Do you have an image of the chart?
C. i remember reading this a few years back :)
What are the answer choices?
Answer:
B
Explanation:
It really depends on what was underlined. There are two possibilities.
- I think that not a single peace loving State could decline a peace treaty with a neighboring State even though the latter was headed by such fiends and cannibals as Hitler and Ribbentrop.
- Non-aggression pacts are pacts of peace between two States. It was such a pact that Germany proposed to us in 1939.
The first one is irony of the highest order. Though Stalin was correct in his assessment of Hitler and Ribbentrop, he didn't include himself (who may have been the worst of the three), in his description.
The second one is just a definition of what a non-aggression pact was.
I would pick B. The real problem is what is underlined. B is the truth. It was actually Hitler's plan to invade Russia long before it happened. Not only that, he was so confident of victory that he did not order his textile industry to make protective clothing when he did invade Russia. He thought it would be over in Russia long before such clothing was needed.
You can often tell what a word means by its context in a sentence.
