Read the claim, related reason, and evidence a student wrote about "The Most Dangerous Game.” Claim: Rainsford should not kill Zaroff. Reason: Rainsford believes that men should not hunt other men. Evidence: "Surely your experiences in the war—" "Did not make me condone cold-blooded murder," finished Rainsford stiffly. Which explanation best states how the evidence supports the student’s reason? Killing a man compromises Rainsford’s beliefs. Killing Zaroff will not end the hunting game. Killing prey will prove Rainsford’s skills. Killing a general is a declaration of war.

A. Killing a man compromises Rainsford’s beliefs.

Explanation:

The claim is that Rainsford should not have killed Zaroff and that it is not justified. The best answer to support that is that killing a man compromises Rainsford's beliefs.

I hope that this helps! :)

that his long years of service outweigh any faults he may have had.

he wanted to be remembered for the good things he did, one of those being when he gave up office so others would follow suit, but george washington wasn’t a man who thought he was perfect, he knew he made mistakes. he was a very talented soldier with a natural gift of tactic.