Question

read the paragraph from a students rhetorical analysis essay. in addition, president obama uses strongly loaded or connotative words to conjure vivid images in his audiences mind and further his appeal to emotion. he punctuates his argument by saying, \when dictators commit atrocities, they depend upon the world to look the other way until those horrifying pictures fade from memory, but these things happened. the facts cannot be denied.\ here, obama appeals to logic as well as emotion. he reasons that the horror of the images from syria must lead nations to take action. he asks the american people to consider the facts of what they have seen and support military action to stop what is happening in syria. which sentence best improves the paragraph by adding specific evidence? he reminds the audience of the nature of chemical weapons and cites an international agreement made in 1997 to abolish their use throughout the world. he describes deadly gas used in world wars i and ii to kill \on a mass scale\ and such weapons make
o distinction between soldier and infant.\ he paints a horrifying portrait of the aftermath of the massacre where people are \foaming at the mouth, gasping for breath.\ he uses the argument that \if we fail to act, the assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons.\

Explanation:

The paragraph discusses Obama's use of loaded words to appeal to emotion and logic regarding chemical - weapons in Syria. The second option provides specific evidence about deadly gas used in World Wars I and II, which is a concrete example of the kind of chemical - weapons he might be referring to. The other options either lack specific details (first and fourth) or are more of a general description of a massacre (third) rather than specific evidence about chemical - weapons.

Answer:

B. He describes deadly gas used in World Wars I and II to kill "on a mass scale" and such weapons make "no distinction between soldier and infant."