Read the following excerpt from Stalin's speech:

"It may be asked: How could the Soviet Government have consented to conclude a non-aggression pact with such treacherous fiends as Hitler and Ribbentrop? Was not this an error on the part of the Soviet Government? Of course not.

Non-aggression pacts are pacts of peace between two states. It was such a pact that Germany proposed to us in 1939. Could the Soviet Government have declined such a proposal? I think that not a single peace-loving state could decline a peace treaty with a neighboring state, even though the latter was headed by such fiends and cannibals as Hitler and Ribbentrop."

Which of the following statements explains a logical fallacy in this excerpt?

A. Stalin veers off-topic, distracting his audience rather than admitting he was wrong to sign the non-aggression pact.

B. Stalin claims he was lying when he attempted to pursue peace, and then he suggests that he was in fact telling the truth.

C. Stalin claims he was not wrong to pursue peace, and then he restates that same argument in different words instead of providing evidence.

D. Stalin introduces the idea that everyone signs non-aggression pacts, suggesting that doing so was right because it was popular.



Answer :

Final answer:

Stalin's logical fallacy in justifying the non-aggression pact with Hitler lies in overlooking the strategic nature of the pact and presenting it as solely a peace treaty.


Explanation:

Stalin's logical fallacy in the excerpt lies in his claim that signing a non-aggression pact with Hitler was justified as a peace treaty, despite knowing Hitler's true intentions and actions. By defending the pact as a peace effort, Stalin overlooks the pact's true nature as a strategic move to divide territories and avoid conflict, not promote peace.


Learn more about logical fallacy in Stalin's justification of the Nazi-Soviet Pact here:

https://brainly.com/question/50997521