Write an objective summary on: Today, nearly 2,500 dogs work with military forces both domestically
and abroad. The Department of Defense has a special school that trains dogs to
sniff out explosives, identify mines, and detect and disable enemies. Special forces
units rappel, perform helicopter hoists, and even skydive with their dogs. That's
right -- parachuting dogs! Dut military dogs don't go into horm's way unarmed.
They may wear specially made goggles (called "doggles") that can be outfitted with
night vision and intrared capabilities. They also might wear body armor that includes
a camera and antenna. This protective gear con cost $30,000 per dog.
Because dogs' sense of smelis 1,000 times stronger than humans, they
can be trained to detect things that humans carinot such as the scent of a bomb or
ir vader. Additionally, a dog is able to hear souties that hiemans cannot. These
special abilities make them military assets. General David Petraus reflected that
the role of dogs in the Middle East conflict is "proof that humans and dogs in the
ine of duly can accomplish things [that]no wtapon of machine con equal."

Read the passage from a vindication of the rights of woman. that the society is formed in the wisest manner, whose constitution is founded on the nature of man, strikes, in the abstract, every thinking being so forcibly, that it looks like presumption to endeavour to bring forward proofs; though proof must be brought, or the strong hold of prescription will never be forced by reason; yet to urge prescription as an argument to justify the depriving men (or women) of their natural rights, is one of the absurd sophisms which daily insult common sense. does wollstonecraft maintain an objective tone in the passage? yes, because she uses objective language such as “society is formed in the wisest manner.” yes, because she uses objective language such as “it looks like presumption to endeavor.” no, because she uses subjective language such as “though proof must be brought, or the strong hold.” no, because she uses subjective language such as “absurd sophisms which daily insult common sense.”

Plsss don’t worry about the green strip can someone plssssss

Read this paragraph from chapter 5 of the prince. there are, for example, the spartans and the romans. the spartans held athens and thebes, establishing there an oligarchy: nevertheless they lost them. the romans, in order to hold capua, carthage, and numantia, dismantled them, and did not lose them. they wished to hold greece as the spartans held it, making it free and permitting its laws, and did not succeed. so to hold it they were compelled to dismantle many cities in the country, for in truth there is no safe way to retain them otherwise than by ruining them. and he who becomes master of a city accustomed to freedom and does not destroy it, may expect to be destroyed by it, for in rebellion it has always the watchword of liberty and its ancient privileges as a rallying point, which neither time nor benefits will ever cause it to forget. and whatever you may do or provide against, they never forget that name or their privileges unless they are disunited or dispersed, but at every chance they immediately rally to them, as pisa after the hundred years she had been held in bondage by the florentines. what idea is stressed in the passage? the desire for liberty the establishment of an oligarchy the dismantling of an acquired state the tendency toward rebellion