Answer:
D. France and England is the answer.
There is a role for the United Nations still as a Peacekeeper in today's world because they can't necessarily force a country to make or keep peace but they can go to a country with a smaller war going on and slowly make peace and as they progress with the small countries they can move onto the bigger countries to make peace.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Unfortunately, you do not specify a specific topic to develop the argument. An argument about what?
What is your compelling question? We cannot cite evidence of your research because you did not mention what is the topic of your research.
If we can help with something, we are going to set our own example based on our own topic.
How about the following.
Compelling question:
Was the Revolutionary War the last option for Patriots to get Independence from Great Britain?
Argument/Evidence:
1.- Yes, it was the only option after the number of aggressions and aggravations from the British crown. The English government never had the "openness" to negotiate another valid solution.
2.- Colonists were sick and tired of the heavy taxation imposed by the English government. We are talking about injust taxation such as the Navigation Acts, the Stamp Act, the Townshend Act, or the Tea Act.
3.- The worst part of it was that colonists had to pay those taxations but they did not have a voice in the British Parliament.
Answer: The answer is complex and not straightforward.
Explanation:
The article relates to Churchill and Roosevelt, so is probably dated from World War 2.
Given this and the reference to the use of force by aggressive nations it is reasonable to assume that this refers to the Axis nations and their allies, primarily Germany, Japan and Italy.
What is being referred to is reflected in the policies applied to Germany and Japan at the end of World War 2. (Italy had already switched sides and deposed Mussolini).
In the post war agreements drawn up, Germany and Japan were largely demilitarised with strict control over their armed forces. In the case of West Germany their limited armed forces existed only within the context of NATO to prevent any aggressive use as was evidenced at the beginning of World War 2.
In both instances these countries were not allowed to develop or possess nuclear weapons.
Until such time as there is a global disarmament treaty, as referred to in the article, then countries which are deemed "aggressive", the losers in a conflict, by others, the winners, have arms controls imposed.
Of course this does not and has not stopped the proliferation of weapons, and conflicts throughout the world since 1945, including the aggressive policies of countries such as the UK and the USA.
