Question: Write an article that answers the following question: Which event happened first, the Ming Chinese invasion or the Siamese invasion of Burma?
Article: While Burma had its hands full with the Ming Chinese invasions, Siam's King Narai attempted to pick off the upper Tenasserim coast and Lan Na. He got Martaban to switch sides in March 1662, and occupied the coast. Fortunately for the Burmese, their troubles with the Ming were over. Their land and naval units recaptured Martaban and Tavoy by December 1662. They followed up on the retreating Siamese but were driven back near Kanchanaburi with heavy losses. Meanwhile, a much larger Siamese army invaded Lan Na, catching the Burmese command completely off guard. The Siamese captured Chiang Mai on 10 February 1663, and drove back Burmese forces that arrived belatedly. In November 1663, Siam launched a two-pronged invasion of the Tenasserim coast: Martaban and Moulmein in the north and Tavoy in the south. Burmese defences withstood several Siamese onslaughts until May 1664 when the invaders retreated before the rainy season arrived. Meanwhile, the Siamese garrison at Chiang Mai was holed up in a deserted city, and its troops were constantly ambushed by resistance forces whenever they ventured out of the city. In late November 1664, the Siamese evacuated Chiang Mai, and returned. This was the last major war between the two kingdoms until 1760 although they traded small raids in 1675-1676, and in 1700-1701.

Question: Write an article that answers the following question: How many points ahead were the Chargers after the second quarter?
Article: The Raiders started the game with 12 unanswered points off of two blocked punts and a field goal. But San Diego quickly responded with a touchdown pass by Philip Rivers and a rush by Mike Tolbert. After the Raiders and Chargers traded field goals, the Chargers led, 17-15, after the first half. Bruce Gradkowski was injured in the first half and after briefly starting the second half, he left the game. Jason Campbell relieved Gradkowski at the quarterback position for the rest of the game. In the third quarter, The Chargers and Raiders traded touchdowns and heading into the fourth quarter the Raiders trailed, 24-22. In the 4th, Nate Kaeding kicked a field goal early and extended the Chargers' lead to five, 27-22. The Raiders then capped off a 14-play, 73-yard drive with a rushing touchdown by Michael Bush, who took back the lead. After a failed two- point attempt by Oakland, they led, 28-27, with 3:24 remaining in the ballgame. The Chargers than began to drive trying to get themselves into field goal position to win the game. The Chargers eventually made it to the Raiders 23-yard line, but after a 10-yard holding penalty by the Chargers, San Diego faced a 2nd and 20 on Oakland's 33-yard line. Looking to pass, Rivers was stripped by Michael Huff and Tyvon Branch returned the fumble 64&#160;yards for a touchdown, sealing the win for the Raiders, 35-27. Though the Chargers outgained the Raiders, 506-279, their special teams were ultimately the deciding factor, giving up two blocked punts for a safety and touchdown. With the win the Raiders not only improved to 2-3, but also snapped a 13-game losing streak to the Chargers, with the first win over the Chargers since September 28, 2003.

Question: Write an article that answers the following question: How many more billions of dollars will be spent to procure major weapons systems than on maintenance and repair?
Article: From 2010 onwards, military spending in Indonesia was aligned to the Minimum Essential Force (MEF) strategic plan 2010 – 2014 requirements. Under MEF 2010 – 2014 funds of up to Rp150 trillion ($16.41 billion) to spend over five years to procure major weapons systems, Rp50 trillion $5.47 billion) will be used to accelerate achieving the Minimum Essential Force, Rp55 trillion ($6.02 billion) for procurement and Rp45 trillion ($4.92 billion) for maintenance and repair. Subsequent funding would be made available to fund the strategic plans of MEF 2015 - 2019 and MEF 2020 - 2024 to achieve the strategic goal of Minimum Essential Force.

Question: Write an article that answers the following question: How many percent of people did not conclude positive effect, when assessing conventional treatments?
Article: The Cochrane Library had 145 CAM-related Cochrane systematic reviews and 340 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. An analysis of the conclusions of only the 145 Cochrane reviews was done by two readers. In 83% of the cases, the readers agreed. In the 17% in which they disagreed, a third reader agreed with one of the initial readers to set a rating. These studies found that, for CAM, 38.4% concluded positive effect or possibly positive (12.4%), 4.8% concluded no effect, 0.7% concluded harmful effect, and 56.6% concluded insufficient evidence. An assessment of conventional treatments found that 41.3% concluded positive or possibly positive effect, 20% concluded no effect, 8.1% concluded net harmful effects, and 21.3% concluded insufficient evidence. However, the CAM review used the more developed 2004 Cochrane database, while the conventional review used the initial 1998 Cochrane database.