1. The primary purpose of the passage is to :-
(C) contrast the value of war in a modernized society with its value in pre-modernized society
It can easily inferred from the first two paragraphs, that the cost of war in modern societies outweigh the benefits. Read this bit to understand better : "The benefits of forcing another nation to surrender its wealth are vastly outweighed by the benefits of persuading that nation to produce and exchange goods and services. In brief, imperialism no longer pays."
2. According to the passage, leaders of premodernized society considered war to be:-
(A) a valid tool of national policy
This again can easily be inferred from the lastparagraph :- "In pre-modernized societies, successful warfare brought significant material rewards, the most obvious of which were the stored wealth of the defeated.........The removal or destruction of a threat brought a sense of security, and power gained over others created pride and national self-esteem". It's quite clearly shown that in pre-modernized societies, The gains/rewards from War outweigh that of its cost.
4. The author mentions all of the following as possible reasons for going to war in a pre-modernized society EXCEPT :-
(B) promoting deserving young men to higher positions. This hasn't been mentioned anywhere in the essay; all other options have been mentioned in the last paragraph.
5. The author is primarily concerned with discussing how:-
(E) war lost its value as a policy tool
This can be, again, easily inferred. The first two paragraphs explain how War has lost its value, and global trade i.e exchange of goods, services etc is far better to improve economic standing of a nation.
6. Which of the following best describes the tone of the passage?
(B) Scientific and detached
The tone of the passage, is neutral and analytical. The author clearly elucidates why War cannot be national policy/took in these modern times. The author also explains why war was a tool to furthering national interests in pre-modern societies.
7. With which of the following statements about a successfully completed program of nuclear disarmament would the author most likely agree?
(A) Without nuclear weapons, war in modernized society would have the same value it had in pre-modernized society.
(B) In the absence of the danger of nuclear war, national leaders could use powerful conventional weapons to make great gains from war.
(C) Eliminating nuclear weapons is likely to increase the danger of an all-out, worldwide military engagement.
(D) Even without the danger of a nuclear disaster, the costs of winning a war have made armed conflict on a large scale virtually obsolete.(E) War is caused by aggressive instincts, so if nuclear weapons were no longer available, national leaders would use conventional weapons to reach the same end.
If you carefully, look at all options A,B,C and E, they all predict about a forthcoming war, or worldwide conflict. Basically, they all these options are similar and can be eliminated! Furthermore, Option (D) has clearly been explained in the second paragraph.
"The benefits of forcing another nation to surrender its wealth are vastly outweighed by the benefits of persuading that nation to produce and exchange goods and services. In brief, imperialism no longer pays.3. The author most likely places the word “civilized” in quotation marks (Highlighted) in order to
(A) show dissatisfaction at not having found a better word-------> the author is not showing any kind of dissatisfaction.
(B) acknowledge that the word was borrowed from another source--------> cannot be inferred.
(C) express irony that war should be a part of civilization----->a cheeky jibe/irony---> humans participate in war despite being "civilzed"
(D) impress upon the reader the tragedy of war----->No, the author isn't try to showcase the tragedy of war to the reader, rather its cost vs benefits.
(E) raise a question about the value of war in modernized society---->this was done in the previous paragraph.
Hope this helps!! :D