An investigation must be launched into the
operations of the private group that is training recruits to fight
against the Balaland Republic. The United States Neutrality Act
plainly forbids United States citizens from engaging in military
campaigns against any nation with which we are not at war. Since
no war has been declared between the United States and the Balaland
Republic, we should bring charges against these fanatics, who
are in open defiance of the law.
Which of the following, if true, would
most weaken the argument above?
|
The Balaland Republic is currently
engaged in a bloody and escalating civil war. |
|
|
Diplomatic relations between the United
States and the Balaland Republic were severed last year. |
|
The recruits are being trained to
fight only in the event the United States goes to war
against the Balaland Republic. |
|
|
The training of recruits if funded
not by United States citizens, but rather by a consortium
of individuals from abroad. |
|
|
Charges cannot be brought against
the private group that is training the recruits unless
an investigation is first launched. |
Countinue
The stimulus tells us that U.S. law forbids U.S.
citizens from engaging in military campaigns against countries unless
the United States is at war with those countries. Since no war has been
declared between the United States and the Balaland Republic, the author
concludes that the recruits being trained to fight against the Balaland
Republic are defying U.S. law.
But if, as Choice (C) asserts, the recruits are
being trained to fight only if a war is declared, then they're not in
defiance of U.S. law. This weakens the author's conclusion. Being prepared
for battle is different from actually engaging in it.
Strengthen/Weaken questions, together with Assumption
questions, are the most common Reasoning question types. Your success
on test day will depend on your ability to handle these questions.
Now let's look at another common question type:
Inference questions.
div>