Question: What did several US politicians suggest doing in the 19th century?

Answer: annexing Canada

The implication has historical basis and dates to the breakup of British America during the American Revolution. The colonies that had confederated to form the United States invaded Canada (at the time a term referring specifically to the modern-day provinces of Quebec and Ontario, which had only been in British hands since 1763) at least twice, neither time succeeding in taking control of the territory. The first invasion was during the Revolution, under the assumption that French-speaking Canadians' presumed hostility towards British colonial rule combined with the Franco-American alliance would make them natural allies to the American cause; the Continental Army successfully recruited two Canadian regiments for the invasion. That invasion's failure forced the members of those regiments into exile, and they settled mostly in upstate New York. The Articles of Confederation, written during the Revolution, included a provision for Canada to join the United States, should they ever decide to do so, without needing to seek U.S. permission as other states would. The United States again invaded Canada during the War of 1812, but this effort was made more difficult due to the large number of Loyalist Americans that had fled to what is now Ontario and still resisted joining the republic. <hl> The Hunter Patriots in the 1830s and the Fenian raids after the American Civil War were private attacks on Canada from the U.S. Several U.S. politicians in the 19th century also spoke in favour of annexing Canada . <hl>

The implication has historical basis and dates to the breakup of British America during the American Revolution. The colonies that had confederated to form the United States invaded Canada (at the time a term referring specifically to the modern-day provinces of Quebec and Ontario, which had only been in British hands since 1763) at least twice, neither time succeeding in taking control of the territory. The first invasion was during the Revolution, under the assumption that French-speaking Canadians' presumed hostility towards British colonial rule combined with the Franco-American alliance would make them natural allies to the American cause; the Continental Army successfully recruited two Canadian regiments for the invasion. That invasion's failure forced the members of those regiments into exile, and they settled mostly in upstate New York. The Articles of Confederation, written during the Revolution, included a provision for Canada to join the United States, should they ever decide to do so, without needing to seek U.S. permission as other states would. The United States again invaded Canada during the War of 1812, but this effort was made more difficult due to the large number of Loyalist Americans that had fled to what is now Ontario and still resisted joining the republic. The Hunter Patriots in the 1830s and the Fenian raids after the American Civil War were private attacks on Canada from the U.S. Several U.S. politicians in the 19th century also spoke in favour of <hl> annexing Canada <hl>.

The Hunter Patriots in the 1830s and the Fenian raids after the American Civil War were private attacks on Canada from the U.S. Several U.S. politicians in the 19th century also spoke in favour of <hl> annexing Canada <hl> .


Question: When were the last days of the Dominion of Newfoundland?

In the late 1940s, during the last days of the Dominion of Newfoundland (at the time a dominion-dependency in the Commonwealth and independent of Canada), there was mainstream support, although not majority, for Newfoundland to form an economic union with the United States, thanks to the efforts of the Economic Union Party and significant U.S. investment in Newfoundland stemming from the U.S.-British alliance in World War II. The movement ultimately failed when, in a 1948 referendum, voters narrowly chose to confederate with Canada (the Economic Union Party supported an independent "responsible government" that they would then push toward their goals).

Answer: In the late 1940s

<hl> In the late 1940s , during the last days of the Dominion of Newfoundland (at the time a dominion-dependency in the Commonwealth and independent of Canada), there was mainstream support, although not majority, for Newfoundland to form an economic union with the United States, thanks to the efforts of the Economic Union Party and significant U.S. investment in Newfoundland stemming from the U.S.-British alliance in World War II. <hl> The movement ultimately failed when, in a 1948 referendum, voters narrowly chose to confederate with Canada (the Economic Union Party supported an independent "responsible government" that they would then push toward their goals).

<hl> In the late 1940s <hl>, during the last days of the Dominion of Newfoundland (at the time a dominion-dependency in the Commonwealth and independent of Canada), there was mainstream support, although not majority, for Newfoundland to form an economic union with the United States, thanks to the efforts of the Economic Union Party and significant U.S. investment in Newfoundland stemming from the U.S.-British alliance in World War II. The movement ultimately failed when, in a 1948 referendum, voters narrowly chose to confederate with Canada (the Economic Union Party supported an independent "responsible government" that they would then push toward their goals).

<hl> In the late 1940s <hl> , during the last days of the Dominion of Newfoundland (at the time a dominion-dependency in the Commonwealth and independent of Canada), there was mainstream support, although not majority, for Newfoundland to form an economic union with the United States, thanks to the efforts of the Economic Union Party and significant U.S. investment in Newfoundland stemming from the U.S.-British alliance in World War II.


Question: What did the Economic Union Party support?

Answer: an independent "responsible government"

In the late 1940s, during the last days of the Dominion of Newfoundland (at the time a dominion-dependency in the Commonwealth and independent of Canada), there was mainstream support, although not majority, for Newfoundland to form an economic union with the United States, thanks to the efforts of the Economic Union Party and significant U.S. investment in Newfoundland stemming from the U.S.-British alliance in World War II. <hl> The movement ultimately failed when, in a 1948 referendum, voters narrowly chose to confederate with Canada (the Economic Union Party supported an independent "responsible government" that they would then push toward their goals). <hl>

In the late 1940s, during the last days of the Dominion of Newfoundland (at the time a dominion-dependency in the Commonwealth and independent of Canada), there was mainstream support, although not majority, for Newfoundland to form an economic union with the United States, thanks to the efforts of the Economic Union Party and significant U.S. investment in Newfoundland stemming from the U.S.-British alliance in World War II. The movement ultimately failed when, in a 1948 referendum, voters narrowly chose to confederate with Canada (the Economic Union Party supported <hl> an independent "responsible government" <hl> that they would then push toward their goals).


Question: What was the result of the 1948 referendum?

Answer: The movement ultimately failed

In the late 1940s, during the last days of the Dominion of Newfoundland (at the time a dominion-dependency in the Commonwealth and independent of Canada), there was mainstream support, although not majority, for Newfoundland to form an economic union with the United States, thanks to the efforts of the Economic Union Party and significant U.S. investment in Newfoundland stemming from the U.S.-British alliance in World War II. <hl> The movement ultimately failed when, in a 1948 referendum, voters narrowly chose to confederate with Canada (the Economic Union Party supported an independent "responsible government" that they would then push toward their goals). <hl>

In the late 1940s, during the last days of the Dominion of Newfoundland (at the time a dominion-dependency in the Commonwealth and independent of Canada), there was mainstream support, although not majority, for Newfoundland to form an economic union with the United States, thanks to the efforts of the Economic Union Party and significant U.S. investment in Newfoundland stemming from the U.S.-British alliance in World War II. <hl> The movement ultimately failed <hl> when, in a 1948 referendum, voters narrowly chose to confederate with Canada (the Economic Union Party supported an independent "responsible government" that they would then push toward their goals).


Question: What does Canada being referred to as the 51st state in a positive way mean in the US, generally?

In the United States, the term "the 51st state" when applied to Canada can serve to highlight the similarities and close relationship between the United States and Canada. Sometimes the term is used disparagingly, intended to deride Canada as an unimportant neighbor. In the Quebec general election, 1989, the political party Parti 51 ran 11 candidates on a platform of Quebec seceding from Canada to join the United States (with its leader, André Perron, claiming Quebec could not survive as an independent nation). The party attracted just 3,846 votes across the province, 0.11% of the total votes cast. In comparison, the other parties in favour of sovereignty of Quebec in that election got 40.16% (PQ) and 1.22% (NPDQ).

Answer: can serve to highlight the similarities and close relationship between the United States and Canada

<hl> In the United States, the term "the 51st state" when applied to Canada can serve to highlight the similarities and close relationship between the United States and Canada . <hl> Sometimes the term is used disparagingly, intended to deride Canada as an unimportant neighbor. In the Quebec general election, 1989, the political party Parti 51 ran 11 candidates on a platform of Quebec seceding from Canada to join the United States (with its leader, André Perron, claiming Quebec could not survive as an independent nation). The party attracted just 3,846 votes across the province, 0.11% of the total votes cast. In comparison, the other parties in favour of sovereignty of Quebec in that election got 40.16% (PQ) and 1.22% (NPDQ).

In the United States, the term "the 51st state" when applied to Canada <hl> can serve to highlight the similarities and close relationship between the United States and Canada <hl>. Sometimes the term is used disparagingly, intended to deride Canada as an unimportant neighbor. In the Quebec general election, 1989, the political party Parti 51 ran 11 candidates on a platform of Quebec seceding from Canada to join the United States (with its leader, André Perron, claiming Quebec could not survive as an independent nation). The party attracted just 3,846 votes across the province, 0.11% of the total votes cast. In comparison, the other parties in favour of sovereignty of Quebec in that election got 40.16% (PQ) and 1.22% (NPDQ).

In the United States, the term "the 51st state" when applied to Canada <hl> can serve to highlight the similarities and close relationship between the United States and Canada <hl> .


Question: What is a negative connotation of the term?

Answer: to deride Canada as an unimportant neighbor

In the United States, the term "the 51st state" when applied to Canada can serve to highlight the similarities and close relationship between the United States and Canada. <hl> Sometimes the term is used disparagingly, intended to deride Canada as an unimportant neighbor . <hl> In the Quebec general election, 1989, the political party Parti 51 ran 11 candidates on a platform of Quebec seceding from Canada to join the United States (with its leader, André Perron, claiming Quebec could not survive as an independent nation). The party attracted just 3,846 votes across the province, 0.11% of the total votes cast. In comparison, the other parties in favour of sovereignty of Quebec in that election got 40.16% (PQ) and 1.22% (NPDQ).

In the United States, the term "the 51st state" when applied to Canada can serve to highlight the similarities and close relationship between the United States and Canada. Sometimes the term is used disparagingly, intended <hl> to deride Canada as an unimportant neighbor <hl>. In the Quebec general election, 1989, the political party Parti 51 ran 11 candidates on a platform of Quebec seceding from Canada to join the United States (with its leader, André Perron, claiming Quebec could not survive as an independent nation). The party attracted just 3,846 votes across the province, 0.11% of the total votes cast. In comparison, the other parties in favour of sovereignty of Quebec in that election got 40.16% (PQ) and 1.22% (NPDQ).

