" role during the time of a civil war (elites vs lower classes) winning battles and reputation, then declaring him dictator for life

hope this : )

in the united states, the president is controlled by the

constitution, and in all respects subordinate to it. insofar

as it deals with presidential power, however, the american

constitution has proved to be a highly malleable document.

with very few exceptions,' the constitutional provisions relating to the president have not been changed at all since

they were ratified in 1787. but in the late twentieth century, those provisions do not mean what they meant in

1787. the constitution is a legal document, and it is enforced judicially; but its meaning was hardly fixed when it

was ratified. in particular, the contemporary president has

far broader powers than the original constitution contemplated. it is remarkable but true that large-scale changes in

the authority of the president have been brought about

without changes in the constitutional text, but nevertheless

without significant illegality.

this is a paradox. is it not clear that constitutional

changes, if not textual, are illegal? the paradox has considerable relevance to our current thinking about the presidency in particular and about constitutionalism in general.

perhaps the framers of the american constitution feared

legislative power most of all; 2 but from well-known events

in the twentieth century, it is possible to conclude that it is

presidential power that holds out the greatest risks to both

liberty and democracy. the president is by far the most visible leader in the nation; he is often the only person in government with a national constituency. moreover, he is