Answer: The pundit is using a NATIONAL DEFENSE ARGUMENT to justify the trade restriction.
Explanation: National defense argument is when someone is using the security of the nation to defend his argument, to be very important as the security of the nation is very important.
This type of argument always tends to use the fallacy of red herring to convince his audience about his argument. The argument sounds to be important as it used red herring to relate it's point to the security of the nation during wartime.
The pundit politician has used the fallacy of red herring to relate it's reason of increment in the tariff of semiconductor importation, to the security of the nation during war times. Therefore this is a national security argument.
Answer:
Openness.
Hope that helps:)
This answer would depend on what the country you are referring too. For the world, I foresee that there will most likely be more war as right now Putin is pushing his ambitions to restore the once known empire of the Soviet Union. This means war in major continents Asia and Europe. NATO is in both continents, and if one country gets involved, they all do. This would mean more than 50% of the worlds countries would be at war with Russia under the agreement of NATO.
Answer:
Because I don't want annoying people as loud as a washing machine wearing an onion hat that teaches useless information near me. Is that not obvious?
Explanation:
Answer: Your answer is, <u>Puyi spent the next 10 years in prison being reeducated in the ways of communism. </u>
Hope this helps!
