What are three reasons the articles of confederation were not satisfactory? no executive was appointed to head the government.

congress could not raise money.

the army had no commander.

congress was not organized.

congress could not pass laws.

Three reasons the Articles of Confederation were not satisfactory were that Congress could not raise money, the army had no commander, and Congress was not organized.

Explanation:

The Articles of Confederation and the Perpetual Union were a document elaborated on November 15, 1777 by the Second Continental Congress, a meeting of the thirteen founding states of the United States of America.

The Articles established a first Constitution which organizes the thirteen states into a Confederation.  

The Articles were applied until the current US Constitution came into force in 1789. They allowed the Confederation to wage war, negotiate treaties, resolve the question of Western territories, to print continental currencies and to borrow both inside and outside the country. Its organization was criticized by the proponents of a stronger central power and by the most populous states, which possessed, as the least populated, only one vote in Congress.

The Confederation was weakened by the lack of income (it could not raise taxes, and depended on the contributions of the states of the Union), the divergent interests and rivalries between states.

the answer is the petition of right.

explanation:

offer to of right, real demand of attesting a benefit against the english crown, the most remarkable point of reference being the petition of right of 1628, which parliament sent to charles i fussing of a movement of oversteps of law. the term also implied the framework (invalidated in 1947) by which a subject could sue the crown.   taking a gander at the frameworks used by maria amidu to make a standard in 2015 commending the 1628 petition of right, which was sent to charles i by the english parliament. at uniquely based law the crown, or the sovereign in his official cutoff, couldn't be sued in the ruler's courts. since the ruler was, really, the superior ace of those courts, coordinating value in them between his subjects, he was not subject to their ward. therefore it transformed into a preparation, at whatever point a subject's certified or individual property had come into the responsibility for ruler or his specialists without legitimate perfect, for the subject to engage the master in chamber for its recovery.