Other than being defeated by the Union in the Civil War, do you think joining the Confederacy turned out as Texans expected? Please answer with complete sentences. Dont answer for points. If you dont actually answer an put something random you will be reported..

Texas declared its secession from the Union on February 1, 1861, and joined the Confederate States on March 2, 1861, after it had replaced its governor, Sam Houston, who had refused to take an oath of allegiance to the Confederacy. As with those of other states, the Declaration of Secession was not recognized by the US government at Washington, DC. Some Texan military units fought in the Civil War east of the Mississippi River, but Texas was more useful for supplying soldiers and horses for the Confederate Army. Texas's supply role lasted until mid-1863, when Union gunboats started to control the Mississippi River, which prevented large transfers of men, horses, or cattle. Some cotton was sold in Mexico, but most of the crop became useless because of the Union's naval blockade of Galveston, Houston, and other ports.

Explanation:   so yes i do

Both the Union and the Confederacy had things going for them, and things working strongly against them. Ultimately the north was victorious and slavery was abolished from the United States, as well as the Confederacy. and the major thing that the Confederacy lacked was leadership

Explanation:

the main inference that can be drawn from jean jacques rousseau's book the social contract is: a. people can enjoy civil and physical freedom, even if it sometimes harms society.

islamic religious leaders have traditionally been people who, as part of the clerisy, mosque, or government, performed a prominent role within their community or nation. however, in the modern contexts of muslims minorities in non-muslim countries as well as secularised muslim states like turkey, indonesia and bangladesh, religious leadership may take a variety of non-formal shapes.

compared to religious leaders/clerics of the other abrahamic faiths, islamic clergy are said to resemble rabbis and not priests. unlike catholic priests they do not "serve as intermediaries between mankind and god",[1] have "process of ordination",[2] or "sacramental functions",[1] but instead serve as "exemplars, teachers, judges, and community leaders," providing religious rules to the pious on "even the most minor and private" matters.[1]