Sometimes the term is used disparagingly, intended <hl> to deride Canada as an unimportant neighbor <hl> .


Question: How man votes did Parti 51 attract in 1989?

Answer: just 3,846 votes

In the United States, the term "the 51st state" when applied to Canada can serve to highlight the similarities and close relationship between the United States and Canada. Sometimes the term is used disparagingly, intended to deride Canada as an unimportant neighbor. In the Quebec general election, 1989, the political party Parti 51 ran 11 candidates on a platform of Quebec seceding from Canada to join the United States (with its leader, André Perron, claiming Quebec could not survive as an independent nation). <hl> The party attracted just 3,846 votes across the province, 0.11% of the total votes cast. <hl> In comparison, the other parties in favour of sovereignty of Quebec in that election got 40.16% (PQ) and 1.22% (NPDQ).

In the United States, the term "the 51st state" when applied to Canada can serve to highlight the similarities and close relationship between the United States and Canada. Sometimes the term is used disparagingly, intended to deride Canada as an unimportant neighbor. In the Quebec general election, 1989, the political party Parti 51 ran 11 candidates on a platform of Quebec seceding from Canada to join the United States (with its leader, André Perron, claiming Quebec could not survive as an independent nation). The party attracted <hl> just 3,846 votes <hl> across the province, 0.11% of the total votes cast. In comparison, the other parties in favour of sovereignty of Quebec in that election got 40.16% (PQ) and 1.22% (NPDQ).


Question: What did the other parties receive that year?

Answer: 40.16% (PQ) and 1.22% (NPDQ)

In the United States, the term "the 51st state" when applied to Canada can serve to highlight the similarities and close relationship between the United States and Canada. Sometimes the term is used disparagingly, intended to deride Canada as an unimportant neighbor. In the Quebec general election, 1989, the political party Parti 51 ran 11 candidates on a platform of Quebec seceding from Canada to join the United States (with its leader, André Perron, claiming Quebec could not survive as an independent nation). The party attracted just 3,846 votes across the province, 0.11% of the total votes cast. <hl> In comparison, the other parties in favour of sovereignty of Quebec in that election got 40.16% (PQ) and 1.22% (NPDQ) . <hl>

In the United States, the term "the 51st state" when applied to Canada can serve to highlight the similarities and close relationship between the United States and Canada. Sometimes the term is used disparagingly, intended to deride Canada as an unimportant neighbor. In the Quebec general election, 1989, the political party Parti 51 ran 11 candidates on a platform of Quebec seceding from Canada to join the United States (with its leader, André Perron, claiming Quebec could not survive as an independent nation). The party attracted just 3,846 votes across the province, 0.11% of the total votes cast. In comparison, the other parties in favour of sovereignty of Quebec in that election got <hl> 40.16% (PQ) and 1.22% (NPDQ) <hl>.

In comparison, the other parties in favour of sovereignty of Quebec in that election got <hl> 40.16% (PQ) and 1.22% (NPDQ) <hl> .


Question: When did Panama have the US-ruled Canal Zone Territory?

Due to geographical proximity of the Central American countries to the U.S. which has powerful military, economic, and political influences, there were several movements and proposals by the United States during the 19th and 20th centuries to annex some or all of the Central American republics (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras with the formerly British-ruled Bay Islands, Nicaragua, Panama which had the U.S.-ruled Canal Zone territory from 1903 to 1979, and formerly British Honduras or Belize since 1981). However, the U.S. never acted on these proposals from some U.S. politicians; some of which were never delivered or considered seriously. In 2001, El Salvador adopted the U.S. dollar as its currency, while Panama has used it for decades due to its ties to the Canal Zone.

Answer: from 1903 to 1979

<hl> Due to geographical proximity of the Central American countries to the U.S. which has powerful military, economic, and political influences, there were several movements and proposals by the United States during the 19th and 20th centuries to annex some or all of the Central American republics (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras with the formerly British-ruled Bay Islands, Nicaragua, Panama which had the U.S.-ruled Canal Zone territory from 1903 to 1979 , and formerly British Honduras or Belize since 1981) <hl> . However, the U.S. never acted on these proposals from some U.S. politicians; some of which were never delivered or considered seriously. In 2001, El Salvador adopted the U.S. dollar as its currency, while Panama has used it for decades due to its ties to the Canal Zone.

Due to geographical proximity of the Central American countries to the U.S. which has powerful military, economic, and political influences, there were several movements and proposals by the United States during the 19th and 20th centuries to annex some or all of the Central American republics (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras with the formerly British-ruled Bay Islands, Nicaragua, Panama which had the U.S.-ruled Canal Zone territory <hl> from 1903 to 1979 <hl>, and formerly British Honduras or Belize since 1981). However, the U.S. never acted on these proposals from some U.S. politicians; some of which were never delivered or considered seriously. In 2001, El Salvador adopted the U.S. dollar as its currency, while Panama has used it for decades due to its ties to the Canal Zone.

Due to geographical proximity of the Central American countries to the U.S. which has powerful military, economic, and political influences, there were several movements and proposals by the United States during the 19th and 20th centuries to annex some or all of the Central American republics (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras with the formerly British-ruled Bay Islands, Nicaragua, Panama which had the U.S.-ruled Canal Zone territory <hl> from 1903 to 1979 <hl> , and formerly British Honduras or Belize since 1981)


Question: When did El Salvador adopt the US Dollar as its currency?

Answer: 2001

Due to geographical proximity of the Central American countries to the U.S. which has powerful military, economic, and political influences, there were several movements and proposals by the United States during the 19th and 20th centuries to annex some or all of the Central American republics (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras with the formerly British-ruled Bay Islands, Nicaragua, Panama which had the U.S.-ruled Canal Zone territory from 1903 to 1979, and formerly British Honduras or Belize since 1981). However, the U.S. never acted on these proposals from some U.S. politicians; some of which were never delivered or considered seriously. <hl> In 2001 , El Salvador adopted the U.S. dollar as its currency, while Panama has used it for decades due to its ties to the Canal Zone. <hl>

Due to geographical proximity of the Central American countries to the U.S. which has powerful military, economic, and political influences, there were several movements and proposals by the United States during the 19th and 20th centuries to annex some or all of the Central American republics (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras with the formerly British-ruled Bay Islands, Nicaragua, Panama which had the U.S.-ruled Canal Zone territory from 1903 to 1979, and formerly British Honduras or Belize since 1981). However, the U.S. never acted on these proposals from some U.S. politicians; some of which were never delivered or considered seriously. In <hl> 2001 <hl>, El Salvador adopted the U.S. dollar as its currency, while Panama has used it for decades due to its ties to the Canal Zone.

In <hl> 2001 <hl> , El Salvador adopted the U.S. dollar as its currency, while Panama has used it for decades due to its ties to the Canal Zone.


Question: When did the British Honduras become Belize?

Answer: since 1981

<hl> Due to geographical proximity of the Central American countries to the U.S. which has powerful military, economic, and political influences, there were several movements and proposals by the United States during the 19th and 20th centuries to annex some or all of the Central American republics (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras with the formerly British-ruled Bay Islands, Nicaragua, Panama which had the U.S.-ruled Canal Zone territory from 1903 to 1979, and formerly British Honduras or Belize since 1981 ). <hl> However, the U.S. never acted on these proposals from some U.S. politicians; some of which were never delivered or considered seriously. In 2001, El Salvador adopted the U.S. dollar as its currency, while Panama has used it for decades due to its ties to the Canal Zone.

Due to geographical proximity of the Central American countries to the U.S. which has powerful military, economic, and political influences, there were several movements and proposals by the United States during the 19th and 20th centuries to annex some or all of the Central American republics (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras with the formerly British-ruled Bay Islands, Nicaragua, Panama which had the U.S.-ruled Canal Zone territory from 1903 to 1979, and formerly British Honduras or Belize <hl> since 1981 <hl>). However, the U.S. never acted on these proposals from some U.S. politicians; some of which were never delivered or considered seriously. In 2001, El Salvador adopted the U.S. dollar as its currency, while Panama has used it for decades due to its ties to the Canal Zone.

Due to geographical proximity of the Central American countries to the U.S. which has powerful military, economic, and political influences, there were several movements and proposals by the United States during the 19th and 20th centuries to annex some or all of the Central American republics (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras with the formerly British-ruled Bay Islands, Nicaragua, Panama which had the U.S.-ruled Canal Zone territory from 1903 to 1979, and formerly British Honduras or Belize <hl> since 1981 <hl> ).


Question: What country was Cuba a territory of?

Cuba, like many Spanish territories, wanted to break free from Spain. A pro-independence movement in Cuba was supported by the U.S., and Cuban guerrilla leaders wanted annexation to the United States, but Cuban revolutionary leader José Martí called for Cuban nationhood. When the U.S. battleship Maine sank in Havana Harbor, the U.S. blamed Spain and the Spanish–American War broke out in 1898. After the U.S. won, Spain relinquished claim of sovereignty over territories, including Cuba. The U.S. administered Cuba as a protectorate until 1902. Several decades later in 1959, the corrupt Cuban government of U.S.-backed Fulgencio Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro. Castro installed a Marxist–Leninist government allied with the Soviet Union, which has been in power ever since.

Answer: Spain

<hl> Cuba, like many Spanish territories, wanted to break free from Spain . <hl> A pro-independence movement in Cuba was supported by the U.S., and Cuban guerrilla leaders wanted annexation to the United States, but Cuban revolutionary leader José Martí called for Cuban nationhood. When the U.S. battleship Maine sank in Havana Harbor, the U.S. blamed Spain and the Spanish–American War broke out in 1898. After the U.S. won, Spain relinquished claim of sovereignty over territories, including Cuba. The U.S. administered Cuba as a protectorate until 1902. Several decades later in 1959, the corrupt Cuban government of U.S.-backed Fulgencio Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro. Castro installed a Marxist–Leninist government allied with the Soviet Union, which has been in power ever since.

