Please help!! In your opinion, were the citizens of France justified in using armed force against their king during the French Revolution? Why or why not?

Revolution is not possible without violence.

Explanation:

Revolution and violence are coherent terms. Almost no revolution in history (at least one that represents a change in the political sense) has passed without violence. The French Revolution, as such, is one of the most famous in history. The people demanded changes of government in the country at all costs. These attitudes also implied violence. Violence was an integral part of the French Revolution, and the people showed it in practice. The French resolution is otherwise characterized by a high degree of violence.

peasants’ war, (1524–25) peasant uprising in germany inspired by changes brought by the reformation, peasants in western and southern germany invoked   divine law to demand agrarian rights and freedom from oppression by nobles and landlords. as the uprising spread, some peasant groups organized armies. although the revolt was supported huldrych zwingli and thomas müntzerits condemnation by martain luther contributed to its defeat, principally by the army of the swabian league. some 100,000 peasants were killed. reprisals and increased restrictions discouraged further attempts to improve the peasants’ plight.

i think it would be " a" i might be wrong tho

the roman army grew in size and became dominant in the mediterranean region.