Questions: Why was Macedonia under Philip II and Alexander able to conquer Greece? Greek city-states were disorganized and unprepared for conflict after the Peloponnesian War. Greek city-states were expecting attacks from Persia and the East. Greek city-states viewed Macedonians as fellow Greeks and liberators.

The answer is A: Greek city-states were disorganized and unprepared for conflict after the Peloponnesian War.

Explanation:

A. Greek city-states were disorganized and unprepared for conflict after the Peloponnesian War.
This is the correct answer. The Peloponnesian War (431–404 BCE) left many Greek city-states weakened, both economically and militarily. The prolonged conflict between Athens and Sparta, along with their respective allies, resulted in significant loss of life, resources, and political stability. This disorganization and lack of preparedness made it easier for Philip II of Macedonia to conquer and unify Greece under his rule.

B. Greek city-states were expecting attacks from Persia and the East.
This statement is incorrect. While the Persian Empire was a historical adversary of the Greek city-states, by the time of Philip II's rise, the immediate threat from Persia had diminished. The Greek city-states were more concerned with internal conflicts and rivalries than with external threats from the East.

C. Greek city-states viewed Macedonians as fellow Greeks and liberators.
This statement is also incorrect. Although the Macedonians were culturally related to the Greeks, many Greek city-states did not initially view them as fellow Greeks or liberators. In fact, there was significant resistance to Macedonian rule, as evidenced by the battles and political maneuvering that took place during Philip II's campaigns. The Greeks often saw the Macedonians as outsiders or even barbarians, despite their shared cultural elements.