Cuba, like many Spanish territories, wanted to break free from <hl> Spain <hl>. A pro-independence movement in Cuba was supported by the U.S., and Cuban guerrilla leaders wanted annexation to the United States, but Cuban revolutionary leader José Martí called for Cuban nationhood. When the U.S. battleship Maine sank in Havana Harbor, the U.S. blamed Spain and the Spanish–American War broke out in 1898. After the U.S. won, Spain relinquished claim of sovereignty over territories, including Cuba. The U.S. administered Cuba as a protectorate until 1902. Several decades later in 1959, the corrupt Cuban government of U.S.-backed Fulgencio Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro. Castro installed a Marxist–Leninist government allied with the Soviet Union, which has been in power ever since.

Cuba, like many Spanish territories, wanted to break free from <hl> Spain <hl> .


Question: What battleship sunk in the Havana Harbor?

Answer: Maine

Cuba, like many Spanish territories, wanted to break free from Spain. A pro-independence movement in Cuba was supported by the U.S., and Cuban guerrilla leaders wanted annexation to the United States, but Cuban revolutionary leader José Martí called for Cuban nationhood. <hl> When the U.S. battleship Maine sank in Havana Harbor, the U.S. blamed Spain and the Spanish–American War broke out in 1898. <hl> After the U.S. won, Spain relinquished claim of sovereignty over territories, including Cuba. The U.S. administered Cuba as a protectorate until 1902. Several decades later in 1959, the corrupt Cuban government of U.S.-backed Fulgencio Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro. Castro installed a Marxist–Leninist government allied with the Soviet Union, which has been in power ever since.

Cuba, like many Spanish territories, wanted to break free from Spain. A pro-independence movement in Cuba was supported by the U.S., and Cuban guerrilla leaders wanted annexation to the United States, but Cuban revolutionary leader José Martí called for Cuban nationhood. When the U.S. battleship <hl> Maine <hl> sank in Havana Harbor, the U.S. blamed Spain and the Spanish–American War broke out in 1898. After the U.S. won, Spain relinquished claim of sovereignty over territories, including Cuba. The U.S. administered Cuba as a protectorate until 1902. Several decades later in 1959, the corrupt Cuban government of U.S.-backed Fulgencio Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro. Castro installed a Marxist–Leninist government allied with the Soviet Union, which has been in power ever since.


Question: When did Fidel Castro overthrow the Cuban government?

Answer: 1959

Cuba, like many Spanish territories, wanted to break free from Spain. A pro-independence movement in Cuba was supported by the U.S., and Cuban guerrilla leaders wanted annexation to the United States, but Cuban revolutionary leader José Martí called for Cuban nationhood. When the U.S. battleship Maine sank in Havana Harbor, the U.S. blamed Spain and the Spanish–American War broke out in 1898. After the U.S. won, Spain relinquished claim of sovereignty over territories, including Cuba. The U.S. administered Cuba as a protectorate until 1902. <hl> Several decades later in 1959 , the corrupt Cuban government of U.S.-backed Fulgencio Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro. <hl> Castro installed a Marxist–Leninist government allied with the Soviet Union, which has been in power ever since.

Cuba, like many Spanish territories, wanted to break free from Spain. A pro-independence movement in Cuba was supported by the U.S., and Cuban guerrilla leaders wanted annexation to the United States, but Cuban revolutionary leader José Martí called for Cuban nationhood. When the U.S. battleship Maine sank in Havana Harbor, the U.S. blamed Spain and the Spanish–American War broke out in 1898. After the U.S. won, Spain relinquished claim of sovereignty over territories, including Cuba. The U.S. administered Cuba as a protectorate until 1902. Several decades later in <hl> 1959 <hl>, the corrupt Cuban government of U.S.-backed Fulgencio Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro. Castro installed a Marxist–Leninist government allied with the Soviet Union, which has been in power ever since.

Several decades later in <hl> 1959 <hl> , the corrupt Cuban government of U.S.-backed Fulgencio Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro.


Question: What government did Castro install?

Answer: Marxist–Leninist government

Cuba, like many Spanish territories, wanted to break free from Spain. A pro-independence movement in Cuba was supported by the U.S., and Cuban guerrilla leaders wanted annexation to the United States, but Cuban revolutionary leader José Martí called for Cuban nationhood. When the U.S. battleship Maine sank in Havana Harbor, the U.S. blamed Spain and the Spanish–American War broke out in 1898. After the U.S. won, Spain relinquished claim of sovereignty over territories, including Cuba. The U.S. administered Cuba as a protectorate until 1902. Several decades later in 1959, the corrupt Cuban government of U.S.-backed Fulgencio Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro. <hl> Castro installed a Marxist–Leninist government allied with the Soviet Union, which has been in power ever since. <hl>

Cuba, like many Spanish territories, wanted to break free from Spain. A pro-independence movement in Cuba was supported by the U.S., and Cuban guerrilla leaders wanted annexation to the United States, but Cuban revolutionary leader José Martí called for Cuban nationhood. When the U.S. battleship Maine sank in Havana Harbor, the U.S. blamed Spain and the Spanish–American War broke out in 1898. After the U.S. won, Spain relinquished claim of sovereignty over territories, including Cuba. The U.S. administered Cuba as a protectorate until 1902. Several decades later in 1959, the corrupt Cuban government of U.S.-backed Fulgencio Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro. Castro installed a <hl> Marxist–Leninist government <hl> allied with the Soviet Union, which has been in power ever since.


Question: Why is Israel referred to as the 51st state?

Several websites assert that Israel is the 51st state due to the annual funding and defense support it receives from the United States. An example of this concept can be found in 2003 when Martine Rothblatt published a book called Two Stars for Peace that argued for the addition of Israel and the Palestinian territories surrounding it as the 51st state in the Union. The American State of Canaan, is a book published by Prof. Alfred de Grazia, political science and sociologist, in March 2009, proposing the creation of the 51st and 52nd states from Israel and the Palestinian territories.

Answer: the annual funding and defense support it receives from the United States

<hl> Several websites assert that Israel is the 51st state due to the annual funding and defense support it receives from the United States . <hl> An example of this concept can be found in 2003 when Martine Rothblatt published a book called Two Stars for Peace that argued for the addition of Israel and the Palestinian territories surrounding it as the 51st state in the Union. The American State of Canaan, is a book published by Prof. Alfred de Grazia, political science and sociologist, in March 2009, proposing the creation of the 51st and 52nd states from Israel and the Palestinian territories.

Several websites assert that Israel is the 51st state due to <hl> the annual funding and defense support it receives from the United States <hl>. An example of this concept can be found in 2003 when Martine Rothblatt published a book called Two Stars for Peace that argued for the addition of Israel and the Palestinian territories surrounding it as the 51st state in the Union. The American State of Canaan, is a book published by Prof. Alfred de Grazia, political science and sociologist, in March 2009, proposing the creation of the 51st and 52nd states from Israel and the Palestinian territories.

Several websites assert that Israel is the 51st state due to <hl> the annual funding and defense support it receives from the United States <hl> .


Question: What book did Martine Rothblatt publish?

Answer: Two Stars for Peace

Several websites assert that Israel is the 51st state due to the annual funding and defense support it receives from the United States. <hl> An example of this concept can be found in 2003 when Martine Rothblatt published a book called Two Stars for Peace that argued for the addition of Israel and the Palestinian territories surrounding it as the 51st state in the Union. <hl> The American State of Canaan, is a book published by Prof. Alfred de Grazia, political science and sociologist, in March 2009, proposing the creation of the 51st and 52nd states from Israel and the Palestinian territories.

Several websites assert that Israel is the 51st state due to the annual funding and defense support it receives from the United States. An example of this concept can be found in 2003 when Martine Rothblatt published a book called <hl> Two Stars for Peace <hl> that argued for the addition of Israel and the Palestinian territories surrounding it as the 51st state in the Union. The American State of Canaan, is a book published by Prof. Alfred de Grazia, political science and sociologist, in March 2009, proposing the creation of the 51st and 52nd states from Israel and the Palestinian territories.


Question: When was Two Stars for Peace published?

Answer: 2003

Several websites assert that Israel is the 51st state due to the annual funding and defense support it receives from the United States. <hl> An example of this concept can be found in 2003 when Martine Rothblatt published a book called Two Stars for Peace that argued for the addition of Israel and the Palestinian territories surrounding it as the 51st state in the Union. <hl> The American State of Canaan, is a book published by Prof. Alfred de Grazia, political science and sociologist, in March 2009, proposing the creation of the 51st and 52nd states from Israel and the Palestinian territories.

Several websites assert that Israel is the 51st state due to the annual funding and defense support it receives from the United States. An example of this concept can be found in <hl> 2003 <hl> when Martine Rothblatt published a book called Two Stars for Peace that argued for the addition of Israel and the Palestinian territories surrounding it as the 51st state in the Union. The American State of Canaan, is a book published by Prof. Alfred de Grazia, political science and sociologist, in March 2009, proposing the creation of the 51st and 52nd states from Israel and the Palestinian territories.


Question: Who wrote the book The American State of Canaan?

Answer: Alfred de Grazia

Several websites assert that Israel is the 51st state due to the annual funding and defense support it receives from the United States. An example of this concept can be found in 2003 when Martine Rothblatt published a book called Two Stars for Peace that argued for the addition of Israel and the Palestinian territories surrounding it as the 51st state in the Union. The American State of Canaan, is a book published by Prof. <hl> Alfred de Grazia , political science and sociologist, in March 2009, proposing the creation of the 51st and 52nd states from Israel and the Palestinian territories. <hl>

Several websites assert that Israel is the 51st state due to the annual funding and defense support it receives from the United States. An example of this concept can be found in 2003 when Martine Rothblatt published a book called Two Stars for Peace that argued for the addition of Israel and the Palestinian territories surrounding it as the 51st state in the Union. The American State of Canaan, is a book published by Prof. <hl> Alfred de Grazia <hl>, political science and sociologist, in March 2009, proposing the creation of the 51st and 52nd states from Israel and the Palestinian territories.

