What were six important sets of actions and reactions in the years 1824 to 1846 that lead to war between the US and Mexico?

See explanation section

Explanation:

The US was coming towards Mexico to expand its territory at that time. The six sets of actions and reactions of the war are given below:

1) In the year of 1825 of ninetieth century, the disputable boundary that was lying between Mexico and Texas got as the central apple of discord. The Govt of the two states started their first hostile relation from here;

2) In accordance with that, Controversial area appearance of Texas and in the beginning of the year 1825 strengthens the animosity;

3) The offending port-related offer by the US to Mexico in 1836 had also created a strife situation in their relation;

4) As a result, they disapproved individuals' independence from 1836;

5) Besides, loss of wealth of the US merchants in Mexico in the year of 1842; and

6) The agitated Govt in Mexico caused apprehension between the two countries in 1846.

interdependence is when all participating groups and individuals depend on each other. if you depend on one anothers goods, you end up trading in order to get the items you're looking for. (for ex: if i have food and you have water, we trade in order to depend on each other to live)

in the united states, the president is controlled by the

constitution, and in all respects subordinate to it. insofar

as it deals with presidential power, however, the american

constitution has proved to be a highly malleable document.

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

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

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

was ratified. in particular, the contemporary president has

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

the authority of the president have been brought about

without changes in the constitutional text, but nevertheless

without significant illegality.

this is a paradox. is it not clear that constitutional

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

perhaps the framers of the american constitution feared

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

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

presidential power that holds out the greatest risks to both

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