Read the passage and answer the question:

Furthermore, when we speak of threats to core values, how intense should the threats be? Surely there are big and small threats to virtually every value we hold dear. Can all those threats be brought into the understanding of security? Every time another country does something or fails to do something, this may damage the core values of one’s country. Every time a person is robbed in the streets, the security of ordinary people as they live their daily lives is har med. Yet, we would be paralyzed if we took such an extensive view of security: everywhere we looked, the world would be full of dangers. So we are brought to a conclusion: security relates only to extremely dangerous threats— threats that could so endanger core values that those values would be damaged beyond repair if we did not do something to deal with the situation.

Which of the following is not a choice that a government has in responding to the threat of war?

To defer the war

The correct answer is Option 2- To defer the war

Option 1- To surrender in war
Option 2- To defer the war (INCORRECT)
Option 3- To prevent the war
Option 4- To defend itself

In responding to the threat of war, a government has three basic choices: to surrender; to prevent the other side from attacking by promising to raise the costs of war to an unacceptable level, and to defend itself when war actually breaks out so as to deny the attacking country its objectives and to turn back or defeat the attacking forces altogether.