<hl> Alfred de Grazia <hl> , political science and sociologist, in March 2009, proposing the creation of the 51st and 52nd states from Israel and the Palestinian territories.


Question: When did Artcle 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco come into effect?

In Article 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco between the Allied Powers and Japan, which came into force in April 1952, the U.S. put the outlying islands of the Ryukyus, including the island of Okinawa—home to over 1 million Okinawans related to the Japanese—and the Bonin Islands, the Volcano Islands, and Iwo Jima into U.S. trusteeship. All these trusteeships were slowly returned to Japanese rule. Okinawa was returned on May 15, 1972, but the U.S. stations troops in the island's bases as a defense for Japan.

Answer: April 1952

<hl> In Article 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco between the Allied Powers and Japan, which came into force in April 1952 , the U.S. put the outlying islands of the Ryukyus, including the island of Okinawa—home to over 1 million Okinawans related to the Japanese—and the Bonin Islands, the Volcano Islands, and Iwo Jima into U.S. trusteeship. <hl> All these trusteeships were slowly returned to Japanese rule. Okinawa was returned on May 15, 1972, but the U.S. stations troops in the island's bases as a defense for Japan.

In Article 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco between the Allied Powers and Japan, which came into force in <hl> April 1952 <hl>, the U.S. put the outlying islands of the Ryukyus, including the island of Okinawa—home to over 1 million Okinawans related to the Japanese—and the Bonin Islands, the Volcano Islands, and Iwo Jima into U.S. trusteeship. All these trusteeships were slowly returned to Japanese rule. Okinawa was returned on May 15, 1972, but the U.S. stations troops in the island's bases as a defense for Japan.

In Article 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco between the Allied Powers and Japan, which came into force in <hl> April 1952 <hl> , the U.S. put the outlying islands of the Ryukyus, including the island of Okinawa—home to over 1 million Okinawans related to the Japanese—and the Bonin Islands, the Volcano Islands, and Iwo Jima into U.S. trusteeship.


Question: How many people lived on the island of Okinawa?

Answer: over 1 million

<hl> In Article 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco between the Allied Powers and Japan, which came into force in April 1952, the U.S. put the outlying islands of the Ryukyus, including the island of Okinawa—home to over 1 million Okinawans related to the Japanese—and the Bonin Islands, the Volcano Islands, and Iwo Jima into U.S. trusteeship. <hl> All these trusteeships were slowly returned to Japanese rule. Okinawa was returned on May 15, 1972, but the U.S. stations troops in the island's bases as a defense for Japan.

In Article 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco between the Allied Powers and Japan, which came into force in April 1952, the U.S. put the outlying islands of the Ryukyus, including the island of Okinawa—home to <hl> over 1 million <hl> Okinawans related to the Japanese—and the Bonin Islands, the Volcano Islands, and Iwo Jima into U.S. trusteeship. All these trusteeships were slowly returned to Japanese rule. Okinawa was returned on May 15, 1972, but the U.S. stations troops in the island's bases as a defense for Japan.


Question: When was Okinawa finally returned?

Answer: May 15, 1972

In Article 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco between the Allied Powers and Japan, which came into force in April 1952, the U.S. put the outlying islands of the Ryukyus, including the island of Okinawa—home to over 1 million Okinawans related to the Japanese—and the Bonin Islands, the Volcano Islands, and Iwo Jima into U.S. trusteeship. All these trusteeships were slowly returned to Japanese rule. <hl> Okinawa was returned on May 15, 1972 , but the U.S. stations troops in the island's bases as a defense for Japan. <hl>

In Article 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco between the Allied Powers and Japan, which came into force in April 1952, the U.S. put the outlying islands of the Ryukyus, including the island of Okinawa—home to over 1 million Okinawans related to the Japanese—and the Bonin Islands, the Volcano Islands, and Iwo Jima into U.S. trusteeship. All these trusteeships were slowly returned to Japanese rule. Okinawa was returned on <hl> May 15, 1972 <hl>, but the U.S. stations troops in the island's bases as a defense for Japan.

Okinawa was returned on <hl> May 15, 1972 <hl> , but the U.S. stations troops in the island's bases as a defense for Japan.


Question: Why did the US have troops on Okinawa?

Answer: as a defense for Japan.

In Article 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco between the Allied Powers and Japan, which came into force in April 1952, the U.S. put the outlying islands of the Ryukyus, including the island of Okinawa—home to over 1 million Okinawans related to the Japanese—and the Bonin Islands, the Volcano Islands, and Iwo Jima into U.S. trusteeship. All these trusteeships were slowly returned to Japanese rule. <hl> Okinawa was returned on May 15, 1972, but the U.S. stations troops in the island's bases as a defense for Japan. <hl>

In Article 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco between the Allied Powers and Japan, which came into force in April 1952, the U.S. put the outlying islands of the Ryukyus, including the island of Okinawa—home to over 1 million Okinawans related to the Japanese—and the Bonin Islands, the Volcano Islands, and Iwo Jima into U.S. trusteeship. All these trusteeships were slowly returned to Japanese rule. Okinawa was returned on May 15, 1972, but the U.S. stations troops in the island's bases <hl> as a defense for Japan. <hl>


Question: When did the 51st State Party attempt to register in New Zealand?

In 2010 there was an attempt to register a 51st State Party with the New Zealand Electoral Commission. The party advocates New Zealand becoming the 51st state of the United States of America. The party's secretary is Paulus Telfer, a former Christchurch mayoral candidate. On February 5, 2010, the party applied to register a logo with the Electoral Commission. The logo – a US flag with 51 stars – was rejected by the Electoral Commission on the grounds that it was likely to cause confusion or mislead electors. As of 2014[update], the party remains unregistered and cannot appear on a ballot.

Answer: 2010

<hl> In 2010 there was an attempt to register a 51st State Party with the New Zealand Electoral Commission. <hl> The party advocates New Zealand becoming the 51st state of the United States of America. The party's secretary is Paulus Telfer, a former Christchurch mayoral candidate. On February 5, 2010, the party applied to register a logo with the Electoral Commission. The logo – a US flag with 51 stars – was rejected by the Electoral Commission on the grounds that it was likely to cause confusion or mislead electors. As of 2014[update], the party remains unregistered and cannot appear on a ballot.

In <hl> 2010 <hl> there was an attempt to register a 51st State Party with the New Zealand Electoral Commission. The party advocates New Zealand becoming the 51st state of the United States of America. The party's secretary is Paulus Telfer, a former Christchurch mayoral candidate. On February 5, 2010, the party applied to register a logo with the Electoral Commission. The logo – a US flag with 51 stars – was rejected by the Electoral Commission on the grounds that it was likely to cause confusion or mislead electors. As of 2014[update], the party remains unregistered and cannot appear on a ballot.


Question: Who is the secretary of the 51st State Party?

Answer: Paulus Telfer

In 2010 there was an attempt to register a 51st State Party with the New Zealand Electoral Commission. The party advocates New Zealand becoming the 51st state of the United States of America. <hl> The party's secretary is Paulus Telfer , a former Christchurch mayoral candidate. <hl> On February 5, 2010, the party applied to register a logo with the Electoral Commission. The logo – a US flag with 51 stars – was rejected by the Electoral Commission on the grounds that it was likely to cause confusion or mislead electors. As of 2014[update], the party remains unregistered and cannot appear on a ballot.

In 2010 there was an attempt to register a 51st State Party with the New Zealand Electoral Commission. The party advocates New Zealand becoming the 51st state of the United States of America. The party's secretary is <hl> Paulus Telfer <hl>, a former Christchurch mayoral candidate. On February 5, 2010, the party applied to register a logo with the Electoral Commission. The logo – a US flag with 51 stars – was rejected by the Electoral Commission on the grounds that it was likely to cause confusion or mislead electors. As of 2014[update], the party remains unregistered and cannot appear on a ballot.

The party's secretary is <hl> Paulus Telfer <hl> , a former Christchurch mayoral candidate.


Question: What does the 51st State Party advocate?

Answer: The party advocates New Zealand becoming the 51st state of the United States of America

In 2010 there was an attempt to register a 51st State Party with the New Zealand Electoral Commission. <hl> The party advocates New Zealand becoming the 51st state of the United States of America . <hl> The party's secretary is Paulus Telfer, a former Christchurch mayoral candidate. On February 5, 2010, the party applied to register a logo with the Electoral Commission. The logo – a US flag with 51 stars – was rejected by the Electoral Commission on the grounds that it was likely to cause confusion or mislead electors. As of 2014[update], the party remains unregistered and cannot appear on a ballot.

In 2010 there was an attempt to register a 51st State Party with the New Zealand Electoral Commission. <hl> The party advocates New Zealand becoming the 51st state of the United States of America <hl>. The party's secretary is Paulus Telfer, a former Christchurch mayoral candidate. On February 5, 2010, the party applied to register a logo with the Electoral Commission. The logo – a US flag with 51 stars – was rejected by the Electoral Commission on the grounds that it was likely to cause confusion or mislead electors. As of 2014[update], the party remains unregistered and cannot appear on a ballot.

<hl> The party advocates New Zealand becoming the 51st state of the United States of America <hl> .


Question: Can people in New Zealand vote for the 51st State Party?

Answer: the party remains unregistered and cannot appear on a ballot.

In 2010 there was an attempt to register a 51st State Party with the New Zealand Electoral Commission. The party advocates New Zealand becoming the 51st state of the United States of America. The party's secretary is Paulus Telfer, a former Christchurch mayoral candidate. On February 5, 2010, the party applied to register a logo with the Electoral Commission. The logo – a US flag with 51 stars – was rejected by the Electoral Commission on the grounds that it was likely to cause confusion or mislead electors. <hl> As of 2014[update], the party remains unregistered and cannot appear on a ballot. <hl>

In 2010 there was an attempt to register a 51st State Party with the New Zealand Electoral Commission. The party advocates New Zealand becoming the 51st state of the United States of America. The party's secretary is Paulus Telfer, a former Christchurch mayoral candidate. On February 5, 2010, the party applied to register a logo with the Electoral Commission. The logo – a US flag with 51 stars – was rejected by the Electoral Commission on the grounds that it was likely to cause confusion or mislead electors. As of 2014[update], <hl> the party remains unregistered and cannot appear on a ballot. <hl>


Question: Who is the mayor of Tirana?

