<p>that seems right
hmm
F Scott Fitzgerald was a writer in the 20s so the answer was probably something about alienation for that question (a)
and the quote with MLK talking about civil disobedience should have had ghandi in the answer</p>
<p>leif ericson first DISCOVERED America, not explored systematically. And.. leif ericson isn't from the netherlands... he's norwegian.</p>
<p>It was def. popular soverignty.</p>
<p>if i remember correctly, florida was signed over in a treaty from spain, peacefully</p>
<p>hmm your right...i thought the netherlands was a region, whoops
and he did systematiccaly explore the new world according to sparknotes. but that would make the answer spain....which i thought of first...damn it
and the us took the phillpenes in the spainish american war and texas in the mexican war so yeah</p>
<p>the land one has to be Texas and the Phillipines. U.S. fought against Mexico and the U.S. faught in the Phillipines also as it was annexed.</p>
<p>I think the exploration question has the answer of spain. At least that's what many prep books claim.</p>
<p>The exploration question didn't ask who first systematically explored AMERICA, to my knowledge. I remember it asking which European nation was first to launch systematic voyages of exploration in general, in which case the answer would be Portugal, who was exploring the Atlantic coast of Africa long before Spain or the Netherlands.</p>
<p>why would the us history sat 2 ask about it in general. that would fall under the category of world history. it definitely mentioned systematic exploration of america b/c it got me started on thinking that the first settlement was st augustine in florida which was settled by spaniards, and the search for the fountain of youth, etc...... </p>
<p>i do believe the answer was spain, not portugal or netherlands.</p>
<p>also as you mention portugal was exploring coast of africa. that has absolutely no value in an american history test.</p>
<p>Wasn't columbus influenced by americo vespucci- who was from portugal?</p>
<p>When the United States fought Mexico from 1846-1848 in the Mexican-American War, it only gained the northern territory of Mexico, which later became the states of California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah.</p>
<p>Texas gained its own independence from Mexico in 1836. Most of the Texans who fought then were originally Americans, but the U.S. didn't directly intercede in the war. Texas was later annexed peacefully in 1845. </p>
<p>So, I don't think the answer included Texas. The Philippines, which Spain was forced to cede to the U.S. in 1898 after the Spanish-American War, certainly were forcibly taken, however.</p>
<p>I didn't take the SAT II, but I'm taking a college course in U.S. history now. I'm probably going to take the SAT II in January. What prep books did you guys use?</p>
<p>no, texas caused a lot of bloodshed.
yall are overthinking this. just wait until the 19 and then we will all know how well we did/didnt do.</p>
<p>Texas was not forcibly taken by the United States. Period.</p>
<p>How's the curve? What prep books did you guys use?</p>
<p>s'vrone, the answer choice was the Phillipines AND Texas. It has to be that as the answer. All the choices had TWO territories.</p>
<p>I used sparknotes. It seemed to do pretty well. I didn't read the entire book, but there were only a few things I had never heard of. Whether that is good or bad- you decide.</p>
<p>From my experience with SATs and ACTs though, Barrons' practice tests are much harder that the real thing, which I would think would make the test easier.</p>
<p>My .02</p>
<p>umm texas started the mexican war...california and stuff was pretty much just a bonus...the mexican war was delayed cause Polk wanted to buy texas first which was one of the questions by the way...so its really texas and phillipens</p>
<p>oh and does anyone remember the answer to the question about what didnt contribute to the growth of the suburban neighborhoods in the 1950s</p>
<p>Ay, fark it. The College Board is reknowned for making fuzzy questions.</p>
<p>Thanks, ames.</p>
<p>Battle of San Jacinto, anyone?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.tamu.edu/ccbn/dewitt/batsanjacinto.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.tamu.edu/ccbn/dewitt/batsanjacinto.htm</a>
<a href="http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/SS/qes4.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/SS/qes4.html</a>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_San_Jacinto%5B/url%5D">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_San_Jacinto</a></p>
<p>Texas WAS taken by force.</p>
<p>The Battle of San Jacinto was fought by Texans. The United States was supposedly uninvolved. Texas proceeded to be a republic until 1845, when it was annexed by the United States through a mutually agreed upon treaty. After the Mexican-American War started, you can hardly say the United States took Texas by force since Texas was already part of the United States. The US was simply defending its territory then.</p>