This does not seem “battle-tested”. The explanations in comments haven’t bridged the gap, I would probably fail your ITT.
I read it as
“the USA is good*”, and “atrocities were necessary to achieve this” ⇒ “these atrocities are justified”.
I believe (based on your comments) you wouldn’t endorse that, but I can’t see this interpretation in your post or other comments of yours. Others have already begun discussing the object-level, but I’ve nothing to add there.
*In the sense and to the extent that OP meant to convey.
This does not seem “battle-tested”. The explanations in comments haven’t bridged the gap, I would probably fail your ITT.
I read it as
“the USA is good*”, and “atrocities were necessary to achieve this” ⇒ “these atrocities are justified”.
I believe (based on your comments) you wouldn’t endorse that, but I can’t see this interpretation in your post or other comments of yours. Others have already begun discussing the object-level, but I’ve nothing to add there.
*In the sense and to the extent that OP meant to convey.