<h2><u>Answer:</u></h2>
Regardless of how bombastic or haughty Imperial Japan was, I don't think their craving was to vanquish the world. Their aspirations were basically focused on the mineral-rich conditions of Asia, and parts of China.
As a general rule, when they involved China amid WW2, there were still extensive swathes of land immaculate and inaccessible by their militaries, that is the reason Mao Zedong could "rest" in the mountains of Yunnan and still get into encounters with the Kuomintang while battling the Japanese (talk about performing various tasks)
Imperial Japan confronted indistinguishable issues with China from Nazi Germany did with the Soviet Union amid WW2. Both Russia and China were too darn BIG!
Angry And Bitter.
That is the only one I think works, since the other 3 are not at all related.
What can be logically concluded about each option:
- <u><em>Faideaux is the speaker´s only dog.</em></u> No. Because the speaker indicated the name of the dog that won, so he/she must have others;
- <u><em>The speaker has more than one dog.</em></u> Yes. Because the speaker mentioned the dog's name. He/She made it clear that it was Faideaux, not another;
- <u><em>Faideaux is the only one of the speaker's dogs to compete in the show.</em></u> Faideaux competed and won, but it can not be concluded that it was the only one competing;
- <em><u>Faideaux is among several of the speaker's dogs to compete in the show.</u></em> It also has no way to conclude that the speaker´s dogs were with Faideaux at the county dog show.
A
d
d
a
d
d
d
a
d
a
d
a
d
a
d
hope this helps. :)