HURRY PLEASEEE!!! In his analytical essay about "The Zoo," Jaime wrote about his own father who was a soldier in Iraq, and concluded that any child of a soldier would feel proud and wouldn’t worry much about their father’s safety. How might a peer reviewer appropriately respond to Jaime’s thinking?

"Your story is very interesting, and I’d like to hear more about your life. It’s probably more real than this story."

"Since you are also the child of a soldier, you’re probably right about the feelings of the child in the story—the author clearly doesn’t understand."

"Your opinion on this is not valid--every child of a soldier should feel worried about his or her parent’s safety."

"You definitely have an insider’s view on this situation. Evidence from your own life shouldn’t be used to analyze another writer’s story, though."

the author is intending to draw attention to the plight of refugees, editorial and biography support this. both workpieces make the reader empathize with enrique as well as with the other young migrants from central america. the writer, however, is using a different approach to each text.

the editorial includes strong words to persuade readers. he is trying hard to convince readers in the us to change its refugee approach.

the biography relies on narrative techniques and figurative language which the writer uses wisely in the setting, characterization, and personification to educate readers on the topic.

op: object of preposition

well basically since ima beginner people will answer any subject "right away"and if you get more points you could ask more questions or if you answer someone's question you get points

(the answer is d)

hope this !