input with options: Defense Secretary Jim Mattis promised Thursday the Pentagon will "notify" Congress before any possible military action in Syria, where the U.S. is considering responding to a suspected chemical weapons attack. "There will be notification to leadership, of course, prior to the attack," Mattis said in his testimony at the House Armed Services Committee. "We will report to Congress. We will keep open lines of communication." But notably, Mattis did not indicate the Trump administration would seek congressional approval before the strike, which presumably would target the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Trump says the U.S. will soon launch "nice and new and smart" missiles in response to last week's suspected poison gas attack, which left scores dead in a rebel-held area. Trump blames Assad for the attack. A U.S. attack is likely to upset a small but growing number of U.S. lawmakers who demand President Donald Trump first ask Congress to authorize any hostilities, citing the War Powers Resolution of 1973, a federal law intended to check the president's ability to wage war. U.S. presidents, both Republican and Democrat, have long argued they have legal authority to order airstrikes and other short-term military campaigns if those engagements fall short of the "hostilities" mentioned in the War Powers Resolution. Additionally, U.S. presidents have cited a pair of authorizations by Congress following the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks as justification for the near-constant U.S. strikes on Islamic militants around the world. The Trump administration has used those authorizations as justification for its current war in Syria. The U.S. has 2,000 troops in Syria, and helps lead an international coalition against Islamic State in Syria and neighboring Iraq. The overwhelming majority of U.S. lawmakers have not publicly objected to the administration's legal rationale for those missions. But as Trump considers expanding the U.S. war to include attacks on Syrian government targets, some in Congress are... Question: What did Syria think about the targets from the U.S.? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- they are feeling good about discipline
- not enough information
- they are upset
- they are not caring
output: not enough information

Q: I thought I might get some good ideas if I went down to the hospital. I always have stayed away from hospitals. People died or were born. But now I thought I might get some idea if I went down to where it was all happening, the being born and the dying. Mostly the dying. It was the dying that interested me. I sat on a bench in a sort of waiting room. I wanted to call it a green room; it wasn't a place where the patients would wait to be called by the doctor; it was a place where the relatives would wait while the patient was in their room. It had a coffee bar, and comfortable couches, with trendy, muted colors on the walls and floor. Everything was clean and modern without being cold, a homogenized balancing act designed to keep everyone calm during their stressful time. It was a green room; patients were "guests"; their families were "guests" as well. Here was where the families would sit and be feted while they waited to be called out to perform, to smile and encourage or to don faces of appropriate mournfulness. The old ones would put on smiles, the young ones would look sad. I think I went there because it seemed to me that it was the place richest in emotional impact. It reeked of spent emotions, and the emotions were made all the stronger, here in the green room, by the efforts at suppression--the muted walls and gourmet coffees and scones, the overstuffed loveseats and couches, as if those in grief should not be permitted to sit on benches or folding chairs. It absolutely reeked of hush and hidden feeling. It was worse than a church. It was worse than a highschool hallway. It was more universal, more basic, something even the children could comprehend. Question: When did the author see the coffee bar? === The answer to the above question is

OPTIONS:
- Before walking into the green room
- not enough information
- After walking into the green room
- Before deciding to go to the hospital

A: After walking into the green room

input: OPTIONS:
- something sweet
- not enough information
- something alcoholic
- something healthy Now, answer this question: I never have feed a baby something that they shouldn't have but I know of an instance where someone did A neighbor of Mine was babysitting for her granddaugther. The mother had placed a water bottle filled with VODKA in the refrigerator. The grandmother used that VODKA to fill the bottle with the powder added. At some point after the baby wouldn't drink the bottle (because of the taste I imagine) but had drank some the Grandmother realized it was Vodka instead of WATER. She gave the baby Powdered Charcoal and the baby vomited the milk mix up. The baby was Ok and no harm done. She was lucky to have the powdered charcoal around. It is hard to find now in the stores. When I was a child (50's-60) it was common for All medicine chests to be supplied with Charcoal. I still keep some of that in My medicine chest. I live in a rural area. It would take me 45 minutes to get to a Medical facility. An ambulance takes 14 minutes to get to my house and 45 minutes to get to a hospital. Now I can say that I have feed babies things that are not recommended at their age. For example, If a baby is not getting full feeling off of just formula, I would make rice cereal and feed the baby that. Some babies are just to big to be satisfied on just milk. Rice is a good filler and does No harm. (like I would not use wheat cereal) I also would give a baby warm tea when they had a stomach ache. Tea of course has caffeine in it. That would not be considered kosher. I also feed My grand daughters sweet tea. They love it. it is better than many sugary corn syrup infested drinks other chose for their children. I use 3/4 cup of sugar for every 2 gallons, so it is NOT much sugar. Question: What did the baby initially drink? === The answer to the above question is
A:
output: something alcoholic

I was once distinctly unsettled by a utility man who called to read the gas meter. We were living in an old house at the time and I was home alone with the youngest child (who was around six months old), balanced on my hip as I opened the door. The visitor looked genuine, dressed in the expected uniform. He was around 6.3 and probably not the most tidily presented utility man I'd met, but I believed him to be genuine and willingly invited him in out of the foul weather. It was pouring down outside, a freezing cold winter's day. As I closed the door I remembered that I should have asked to see his company I.D. , so as I opened the meter cupboard and switched on the light, I politely said, 'Oops, I should have asked to see your I.D. if you don't mind?. He stood there in front of the door and made no move to produce his card or do anything in fact. He just glared down at me in the most menacing way and said in a very sinister voice 'Isn't it a little bit late for that now? What are you going to do if I tell you I don't have it?'. There was an embarrassed silence. He continued to stare down at me without making a move for what seemed like minutes but was probably seconds. He didn't produce his I.D., instead he almost grudgingly read the meter as I looked on and then he swiftly left without saying goodbye. I closed the door and locked it, and then took a while to get my pulse rate back to normal and to realise I'd just learned a very big lesson. Such a creepy individual, I didn't make that mistake again. Question: What is probably true about the narrator? === The answer to the above question is

OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- She has lived in multiple houses.
- She is married.
- She has at least 2 children.

Answer:
She is married.