An investigation must be launched into the operations of the private group that is training recruits ot fight against the Balaland Republic. THe US Neutrality Act plainly forbids US citizens from engaging in military campaigns against any nation with which we are not at war. Since no war has been declared between the US and the Balaland Republic we should bring charges against these fantics, who are in open defiance of the law.
Which of the following if true would most weaken the argument above?
A) THe Balaland republic is currently engaged in a bloody escalating civil war
B) Diplomatic relations between the US and the Balaland Republic were severed last year
C) The recruits are being trained to fight only in the event US goes to war against Balaland Rep
D) The training of recruits is funded not by US citizens but rather by a consortium of inividuals from abroad
E) Charges cannto be brouthg against the private group that is training the recruits unless an investigation is launched.
--== Message from the GMAT Club Team ==--
THERE IS LIKELY A BETTER DISCUSSION OF THIS EXACT QUESTION.
This discussion does not meet community quality standards. It has been retired. If you would like to discuss this question please re-post it in the respective forum. Thank you!
To review the GMAT Club's Forums Posting Guidelines, please follow these links:
Quantitative |
Verbal Please note - we may remove posts that do not follow our posting guidelines. Thank you.