Answer:
The soldier is pointing out that:
a) It is often conflicting.
Explanation:
If people who are fighting against you open fire and kill you, we can say you were killed by enemy fire, since it was the enemy who shot. Thus, friendly fire means being killed by your friends, not by your enemy. However, <u>when the soldier says, "I don't know why they call it friendly fire if it kills you," he is paying more attention to the literal meaning of "friendly". "Friendly" can refer to people who are nice and kind. But it can also refer to something that is not harmful. If a product does not harm nature, we say it is environment-friendly. From this perspective, it does seem weird to call "friendly fire" something that is harmful, that can kill you. Thus, to this soldier, terminology used at war seems conflicting.</u>
The answer is c sorry if it’s not correct
<span>While he doesn't specifically mention slavery in this excerpt then I would say that the answer would be B) by citing the office to which he was elected as it could be said to be ethos as appealing to people's belief that the president has the right to declare war though the obvious purpose of the war is to fight slavery.</span>
It is A: The mood is bittersweet. It is unlikely he will ever find her but the search keeps him going. I took the test!
