Question

read the excerpt from \how we entered world war i.\

nothing that wilson said about the danger to democracy could not have been said all along. for that cause we could have gone to war six months or a year or two years earlier, with incalculable effect on history. except for the proof of hostility in the resumed submarine campaign and the zimmermann telegram, our cause would have been as valid, but we would then have been fighting a preventive war—to prevent a victory by german militarism with its potential danger to our way of life—not a war of no choice. instead, we waited for the overt acts of hostility which brought the war to us...

the author’s word choice gives the reader a sense that

• the united states was incorrect in waiting for a hostile act from germany.
• the entry of the united states into world war i was justified, and the timing was accurate.
• the threat to democracy should have been enough motivation for the united states to enter the war.
• the united states did not have a justifiable reason to go to war earlier.

Explanation:

The excerpt states that the cause for war (danger to democracy from German militarism) was valid earlier, and the US waited for overt hostile acts (submarine campaign, Zimmermann telegram) to enter. The author’s word choice like “our cause would have been as valid” and “we waited for the overt acts” implies the threat to democracy (Wilson’s argument) was a sufficient reason to enter earlier, as the cause was valid even before the hostile acts. The other options: first is wrong (author implies waiting was not necessary as cause was valid earlier), second is wrong (timing was not accurate as they could have gone earlier), fourth is wrong (author says cause was valid earlier so there was a justifiable reason to go earlier). So the correct idea is that the threat to democracy should have been enough motivation to enter earlier.

Answer:

the threat to democracy should have been enough motivation for the United States to enter the war.