Albania has often been called the 51st state for its perceived strongly pro-American positions, mainly because of the United States' policies towards it. In reference to President George W. Bush's 2007 European tour, Edi Rama, Tirana's mayor and leader of the opposition Socialists, said: "Albania is for sure the most pro-American country in Europe, maybe even in the world ... Nowhere else can you find such respect and hospitality for the President of the United States. Even in Michigan, he wouldn't be as welcome." At the time of ex-Secretary of State James Baker's visit in 1992, there was even a move to hold a referendum declaring the country as the 51st American state. In addition to Albania, Kosovo which is predominately Albanian is seen as a 51st state due to the heavily presence and influence of the United States. The US has had troops and the largest base outside US territory, Camp Bondsteel in the territory since 1999.

Answer: Edi Rama,

Albania has often been called the 51st state for its perceived strongly pro-American positions, mainly because of the United States' policies towards it. <hl> In reference to President George W. Bush's 2007 European tour, Edi Rama, Tirana's mayor and leader of the opposition Socialists, said: "Albania is for sure the most pro-American country in Europe, maybe even in the world ... <hl> Nowhere else can you find such respect and hospitality for the President of the United States. Even in Michigan, he wouldn't be as welcome." At the time of ex-Secretary of State James Baker's visit in 1992, there was even a move to hold a referendum declaring the country as the 51st American state. In addition to Albania, Kosovo which is predominately Albanian is seen as a 51st state due to the heavily presence and influence of the United States. The US has had troops and the largest base outside US territory, Camp Bondsteel in the territory since 1999.

Albania has often been called the 51st state for its perceived strongly pro-American positions, mainly because of the United States' policies towards it. In reference to President George W. Bush's 2007 European tour, <hl> Edi Rama, <hl> Tirana's mayor and leader of the opposition Socialists, said: "Albania is for sure the most pro-American country in Europe, maybe even in the world ... Nowhere else can you find such respect and hospitality for the President of the United States. Even in Michigan, he wouldn't be as welcome." At the time of ex-Secretary of State James Baker's visit in 1992, there was even a move to hold a referendum declaring the country as the 51st American state. In addition to Albania, Kosovo which is predominately Albanian is seen as a 51st state due to the heavily presence and influence of the United States. The US has had troops and the largest base outside US territory, Camp Bondsteel in the territory since 1999.


Question: Who said that Albania is the most pro-American country in Europe?

Answer: Edi Rama

Albania has often been called the 51st state for its perceived strongly pro-American positions, mainly because of the United States' policies towards it. <hl> In reference to President George W. Bush's 2007 European tour, Edi Rama , Tirana's mayor and leader of the opposition Socialists, said: "Albania is for sure the most pro-American country in Europe, maybe even in the world ... <hl> Nowhere else can you find such respect and hospitality for the President of the United States. Even in Michigan, he wouldn't be as welcome." At the time of ex-Secretary of State James Baker's visit in 1992, there was even a move to hold a referendum declaring the country as the 51st American state. In addition to Albania, Kosovo which is predominately Albanian is seen as a 51st state due to the heavily presence and influence of the United States. The US has had troops and the largest base outside US territory, Camp Bondsteel in the territory since 1999.

Albania has often been called the 51st state for its perceived strongly pro-American positions, mainly because of the United States' policies towards it. In reference to President George W. Bush's 2007 European tour, <hl> Edi Rama <hl>, Tirana's mayor and leader of the opposition Socialists, said: "Albania is for sure the most pro-American country in Europe, maybe even in the world ... Nowhere else can you find such respect and hospitality for the President of the United States. Even in Michigan, he wouldn't be as welcome." At the time of ex-Secretary of State James Baker's visit in 1992, there was even a move to hold a referendum declaring the country as the 51st American state. In addition to Albania, Kosovo which is predominately Albanian is seen as a 51st state due to the heavily presence and influence of the United States. The US has had troops and the largest base outside US territory, Camp Bondsteel in the territory since 1999.

In reference to President George W. Bush's 2007 European tour, <hl> Edi Rama <hl> , Tirana's mayor and leader of the opposition Socialists, said: "Albania is for sure the most pro-American country in Europe, maybe even in the world ...


Question: When did James Baker visit Albania as Secretary of State?

Answer: 1992

Albania has often been called the 51st state for its perceived strongly pro-American positions, mainly because of the United States' policies towards it. In reference to President George W. Bush's 2007 European tour, Edi Rama, Tirana's mayor and leader of the opposition Socialists, said: "Albania is for sure the most pro-American country in Europe, maybe even in the world ... Nowhere else can you find such respect and hospitality for the President of the United States. Even in Michigan, he wouldn't be as welcome." <hl> At the time of ex-Secretary of State James Baker's visit in 1992 , there was even a move to hold a referendum declaring the country as the 51st American state. <hl> In addition to Albania, Kosovo which is predominately Albanian is seen as a 51st state due to the heavily presence and influence of the United States. The US has had troops and the largest base outside US territory, Camp Bondsteel in the territory since 1999.

Albania has often been called the 51st state for its perceived strongly pro-American positions, mainly because of the United States' policies towards it. In reference to President George W. Bush's 2007 European tour, Edi Rama, Tirana's mayor and leader of the opposition Socialists, said: "Albania is for sure the most pro-American country in Europe, maybe even in the world ... Nowhere else can you find such respect and hospitality for the President of the United States. Even in Michigan, he wouldn't be as welcome." At the time of ex-Secretary of State James Baker's visit in <hl> 1992 <hl>, there was even a move to hold a referendum declaring the country as the 51st American state. In addition to Albania, Kosovo which is predominately Albanian is seen as a 51st state due to the heavily presence and influence of the United States. The US has had troops and the largest base outside US territory, Camp Bondsteel in the territory since 1999.

At the time of ex-Secretary of State James Baker's visit in <hl> 1992 <hl> , there was even a move to hold a referendum declaring the country as the 51st American state.


Question: What is the name of the largest US military base outside of US territory?

Answer: Camp Bondsteel

Albania has often been called the 51st state for its perceived strongly pro-American positions, mainly because of the United States' policies towards it. In reference to President George W. Bush's 2007 European tour, Edi Rama, Tirana's mayor and leader of the opposition Socialists, said: "Albania is for sure the most pro-American country in Europe, maybe even in the world ... Nowhere else can you find such respect and hospitality for the President of the United States. Even in Michigan, he wouldn't be as welcome." At the time of ex-Secretary of State James Baker's visit in 1992, there was even a move to hold a referendum declaring the country as the 51st American state. In addition to Albania, Kosovo which is predominately Albanian is seen as a 51st state due to the heavily presence and influence of the United States. <hl> The US has had troops and the largest base outside US territory, Camp Bondsteel in the territory since 1999. <hl>

Albania has often been called the 51st state for its perceived strongly pro-American positions, mainly because of the United States' policies towards it. In reference to President George W. Bush's 2007 European tour, Edi Rama, Tirana's mayor and leader of the opposition Socialists, said: "Albania is for sure the most pro-American country in Europe, maybe even in the world ... Nowhere else can you find such respect and hospitality for the President of the United States. Even in Michigan, he wouldn't be as welcome." At the time of ex-Secretary of State James Baker's visit in 1992, there was even a move to hold a referendum declaring the country as the 51st American state. In addition to Albania, Kosovo which is predominately Albanian is seen as a 51st state due to the heavily presence and influence of the United States. The US has had troops and the largest base outside US territory, <hl> Camp Bondsteel <hl> in the territory since 1999.


Question: When did the US control Greenland?

During World War II, when Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany, the United States briefly controlled Greenland for battlefields and protection. In 1946, the United States offered to buy Greenland from Denmark for $100 million ($1.2 billion today) but Denmark refused to sell it. Several politicians and others have in recent years argued that Greenland could hypothetically be in a better financial situation as a part of the United States; for instance mentioned by professor Gudmundur Alfredsson at University of Akureyri in 2014. One of the actual reasons behind US interest in Greenland could be the vast natural resources of the island. According to Wikileaks, the U.S. appears to be highly interested in investing in the resource base of the island and in tapping the vast expected hydrocarbons off the Greenlandic coast.

Answer: when Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany

<hl> During World War II, when Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany , the United States briefly controlled Greenland for battlefields and protection. <hl> In 1946, the United States offered to buy Greenland from Denmark for $100 million ($1.2 billion today) but Denmark refused to sell it. Several politicians and others have in recent years argued that Greenland could hypothetically be in a better financial situation as a part of the United States; for instance mentioned by professor Gudmundur Alfredsson at University of Akureyri in 2014. One of the actual reasons behind US interest in Greenland could be the vast natural resources of the island. According to Wikileaks, the U.S. appears to be highly interested in investing in the resource base of the island and in tapping the vast expected hydrocarbons off the Greenlandic coast.

During World War II, <hl> when Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany <hl>, the United States briefly controlled Greenland for battlefields and protection. In 1946, the United States offered to buy Greenland from Denmark for $100 million ($1.2 billion today) but Denmark refused to sell it. Several politicians and others have in recent years argued that Greenland could hypothetically be in a better financial situation as a part of the United States; for instance mentioned by professor Gudmundur Alfredsson at University of Akureyri in 2014. One of the actual reasons behind US interest in Greenland could be the vast natural resources of the island. According to Wikileaks, the U.S. appears to be highly interested in investing in the resource base of the island and in tapping the vast expected hydrocarbons off the Greenlandic coast.

During World War II, <hl> when Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany <hl> , the United States briefly controlled Greenland for battlefields and protection.


Question: How much did the US offer to pay for Greenland?

