The argument in favor of US economic aid to other nations is invalid because the premises do not relate to the conclusion.
An argument is valid when all the premises are true and build a true conclusion.
According to the above, the argument presented has the following premises:
- Foreign economic aid to other countries is a good investment for the United States.
- It comprises only one percent of the entire federal budget, about $ 20 billion.
And the conclusion it presents is:
- Returns untold amounts in increased sales of American goods and services.
According to the above, the argument is a fallacy because the premises are not related to the conclusion because:
An investment is an economic contribution to receive a later profit, in this case, the United States is investing, and those who are receiving the profit are private US companies. Furthermore, no argument is presented that relates the increase in sales of goods and services with this investment.
Learn more in: brainly.com/question/2645376
A Russia mobilized their army quicker
Answer:
Germany would exchange its prisoners.
Germany would surrender its weapons.
Germany would withdraw its troops.
Germany would surrender gained lands.
Explanation:
The armistice was a document that was signed by Germany and some countries of the world to brought the First World War to an end. It was paper that brought defeat to the Germans and victory for the other countries. Some of the terms in the armistice are: Germany would exchange its prisoners, Germany would surrender its weapons, Germany would withdraw its troops, and Germany would surrender gained lands.
A, C, and D are the correct choices.
