Q: 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: How does Jim Mattis feel about the possible attack? === The answer to the above question is

OPTIONS:
- They should use economic sanctions
- It is unwarranted
- not enough information
- It is warranted

A: It is warranted

input: OPTIONS:
- cooked vegetables are more nutritious.
- raw vegetables are more nutritious.
- both cooked and raw vegetables are nutritious.
- not enough information Now, answer this question: Cooking food is something we have done since the first caveman threw a mammoth steak on the fire. While it is true that cooking does cause chemical changes in food and a loss of some nutrients, it is a clear case of being alert and not alarmed. Every time we cook food, there is some degree of nutrient loss. Exposing food to heat, oxygen or light alters the nutrients found in food. It is not all bad news though because cooking food also has its advantages. Cooking food can increase its digestibility, meaning you will get more nutrients out of it. And even though there may be less of some nutrients from cooking, it is swings and roundabouts as the availability of certain phytonutrients increases. And of course, let's not forget that heating food kills some of the nasty microbes that can cause food poisoning. The principle behind a raw food diet is that cooking food destroys the natural enzymes and nutrients that would otherwise give us optimal health and control body weight. A raw food diet is almost entirely plant-based and includes fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, grains, vegetable oils and juices in their natural uncooked state. Now on the pro side for a raw food diet, it means if you are currently eating a lot of processed food, then switching to raw food will be a clear nutritional win. So that gets a big tick. Unquestionably, there are many benefits to eating plenty of fruits and vegetables. These foods are high in nutrients and fibre and low in kilojoules. But is raw superior to cooked? A review of 28 research studies found eaters of both cooked and raw vegetables had a lower risk of cancer compared to people who did not eat many vegetables in the first place. Where the science gets murky is the claim that raw food is better because cooking destroys the enzymes found in plants. It is 100 percent correct that cooking will do this. But so too does digestion. Few enzymes survive their trip through the hydrochloric acid spa bath in the stomach. And those plant enzymes are essential only to the plants. The... Question: The author probably feels that: === The answer to the above question is
A:
output: both cooked and raw vegetables are nutritious.

Problem:OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- she is eager to leave her hometown
- she wants to see the world
- she is attached to her hometown

Diane's heart felt leaden as she prepared to leave. Each face she looked at, she knew she was seeing for the last time. As if she were dying and they all were going to live on. Oh, why must I leave? Now, when all of you are about to put on the martyr's crown, how can you cast me out? I want to die with you. I do not want to go on, stumbling through this world alone. For years these people had been her only family. When she was a child, her faith was preached and practiced openly all over the south of France. The crusade was already twenty years old then, but the perfecti still taught crowds of people in the streets of great cities like Toulouse and Beziers, still won converts away from the Church of Rome. From the lords and ladies in their castles to the peasants on the mountainsides, over half the people were Cathars. Now this year, one thousand two hundred forty-four, might come to be remembered as the year Catharism in France disappeared. From now on there would be nothing but a remnant in hiding, having to sneak about. No, she didn't want to live that way. She longed to throw herself down and beg Bishop Bertran once again to let her stay. But duty pressed down upon her like a mail shirt. It was burdensome, but it protected her from error. She quietly made ready. Before long, Diane and Roland were standing on the northeast wall amid a group of perfecti. From a family that had taken refuge on Mont Segur had come a red and green costume for Diane, the tunic and hose of a well-to-do boy, an equerry. They had cut her hair short and tucked it under a cap topped with a long partridge feather. They had sewn the red cross back on Roland's black surcoat, and had made one for Diane's tunic from a gentlewoman's crimson scarf. A rope to form a sling was tied around her waist and another around her knees. Roland was similarly tied. Question: What is probably true about Diane? === The answer to the above question is
****
A:
she is attached to her hometown