Answer: $100 million

During World War II, when Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany, the United States briefly controlled Greenland for battlefields and protection. <hl> In 1946, the United States offered to buy Greenland from Denmark for $100 million ($1.2 billion today) <hl> but Denmark refused to sell it. Several politicians and others have in recent years argued that Greenland could hypothetically be in a better financial situation as a part of the United States; for instance mentioned by professor Gudmundur Alfredsson at University of Akureyri in 2014. One of the actual reasons behind US interest in Greenland could be the vast natural resources of the island. According to Wikileaks, the U.S. appears to be highly interested in investing in the resource base of the island and in tapping the vast expected hydrocarbons off the Greenlandic coast.

During World War II, when Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany, the United States briefly controlled Greenland for battlefields and protection. In 1946, the United States offered to buy Greenland from Denmark for <hl> $100 million <hl> ($1.2 billion today) but Denmark refused to sell it. Several politicians and others have in recent years argued that Greenland could hypothetically be in a better financial situation as a part of the United States; for instance mentioned by professor Gudmundur Alfredsson at University of Akureyri in 2014. One of the actual reasons behind US interest in Greenland could be the vast natural resources of the island. According to Wikileaks, the U.S. appears to be highly interested in investing in the resource base of the island and in tapping the vast expected hydrocarbons off the Greenlandic coast.


Question: What university is professor Gudmundur Alfredssson from?

Answer: University of Akureyri

During World War II, when Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany, the United States briefly controlled Greenland for battlefields and protection. In 1946, the United States offered to buy Greenland from Denmark for $100 million ($1.2 billion today) but Denmark refused to sell it. <hl> Several politicians and others have in recent years argued that Greenland could hypothetically be in a better financial situation as a part of the United States; for instance mentioned by professor Gudmundur Alfredsson at University of Akureyri in 2014. <hl> One of the actual reasons behind US interest in Greenland could be the vast natural resources of the island. According to Wikileaks, the U.S. appears to be highly interested in investing in the resource base of the island and in tapping the vast expected hydrocarbons off the Greenlandic coast.

During World War II, when Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany, the United States briefly controlled Greenland for battlefields and protection. In 1946, the United States offered to buy Greenland from Denmark for $100 million ($1.2 billion today) but Denmark refused to sell it. Several politicians and others have in recent years argued that Greenland could hypothetically be in a better financial situation as a part of the United States; for instance mentioned by professor Gudmundur Alfredsson at <hl> University of Akureyri <hl> in 2014. One of the actual reasons behind US interest in Greenland could be the vast natural resources of the island. According to Wikileaks, the U.S. appears to be highly interested in investing in the resource base of the island and in tapping the vast expected hydrocarbons off the Greenlandic coast.


Question: What is one reason the US would be interested in Greenland?

Answer: the vast expected hydrocarbons off the Greenlandic coast.

During World War II, when Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany, the United States briefly controlled Greenland for battlefields and protection. In 1946, the United States offered to buy Greenland from Denmark for $100 million ($1.2 billion today) but Denmark refused to sell it. Several politicians and others have in recent years argued that Greenland could hypothetically be in a better financial situation as a part of the United States; for instance mentioned by professor Gudmundur Alfredsson at University of Akureyri in 2014. One of the actual reasons behind US interest in Greenland could be the vast natural resources of the island. <hl> According to Wikileaks, the U.S. appears to be highly interested in investing in the resource base of the island and in tapping the vast expected hydrocarbons off the Greenlandic coast. <hl>

During World War II, when Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany, the United States briefly controlled Greenland for battlefields and protection. In 1946, the United States offered to buy Greenland from Denmark for $100 million ($1.2 billion today) but Denmark refused to sell it. Several politicians and others have in recent years argued that Greenland could hypothetically be in a better financial situation as a part of the United States; for instance mentioned by professor Gudmundur Alfredsson at University of Akureyri in 2014. One of the actual reasons behind US interest in Greenland could be the vast natural resources of the island. According to Wikileaks, the U.S. appears to be highly interested in investing in the resource base of the island and in tapping <hl> the vast expected hydrocarbons off the Greenlandic coast. <hl>


Question: What had been Poland's stance towards the US, historically?

Poland has historically been staunchly pro-American, dating back to General Tadeusz Kościuszko and Casimir Pulaski's involvement in the American Revolution. This pro-American stance was reinforced following favorable American intervention in World War I (leading to the creation of an independent Poland) and the Cold War (culminating in a Polish state independent of Soviet influence). Poland contributed a large force to the "Coalition of the Willing" in Iraq. A quote referring to Poland as "the 51st state" has been attributed to James Pavitt, then Central Intelligence Agency Deputy Director for Operations, especially in connection to extraordinary rendition.

Answer: staunchly pro-American

<hl> Poland has historically been staunchly pro-American , dating back to General Tadeusz Kościuszko and Casimir Pulaski's involvement in the American Revolution. <hl> This pro-American stance was reinforced following favorable American intervention in World War I (leading to the creation of an independent Poland) and the Cold War (culminating in a Polish state independent of Soviet influence). Poland contributed a large force to the "Coalition of the Willing" in Iraq. A quote referring to Poland as "the 51st state" has been attributed to James Pavitt, then Central Intelligence Agency Deputy Director for Operations, especially in connection to extraordinary rendition.

Poland has historically been <hl> staunchly pro-American <hl>, dating back to General Tadeusz Kościuszko and Casimir Pulaski's involvement in the American Revolution. This pro-American stance was reinforced following favorable American intervention in World War I (leading to the creation of an independent Poland) and the Cold War (culminating in a Polish state independent of Soviet influence). Poland contributed a large force to the "Coalition of the Willing" in Iraq. A quote referring to Poland as "the 51st state" has been attributed to James Pavitt, then Central Intelligence Agency Deputy Director for Operations, especially in connection to extraordinary rendition.

Poland has historically been <hl> staunchly pro-American <hl> , dating back to General Tadeusz Kościuszko and Casimir Pulaski's involvement in the American Revolution.


Question: What led to the creation of an independent Poland?

Answer: favorable American intervention in World War I

Poland has historically been staunchly pro-American, dating back to General Tadeusz Kościuszko and Casimir Pulaski's involvement in the American Revolution. <hl> This pro-American stance was reinforced following favorable American intervention in World War I (leading to the creation of an independent Poland) and the Cold War (culminating in a Polish state independent of Soviet influence). <hl> Poland contributed a large force to the "Coalition of the Willing" in Iraq. A quote referring to Poland as "the 51st state" has been attributed to James Pavitt, then Central Intelligence Agency Deputy Director for Operations, especially in connection to extraordinary rendition.

Poland has historically been staunchly pro-American, dating back to General Tadeusz Kościuszko and Casimir Pulaski's involvement in the American Revolution. This pro-American stance was reinforced following <hl> favorable American intervention in World War I <hl> (leading to the creation of an independent Poland) and the Cold War (culminating in a Polish state independent of Soviet influence). Poland contributed a large force to the "Coalition of the Willing" in Iraq. A quote referring to Poland as "the 51st state" has been attributed to James Pavitt, then Central Intelligence Agency Deputy Director for Operations, especially in connection to extraordinary rendition.


Question: What did Poland contribute to the "Coalition of the Willing"?

Answer: a large force

Poland has historically been staunchly pro-American, dating back to General Tadeusz Kościuszko and Casimir Pulaski's involvement in the American Revolution. This pro-American stance was reinforced following favorable American intervention in World War I (leading to the creation of an independent Poland) and the Cold War (culminating in a Polish state independent of Soviet influence). <hl> Poland contributed a large force to the "Coalition of the Willing" in Iraq. <hl> A quote referring to Poland as "the 51st state" has been attributed to James Pavitt, then Central Intelligence Agency Deputy Director for Operations, especially in connection to extraordinary rendition.

Poland has historically been staunchly pro-American, dating back to General Tadeusz Kościuszko and Casimir Pulaski's involvement in the American Revolution. This pro-American stance was reinforced following favorable American intervention in World War I (leading to the creation of an independent Poland) and the Cold War (culminating in a Polish state independent of Soviet influence). Poland contributed <hl> a large force <hl> to the "Coalition of the Willing" in Iraq. A quote referring to Poland as "the 51st state" has been attributed to James Pavitt, then Central Intelligence Agency Deputy Director for Operations, especially in connection to extraordinary rendition.


Question: How many members did the Party of Reconstruction in Sicily have in 1944?

The Party of Reconstruction in Sicily, which claimed 40,000 members in 1944, campaigned for Sicily to be admitted as a U.S. state. This party was one of several Sicilian separatist movements active after the downfall of Italian Fascism. Sicilians felt neglected or underrepresented by the Italian government after the annexation of 1861 that ended the rule of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies based in Naples. The large population of Sicilians in America and the American-led Allied invasion of Sicily in July–August 1943 may have contributed to the sentiment.

Answer: 40,000 members

<hl> The Party of Reconstruction in Sicily, which claimed 40,000 members in 1944, campaigned for Sicily to be admitted as a U.S. state. <hl> This party was one of several Sicilian separatist movements active after the downfall of Italian Fascism. Sicilians felt neglected or underrepresented by the Italian government after the annexation of 1861 that ended the rule of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies based in Naples. The large population of Sicilians in America and the American-led Allied invasion of Sicily in July–August 1943 may have contributed to the sentiment.

The Party of Reconstruction in Sicily, which claimed <hl> 40,000 members <hl> in 1944, campaigned for Sicily to be admitted as a U.S. state. This party was one of several Sicilian separatist movements active after the downfall of Italian Fascism. Sicilians felt neglected or underrepresented by the Italian government after the annexation of 1861 that ended the rule of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies based in Naples. The large population of Sicilians in America and the American-led Allied invasion of Sicily in July–August 1943 may have contributed to the sentiment.


Question: What did the Party of Reconstruction in Sicily campaign for?

Answer: for Sicily to be admitted as a U.S. state

<hl> The Party of Reconstruction in Sicily, which claimed 40,000 members in 1944, campaigned for Sicily to be admitted as a U.S. state . <hl> This party was one of several Sicilian separatist movements active after the downfall of Italian Fascism. Sicilians felt neglected or underrepresented by the Italian government after the annexation of 1861 that ended the rule of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies based in Naples. The large population of Sicilians in America and the American-led Allied invasion of Sicily in July–August 1943 may have contributed to the sentiment.

