(A) If a government knows about a particular weapons-smuggling incident, it must have intended to use the weapons for its own purposes. - no question of using the weapons. OOS.

(B) If a government claims that it knew nothing about a particular weapons-smuggling incident, it must have known everything about it. - first part OOS.

(C) If a government does not permit weapons to enter a country, it is a closed society. - this is the definition bof a closed society. Irrelevant.

(D) If a country is a closed society, its government has a large contingent of armed guards patrolling its borders. - looks good and inline with the argument. Hold.

(E) If a country is a closed society, its government has knowledge about everything that occurs in the country. - looks appealing but the problem here is "everything". We cannot conclude anything about everything from the given argument.

So, D for me.

Sent from my Lenovo K53a48 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

[quote="gmat1393"]A weapons-smuggling incident recently took place in country Y. We all know that Y is a closed society. So Y's government must have known about the weapons.

Which of the following is an assumption that would make the conclusion above logically correct?


(A) If a government knows about a particular weapons-smuggling incident, it must have intended to use the weapons for its own purposes.

(B) If a government claims that it knew nothing about a particular weapons-smuggling incident, it must have known everything about it.

(C) If a government does not permit weapons to enter a country, it is a closed society.

(D) If a country is a closed society, its government has a large contingent of armed guards patrolling its borders.

(E) If a country is a closed society, its government has knowledge about everything that occurs in the country.



E should be correct answer
D can be tempting , but D goes too far in talking about large contigent of armed guards

E is correct.

I understand D can be tempting, but D goes too far in talking about out of the scope