-
LalaB
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 425
- Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 9:00 am
- Thanked: 56 times
- Followed by:7 members
- GMAT Score:690
Country G and Country H have been engaged in a cold war for almost 40 years. Common knowledge and public opinions expressed through the media show that Country H has malevolent and hostile intentions towards Country G. Country H is a major manufacturer of military equipment and weapons. Even at the risk of suffering a few casualties, Country G should attack Country H now, or it is to suffer an attack by Country H later, resulting in the death of many civilians.
The argument is flawed primarily because the author-
A.is in favor of one side of the argument, instead of maintaining an objective position
B.offers an inaccurate analogy to explain the circumstances facing both countries
C.creates a false dilemma by presenting fewer paths of action than there are available
D.assumes the existence of military or political tension between Country G and Country H
E.does not provide evidence to prove Country H's production of weapons and military surplus
I would like to see ur reasoning. OA will be later
The argument is flawed primarily because the author-
A.is in favor of one side of the argument, instead of maintaining an objective position
B.offers an inaccurate analogy to explain the circumstances facing both countries
C.creates a false dilemma by presenting fewer paths of action than there are available
D.assumes the existence of military or political tension between Country G and Country H
E.does not provide evidence to prove Country H's production of weapons and military surplus
I would like to see ur reasoning. OA will be later