The Party of Reconstruction in Sicily, which claimed 40,000 members in 1944, campaigned <hl> for Sicily to be admitted as a U.S. state <hl>. This party was one of several Sicilian separatist movements active after the downfall of Italian Fascism. Sicilians felt neglected or underrepresented by the Italian government after the annexation of 1861 that ended the rule of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies based in Naples. The large population of Sicilians in America and the American-led Allied invasion of Sicily in July–August 1943 may have contributed to the sentiment.

The Party of Reconstruction in Sicily, which claimed 40,000 members in 1944, campaigned <hl> for Sicily to be admitted as a U.S. state <hl> .


Question: When did the annexation of Sicily by Italy happen?

Answer: 1861

The Party of Reconstruction in Sicily, which claimed 40,000 members in 1944, campaigned for Sicily to be admitted as a U.S. state. This party was one of several Sicilian separatist movements active after the downfall of Italian Fascism. <hl> Sicilians felt neglected or underrepresented by the Italian government after the annexation of 1861 that ended the rule of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies based in Naples. <hl> The large population of Sicilians in America and the American-led Allied invasion of Sicily in July–August 1943 may have contributed to the sentiment.

The Party of Reconstruction in Sicily, which claimed 40,000 members in 1944, campaigned for Sicily to be admitted as a U.S. state. This party was one of several Sicilian separatist movements active after the downfall of Italian Fascism. Sicilians felt neglected or underrepresented by the Italian government after the annexation of <hl> 1861 <hl> that ended the rule of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies based in Naples. The large population of Sicilians in America and the American-led Allied invasion of Sicily in July–August 1943 may have contributed to the sentiment.


Question: When did the Allied invasion of Sicily occur?

Answer: July–August 1943

The Party of Reconstruction in Sicily, which claimed 40,000 members in 1944, campaigned for Sicily to be admitted as a U.S. state. This party was one of several Sicilian separatist movements active after the downfall of Italian Fascism. Sicilians felt neglected or underrepresented by the Italian government after the annexation of 1861 that ended the rule of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies based in Naples. <hl> The large population of Sicilians in America and the American-led Allied invasion of Sicily in July–August 1943 may have contributed to the sentiment. <hl>

The Party of Reconstruction in Sicily, which claimed 40,000 members in 1944, campaigned for Sicily to be admitted as a U.S. state. This party was one of several Sicilian separatist movements active after the downfall of Italian Fascism. Sicilians felt neglected or underrepresented by the Italian government after the annexation of 1861 that ended the rule of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies based in Naples. The large population of Sicilians in America and the American-led Allied invasion of Sicily in <hl> July–August 1943 <hl> may have contributed to the sentiment.


Question: What are the four categories of terra nullius?

There are four categories of terra nullius, land that is unclaimed by any state: the small unclaimed territory of Bir Tawil between Egypt and Sudan, Antarctica, the oceans, and celestial bodies such as the Moon or Mars. In the last three of these, international treaties (the Antarctic Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the Outer Space Treaty respectively) prevent colonization and potential statehood of any of these uninhabited (and, given current technology, not permanently inhabitable) territories.

Answer: the small unclaimed territory of Bir Tawil between Egypt and Sudan, Antarctica, the oceans, and celestial bodies

<hl> There are four categories of terra nullius, land that is unclaimed by any state: the small unclaimed territory of Bir Tawil between Egypt and Sudan, Antarctica, the oceans, and celestial bodies such as the Moon or Mars. <hl> In the last three of these, international treaties (the Antarctic Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the Outer Space Treaty respectively) prevent colonization and potential statehood of any of these uninhabited (and, given current technology, not permanently inhabitable) territories.

There are four categories of terra nullius, land that is unclaimed by any state: <hl> the small unclaimed territory of Bir Tawil between Egypt and Sudan, Antarctica, the oceans, and celestial bodies <hl> such as the Moon or Mars. In the last three of these, international treaties (the Antarctic Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the Outer Space Treaty respectively) prevent colonization and potential statehood of any of these uninhabited (and, given current technology, not permanently inhabitable) territories.


Question: What three treaties exist for unclaimed lands?

Answer: the Antarctic Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the Outer Space Treaty

There are four categories of terra nullius, land that is unclaimed by any state: the small unclaimed territory of Bir Tawil between Egypt and Sudan, Antarctica, the oceans, and celestial bodies such as the Moon or Mars. <hl> In the last three of these, international treaties ( the Antarctic Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the Outer Space Treaty respectively) prevent colonization and potential statehood of any of these uninhabited (and, given current technology, not permanently inhabitable) territories. <hl>

There are four categories of terra nullius, land that is unclaimed by any state: the small unclaimed territory of Bir Tawil between Egypt and Sudan, Antarctica, the oceans, and celestial bodies such as the Moon or Mars. In the last three of these, international treaties (<hl> the Antarctic Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the Outer Space Treaty <hl> respectively) prevent colonization and potential statehood of any of these uninhabited (and, given current technology, not permanently inhabitable) territories.

In the last three of these, international treaties ( <hl> the Antarctic Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the Outer Space Treaty <hl> respectively) prevent colonization and potential statehood of any of these uninhabited (and, given current technology, not permanently inhabitable) territories.


Question: What do the treaties defend against?

Answer: prevent colonization and potential statehood of any of these uninhabited (and, given current technology, not permanently inhabitable) territories.

There are four categories of terra nullius, land that is unclaimed by any state: the small unclaimed territory of Bir Tawil between Egypt and Sudan, Antarctica, the oceans, and celestial bodies such as the Moon or Mars. <hl> In the last three of these, international treaties (the Antarctic Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the Outer Space Treaty respectively) prevent colonization and potential statehood of any of these uninhabited (and, given current technology, not permanently inhabitable) territories. <hl>

There are four categories of terra nullius, land that is unclaimed by any state: the small unclaimed territory of Bir Tawil between Egypt and Sudan, Antarctica, the oceans, and celestial bodies such as the Moon or Mars. In the last three of these, international treaties (the Antarctic Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the Outer Space Treaty respectively) <hl> prevent colonization and potential statehood of any of these uninhabited (and, given current technology, not permanently inhabitable) territories. <hl>


Question: Where is Bir Tawil located?

Answer: between Egypt and Sudan

<hl> There are four categories of terra nullius, land that is unclaimed by any state: the small unclaimed territory of Bir Tawil between Egypt and Sudan , Antarctica, the oceans, and celestial bodies such as the Moon or Mars. <hl> In the last three of these, international treaties (the Antarctic Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the Outer Space Treaty respectively) prevent colonization and potential statehood of any of these uninhabited (and, given current technology, not permanently inhabitable) territories.

There are four categories of terra nullius, land that is unclaimed by any state: the small unclaimed territory of Bir Tawil <hl> between Egypt and Sudan <hl>, Antarctica, the oceans, and celestial bodies such as the Moon or Mars. In the last three of these, international treaties (the Antarctic Treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the Outer Space Treaty respectively) prevent colonization and potential statehood of any of these uninhabited (and, given current technology, not permanently inhabitable) territories.

There are four categories of terra nullius, land that is unclaimed by any state: the small unclaimed territory of Bir Tawil <hl> between Egypt and Sudan <hl> , Antarctica, the oceans, and celestial bodies such as the Moon or Mars.


Question: What device is able to change electric powerinto radio waves and also do the reverse?

An antenna (plural antennae or antennas), or aerial, is an electrical device which converts electric power into radio waves, and vice versa. It is usually used with a radio transmitter or radio receiver. In transmission, a radio transmitter supplies an electric current oscillating at radio frequency (i.e. a high frequency alternating current (AC)) to the antenna's terminals, and the antenna radiates the energy from the current as electromagnetic waves (radio waves). In reception, an antenna intercepts some of the power of an electromagnetic wave in order to produce a tiny voltage at its terminals, that is applied to a receiver to be amplified.

Answer: An antenna

<hl> An antenna (plural antennae or antennas), or aerial, is an electrical device which converts electric power into radio waves, and vice versa. <hl> It is usually used with a radio transmitter or radio receiver. In transmission, a radio transmitter supplies an electric current oscillating at radio frequency (i.e. a high frequency alternating current (AC)) to the antenna's terminals, and the antenna radiates the energy from the current as electromagnetic waves (radio waves). In reception, an antenna intercepts some of the power of an electromagnetic wave in order to produce a tiny voltage at its terminals, that is applied to a receiver to be amplified.

<hl> An antenna <hl> (plural antennae or antennas), or aerial, is an electrical device which converts electric power into radio waves, and vice versa. It is usually used with a radio transmitter or radio receiver. In transmission, a radio transmitter supplies an electric current oscillating at radio frequency (i.e. a high frequency alternating current (AC)) to the antenna's terminals, and the antenna radiates the energy from the current as electromagnetic waves (radio waves). In reception, an antenna intercepts some of the power of an electromagnetic wave in order to produce a tiny voltage at its terminals, that is applied to a receiver to be amplified.


Question: What device is often used in conjuntion with the antenna?

Answer: radio transmitter or radio receiver

An antenna (plural antennae or antennas), or aerial, is an electrical device which converts electric power into radio waves, and vice versa. <hl> It is usually used with a radio transmitter or radio receiver . <hl> In transmission, a radio transmitter supplies an electric current oscillating at radio frequency (i.e. a high frequency alternating current (AC)) to the antenna's terminals, and the antenna radiates the energy from the current as electromagnetic waves (radio waves). In reception, an antenna intercepts some of the power of an electromagnetic wave in order to produce a tiny voltage at its terminals, that is applied to a receiver to be amplified.

An antenna (plural antennae or antennas), or aerial, is an electrical device which converts electric power into radio waves, and vice versa. It is usually used with a <hl> radio transmitter or radio receiver <hl>. In transmission, a radio transmitter supplies an electric current oscillating at radio frequency (i.e. a high frequency alternating current (AC)) to the antenna's terminals, and the antenna radiates the energy from the current as electromagnetic waves (radio waves). In reception, an antenna intercepts some of the power of an electromagnetic wave in order to produce a tiny voltage at its terminals, that is applied to a receiver to be amplified.

