Agree or disagree read the statement below and decide whether you agree or disagree with it. be prepared to support your

No one is completely good or completely evil.

i agree becuase (even though i haven read your reading material) it may of people bias are based off of whitnessing only what they chose to see because today many americans consider trump  bad they only focous on what negative things he may have said insted of the good.

I have to agree you get to help people from our community and also they get to help us too and we learn more from them too

agree or dissiagree im guesing it is agree please tell me its correct

in my oppinion i agree because creating life in an unnatural manner whould never be a good idea is ture because you are risking your life and yours to make somone in such a way ohh and if this dosent suite you you could always change it up and just so you know  unnatural means contrary to the ordinary course of nature; abnormal. or not existing in nature; artificial or lacking feelings of kindness and sympathy that are considered to be natural. let me know if this hels and srry for the misunderstanding and here is some evidence in the text to support it ''unnatural and the natural. Victor's creation represents science, or the unnatural. Frankenstein's creation of this monster throws nature into a state of imbalance, which causes the eventual destruction of Victor and his entire family. Also, as this is a frame tale, Victor's loss in the battle between nature and science is shown to be a warning for Walton as he too probes dangerously close to discovering nature's secrets.'' hope this help if not i will edit it again

Disagree: people should have the right to know what is going on. The negative should not be censored because people deserve to know what really is going on. Sure, not knowing the negatives will keep spirits high, but it will also cause people to think that everything is going well, even though it is not.

I agree because he was playing the role as god when he was deemed unworthy as the beast.

i will have to agree but then they would be lieing if the county is on the loosing side and then it gets more complacated and if you are losing a war then you should say that " we are lossing this battle we need brave sholdures and they will be paid alot for there time" bevcause that will raise the chance of battle

It is reliant on the intensity of the attack as well as the power of the attacking nation.

 some countries have been attacked and literally never fought back but surrendered if the attacking nation is more powerful in terms of military power.

in case the intensity of the attack can be absorbed, a country can also opt for diplomacy as war is the ultimate sanction in international relation.

in case the country feels it has the capacity to protect its sovereignty then fighting back is the only option.

another way to look at it would be one of the most difficult issues in foreign policy is deciding when the United States should exercise military force. Most people think that military force may be used if a vital national interest of the United States is threatened. The difficulty lies in getting people to agree on what constitutes a vital national interest.

Almost everyone would agree that an attack by a foreign country on the United States threatens a vital interest. Many  also would think a vital interest threatened if a country attacked a nation that we had signed a security agreement with. Disagreements emerge when the threat involves the free flow of a precious commodity, such as oil. They also surface over situations that do not pose an immediate threat to U.S. security but could imperil it in the future, such as when a region becomes unstable and the instability may lead to wider conflicts. Another area of debate opens over human rights and humanitarian efforts. The United States is the most powerful democratic nation on Earth. Does that mean we always have a vital interest in promoting human rights and democracy? Or, should we stay out of the affairs of other nations unless they threaten other of our national interests?  

Another issue arises over how the United States should exercise military force. Some argue that America should never act unilaterally, but should only act with others, allies or particularly with the United Nations. They believe America has a strong interest in upholding international law. Others agree that it is appropriate to act in coalitions, but they think demanding it in every circumstance would paralyze America’s role as a world leader.