the remaining differences are mostly about aesthetics and not about the use of violence to maintain hegemony
Could you clarify why it's not good reasoning?
- A = u.s. abducts leader
- B = leader is a problem for the u.s.
- C = leader is a boon to the people
- D = leader is (likely) legitimately elected
Argument:
- If A then B
- If B then C
- If C then D
- A
- Therefore D
We just need "If C then D" to chain A to D since the comment up top didn't mention it . Oh, I think I see a problem here. In the us with leaders we constantly have "D and not C," and even worse than the not C's are the nazis. Ok, I'll stop.