It is usually used with a <hl> radio transmitter or radio receiver <hl> .


Question: What process associated with antennas produces a high frequency alternating current?

Answer: transmission

An antenna (plural antennae or antennas), or aerial, is an electrical device which converts electric power into radio waves, and vice versa. It is usually used with a radio transmitter or radio receiver. <hl> In transmission , a radio transmitter supplies an electric current oscillating at radio frequency (i.e. a high frequency alternating current (AC)) to the antenna's terminals, and the antenna radiates the energy from the current as electromagnetic waves (radio waves). <hl> In reception, an antenna intercepts some of the power of an electromagnetic wave in order to produce a tiny voltage at its terminals, that is applied to a receiver to be amplified.

An antenna (plural antennae or antennas), or aerial, is an electrical device which converts electric power into radio waves, and vice versa. It is usually used with a radio transmitter or radio receiver. In <hl> transmission <hl>, a radio transmitter supplies an electric current oscillating at radio frequency (i.e. a high frequency alternating current (AC)) to the antenna's terminals, and the antenna radiates the energy from the current as electromagnetic waves (radio waves). In reception, an antenna intercepts some of the power of an electromagnetic wave in order to produce a tiny voltage at its terminals, that is applied to a receiver to be amplified.

In <hl> transmission <hl> , a radio transmitter supplies an electric current oscillating at radio frequency (i.e. a high frequency alternating current (AC)) to the antenna's terminals, and the antenna radiates the energy from the current as electromagnetic waves (radio waves).


Question: What else can radio waves be called?

Answer: electromagnetic waves

An antenna (plural antennae or antennas), or aerial, is an electrical device which converts electric power into radio waves, and vice versa. It is usually used with a radio transmitter or radio receiver. <hl> In transmission, a radio transmitter supplies an electric current oscillating at radio frequency (i.e. a high frequency alternating current (AC)) to the antenna's terminals, and the antenna radiates the energy from the current as electromagnetic waves (radio waves). <hl> In reception, an antenna intercepts some of the power of an electromagnetic wave in order to produce a tiny voltage at its terminals, that is applied to a receiver to be amplified.

An antenna (plural antennae or antennas), or aerial, is an electrical device which converts electric power into radio waves, and vice versa. It is usually used with a radio transmitter or radio receiver. In transmission, a radio transmitter supplies an electric current oscillating at radio frequency (i.e. a high frequency alternating current (AC)) to the antenna's terminals, and the antenna radiates the energy from the current as <hl> electromagnetic waves <hl> (radio waves). In reception, an antenna intercepts some of the power of an electromagnetic wave in order to produce a tiny voltage at its terminals, that is applied to a receiver to be amplified.


Question: When does an antenna catch electromagnetic waves?

Answer: reception

An antenna (plural antennae or antennas), or aerial, is an electrical device which converts electric power into radio waves, and vice versa. It is usually used with a radio transmitter or radio receiver. In transmission, a radio transmitter supplies an electric current oscillating at radio frequency (i.e. a high frequency alternating current (AC)) to the antenna's terminals, and the antenna radiates the energy from the current as electromagnetic waves (radio waves). <hl> In reception , an antenna intercepts some of the power of an electromagnetic wave in order to produce a tiny voltage at its terminals, that is applied to a receiver to be amplified. <hl>

An antenna (plural antennae or antennas), or aerial, is an electrical device which converts electric power into radio waves, and vice versa. It is usually used with a radio transmitter or radio receiver. In transmission, a radio transmitter supplies an electric current oscillating at radio frequency (i.e. a high frequency alternating current (AC)) to the antenna's terminals, and the antenna radiates the energy from the current as electromagnetic waves (radio waves). In <hl> reception <hl>, an antenna intercepts some of the power of an electromagnetic wave in order to produce a tiny voltage at its terminals, that is applied to a receiver to be amplified.

In <hl> reception <hl> , an antenna intercepts some of the power of an electromagnetic wave in order to produce a tiny voltage at its terminals, that is applied to a receiver to be amplified.


Question: What is frequently used to connect elements to the receiver?

Typically an antenna consists of an arrangement of metallic conductors (elements), electrically connected (often through a transmission line) to the receiver or transmitter. An oscillating current of electrons forced through the antenna by a transmitter will create an oscillating magnetic field around the antenna elements, while the charge of the electrons also creates an oscillating electric field along the elements. These time-varying fields radiate away from the antenna into space as a moving transverse electromagnetic field wave. Conversely, during reception, the oscillating electric and magnetic fields of an incoming radio wave exert force on the electrons in the antenna elements, causing them to move back and forth, creating oscillating currents in the antenna.

Answer: transmission line

<hl> Typically an antenna consists of an arrangement of metallic conductors (elements), electrically connected (often through a transmission line ) to the receiver or transmitter. <hl> An oscillating current of electrons forced through the antenna by a transmitter will create an oscillating magnetic field around the antenna elements, while the charge of the electrons also creates an oscillating electric field along the elements. These time-varying fields radiate away from the antenna into space as a moving transverse electromagnetic field wave. Conversely, during reception, the oscillating electric and magnetic fields of an incoming radio wave exert force on the electrons in the antenna elements, causing them to move back and forth, creating oscillating currents in the antenna.

Typically an antenna consists of an arrangement of metallic conductors (elements), electrically connected (often through a <hl> transmission line <hl>) to the receiver or transmitter. An oscillating current of electrons forced through the antenna by a transmitter will create an oscillating magnetic field around the antenna elements, while the charge of the electrons also creates an oscillating electric field along the elements. These time-varying fields radiate away from the antenna into space as a moving transverse electromagnetic field wave. Conversely, during reception, the oscillating electric and magnetic fields of an incoming radio wave exert force on the electrons in the antenna elements, causing them to move back and forth, creating oscillating currents in the antenna.

Typically an antenna consists of an arrangement of metallic conductors (elements), electrically connected (often through a <hl> transmission line <hl> ) to the receiver or transmitter.


Question: During transmission does the electric field wave move closer to the antenna?

Answer: radiate away

Typically an antenna consists of an arrangement of metallic conductors (elements), electrically connected (often through a transmission line) to the receiver or transmitter. An oscillating current of electrons forced through the antenna by a transmitter will create an oscillating magnetic field around the antenna elements, while the charge of the electrons also creates an oscillating electric field along the elements. <hl> These time-varying fields radiate away from the antenna into space as a moving transverse electromagnetic field wave. <hl> Conversely, during reception, the oscillating electric and magnetic fields of an incoming radio wave exert force on the electrons in the antenna elements, causing them to move back and forth, creating oscillating currents in the antenna.

Typically an antenna consists of an arrangement of metallic conductors (elements), electrically connected (often through a transmission line) to the receiver or transmitter. An oscillating current of electrons forced through the antenna by a transmitter will create an oscillating magnetic field around the antenna elements, while the charge of the electrons also creates an oscillating electric field along the elements. These time-varying fields <hl> radiate away <hl> from the antenna into space as a moving transverse electromagnetic field wave. Conversely, during reception, the oscillating electric and magnetic fields of an incoming radio wave exert force on the electrons in the antenna elements, causing them to move back and forth, creating oscillating currents in the antenna.


Question: What particles are pushed through the antenna by a transmitter?

Answer: electrons

Typically an antenna consists of an arrangement of metallic conductors (elements), electrically connected (often through a transmission line) to the receiver or transmitter. <hl> An oscillating current of electrons forced through the antenna by a transmitter will create an oscillating magnetic field around the antenna elements, while the charge of the electrons also creates an oscillating electric field along the elements. <hl> These time-varying fields radiate away from the antenna into space as a moving transverse electromagnetic field wave. Conversely, during reception, the oscillating electric and magnetic fields of an incoming radio wave exert force on the electrons in the antenna elements, causing them to move back and forth, creating oscillating currents in the antenna.

Typically an antenna consists of an arrangement of metallic conductors (elements), electrically connected (often through a transmission line) to the receiver or transmitter. An oscillating current of <hl> electrons <hl> forced through the antenna by a transmitter will create an oscillating magnetic field around the antenna elements, while the charge of the electrons also creates an oscillating electric field along the elements. These time-varying fields radiate away from the antenna into space as a moving transverse electromagnetic field wave. Conversely, during reception, the oscillating electric and magnetic fields of an incoming radio wave exert force on the electrons in the antenna elements, causing them to move back and forth, creating oscillating currents in the antenna.


Question: During what process would electrons be vacillating in the antenna?

Answer: reception

Typically an antenna consists of an arrangement of metallic conductors (elements), electrically connected (often through a transmission line) to the receiver or transmitter. An oscillating current of electrons forced through the antenna by a transmitter will create an oscillating magnetic field around the antenna elements, while the charge of the electrons also creates an oscillating electric field along the elements. These time-varying fields radiate away from the antenna into space as a moving transverse electromagnetic field wave. <hl> Conversely, during reception , the oscillating electric and magnetic fields of an incoming radio wave exert force on the electrons in the antenna elements, causing them to move back and forth, creating oscillating currents in the antenna. <hl>

Typically an antenna consists of an arrangement of metallic conductors (elements), electrically connected (often through a transmission line) to the receiver or transmitter. An oscillating current of electrons forced through the antenna by a transmitter will create an oscillating magnetic field around the antenna elements, while the charge of the electrons also creates an oscillating electric field along the elements. These time-varying fields radiate away from the antenna into space as a moving transverse electromagnetic field wave. Conversely, during <hl> reception <hl>, the oscillating electric and magnetic fields of an incoming radio wave exert force on the electrons in the antenna elements, causing them to move back and forth, creating oscillating currents in the antenna.

Conversely, during <hl> reception <hl> , the oscillating electric and magnetic fields of an incoming radio wave exert force on the electrons in the antenna elements, causing them to move back and forth, creating oscillating currents in the antenna.