Is it possible to persuade mankind to live without war? War is an ancient practice which has existed for at least six thousand years. It was always bad and usually foolish, but in the past, the human race managed to live with it. Modern cleverness has changed this. Either man will end the existence of war, or war will end the existence of man. For the present, it is nuclear weapons   that cause the most serious danger, but bacteriological or chemical weapons may, before long, offer an even greater threat. If we succeeded in ending the existence of nuclear weapons, our work will not be done. It will never be done until we have succeeded in ending war. To do this, we need to persuade mankind to look up on international problems in a new way not as contests of force, in which the victory goes to the side which is most skillful in killing people, but by settling in accordance with(, , , ) agreed rules of law. It is not easy to change very old mental habits, but this is what must be attempted. There are those who say that the acceptance of this or that ideology   would prevent war. I believe this to be a big mistake. All ideologies are based upon dogmatic statements   ,which are, at best, doubtful, and at worst, totally false. Their supporters believe in them so deeply that they are willing to go to war in support of them. The movement of world opinion during the past few years has been very largely such as we can welcome. It has become a common place that nuclear war must be avoided. Of course very difficult problems remain in the world, but the spirit in which they are coming nearer to is a better one than it was some years ago. It has begun to be thought, even by the powerful men who decide whether we shall live or die, that negotiations  should reach agreements even if both sides do not find these agreements wholly satisfactory. It has begun to be understood that the important struggle nowadays is not between different countries but between man and the atom bomb . This passage implies  that war is now  _  .
worse than in the past as bad as in the past not as dangerous as in the past as necessary as in the past
Question: Is it possible to persuade mankind to live without war? War is an ancient practice which has existed for at least six thousand years. It was always bad and usually foolish, but in the past, the human race managed to live with it. Modern cleverness has changed this. Either man will end the existence of war, or war will end the existence of man. For the present, it is nuclear weapons   that cause the most serious danger, but bacteriological or chemical weapons may, before long, offer an even greater threat. If we succeeded in ending the existence of nuclear weapons, our work will not be done. It will never be done until we have succeeded in ending war. To do this, we need to persuade mankind to look up on international problems in a new way not as contests of force, in which the victory goes to the side which is most skillful in killing people, but by settling in accordance with(, , , ) agreed rules of law. It is not easy to change very old mental habits, but this is what must be attempted. There are those who say that the acceptance of this or that ideology   would prevent war. I believe this to be a big mistake. All ideologies are based upon dogmatic statements   ,which are, at best, doubtful, and at worst, totally false. Their supporters believe in them so deeply that they are willing to go to war in support of them. The movement of world opinion during the past few years has been very largely such as we can welcome. It has become a common place that nuclear war must be avoided. Of course very difficult problems remain in the world, but the spirit in which they are coming nearer to is a better one than it was some years ago. It has begun to be thought, even by the powerful men who decide whether we shall live or die, that negotiations  should reach agreements even if both sides do not find these agreements wholly satisfactory. It has begun to be understood that the important struggle nowadays is not between different countries but between man and the atom bomb . This passage implies  that war is now  _  .
A. worse than in the past
B. as bad as in the past
C. not as dangerous as in the past
D. as necessary as in the past
Answer: