On Sept. 24,President Barack Obama will bring together 14 world leaders for a special U. N. Security Council meeting in New York. On the agenda: how to rid the world of nuclear weapons. The summit is the latest step in the administration's campaign to eliminate nukes. The efforts to eliminate nukesare all grounded in the same proposition: that nuclear weapons represent the" gravest threat" to U. S. security. This argument has a lot going for it. It's also popular; U.S. presidents have been making similar noises since the Eisenhower administration, and halting the spread of nukes( if not eliminating them altogether) is one of the few things Obama, Vladimir Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu can all agree on. There's just one problem with the reasoning : it may well be wrong. A growing and compelling body of research suggests that nuclear weapons may not, in fact, make the World more dangerous. The bomb may actually make us safer. This argument rests on two deceptively simple observations. First, nuclear weapons have not been used since 1945. Second, there's never been a nuclear war, or even a nonnuclear war between two states that possess them. Just stop for a second and think about that : it's hard to overstate how remarkable it is. especially given the singular viciousness of the 20th century. As Kenneth Waltz, the leading" nuclear optimist" and a professor of political science at UC Berkeley puts it," We now have 64 years of experience since Hiroshi- ma. It's striking and against all historical precedent that for that substantial period, there has not been any war among nuclear states. " To understand why the next 64 years are likely to play out the same way—Iyou need to start by recognizing that all states are rational on some basic level. Their leaders may be stupid, petty even evil, but they tend to do things only when they're pretty sure they can get away with them. Take war: a country will start a fight only when it'almost certain it can get what it wants at an acceptable price. Not even Hider or Saddam waged wars they didn't think they could win. The problem historically has been that leaders often make the wrong gamble and underestimate the other side—millions of innocents pay the price.
单选题
What is the main topic of the special U. N. Security Council meeting in New York on Sept. 24?
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】考查特定事件的目的定位到On the agenda：how to rid the world of nuclear weapons．议事项即是怎样为世界消除核武器。可见选项D是合文意的，故选择D。
单选题
According to the passage ,why the Obama administration urged the world to get rid of nukes?
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】考查特定事件的原因定位到文章原句The efforts to eliminate nukes are all grounded in the same proposition：that nuclear weapons represent the "gravest threat" to U.S. security．所有力图消除核武器的努力都源于这样一个认知，即核武器是美国安全面临的最严重威胁。可见选项B认为核武器是美国安全的最大威胁，合文意的，故选择B。
单选题
According to the passage, what is the writer's attitude towards nuclear weapons?
【正确答案】
A
【答案解析】考查作者的观点定位到文章原句A growing and compelling body of research suggests that nuclear weapons may not，in fact，make the world more dangerous．The bomb may actually makeus safer．越来越多的研究机构指出，核武器可能在事实上不会让世界变得危险，相反可能让我们更安全。可见选项A是合文意的，选项B不合文意，故选择A。
单选题
Which one of the following statement is NOT right according to the passage?
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】考查全篇大意理解定位到文章原句This argument has a lot going for it．It's also popular．U.S. presidents have been making similar noises since the Eisenhower administration．nuclear weapons have not been used since 1945．There has never been a nuclear war，or even a nonnuclear war between two states that possess them．这个论点有很多支持的论据，也很受欢迎。从艾森豪威尔政府开始，历届美国政府都发出类似的声音。自从1945年以来，世界上就没有国家使用过核武器，任何两个拥有核武器的国家之间连非核战争都没有爆发过，更不用说是核战争了。可见选项ACD是合文意的，B认为国与国之间没有战争是不正确的，文章的原意是在拥有核武器的国家之间没有战争。故选择B。
单选题
Why is it that there will be no war between in the next 64 years?
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】考杏特定事件的原因定位到文章原句…all states are rational on some basic level． Their leaders…but they tend to do things only when they're pretty sure they can get away with them．Take war: a country will start a fight only when it's almost certain it can get what it wants at an acceptable price．所有的国家最起码还是理智的，领导人也会选择去做他们能够处理的事情。拿战争来说，没有国家会发起战争，除非这场战争可以使他们在可承担的代价之内获得想要的结果。可见选项B认为没有人可以在核战争中取胜，是正确的，因为没有人可以取胜，所以核武器拥有因都不会动用核武器。故选择B。