Let's work together to deduce a desired conclusion from a set of assumptions. We are attempting to construct a valid argument that concludes: 'The US is justified in using military force against Assad's regime.' Issue: Is the US justified in using military force against Assad's regime? The assumptions below are GIVEN. These will be the statements we will use to try to validly deduce that 'The US is justified in using military force against Assad's regime'. NOTE: we do not assume that these statement are true. As you work to deduce that 'The US is justified in using military force against Assad's regime', keep in mind the difference between a valid and a sound argument: (These assumptions are numbered so we can keep track of them.) 1.Assad's regime uses chemical weapons with impunity. 2. Our allies could face chemical weapons. 3. If Assad's regime uses chemical weapons with impunity, this will effectively erode the ban on them. 4. If the ban on chemical weapons erodes, then other tyrants will be more likely to attain and use them. 5. If other tyrants attain and use chemical weapons, U.S. troops will be more likely to face chemical weapons on the battlefield