Read the following passage from Joseph Stalin's radio broadcast shortly after
Germany invaded the USSR in 1941:
Non-aggression pacts are pacts of peace between two
States. It was such a pact that Germany proposed to us in
1939. Could the Soviet Government have declined such a
proposal? I think that not a single peace-loving state could
decline a peace treaty with a neighboring state even
though the latter was headed by such fiends and cannibals
as Hitler and Ribbentrop.

Which argument is most clearly developed by the rhetoric used in the
passage?

A. Russia signed a peace treaty with Germany.

B. Germany's leaders cannot be trusted.

C. Russia should have joined forces with the Allies.

D. Germany's army is not invincible.

Looking at the available options, "B. Germany's leaders cannot be trusted" is the argument that is most clearly developed by the rhetoric used in the passage.

What is argument?

Argument can be referred to as the claim that an author actually makes in a text or passage. It is usually supported with an evidence.

Thus, we see here that the argument here is "B. Germany's leaders cannot be trusted."

Learn more about argument on https://brainly.com/question/540969

#SPJ2