Refer to the Newsela article "The Relationship between Hunger and War." What is the author's viewpoint in the article?

• Destroying food resources is more damaging than the use of weapons.

•Humanitarian aid is the solution to ending food insecurity.

•By ending wars, nations can eliminate famine.

•The United Nations has done little to address the use of starvation as a weapon.

Destroying food resources is more damaging than the use of weapons.

Explanation:

In the aforementioned article, the author explains how using starvation and food insecurity as weapons of war by destroying food resources, can be more damaging than the use of weapons.

Destroying food resources can threaten entire populations as they may starve to death while weapons cannot regularly do so. For instance, Germany could have implemented food destruction policies in WWII that would have killed 20 million Russians and the starvation of Biafra by the Nigerian government during the Biafran war killed many times more Biafrans by the armed conflict did.

Destroying food resources is more damaging than the use of weapons.

Explanation:

i took the test

can you be more do you have options/ if so, you can put it in the chat or edit your question (

well, i hope this at least : ) :

noun: a temporary state of mind or feeling.

adjective: (especially of music) inducing or suggestive of a particular feeling or state of mind.

examples:

hope this ! : )