Contrary to his reputation, the admiral was not a (i). He (ii) his order to attack when he saw the white flag raised by the enemy sailors, and was actually relieved that he could bring an end to the (iii).
The options are:
- (i) A. bloodthirsty man B. pacifist C. pedant
- (ii) D. countermanded E. reiterated F. commandeered
- (iii) G. truce H. hiatus I. hostilities
The answer is A, D, and I. I think B (pacifist) is more plausible than A (bloodthirsty man) because it matches perfectly with the blanks.
Bloodthirsty man is correct; pacifist is wrong.
Since you apparently agree with D and I, let’s start by looking at the complete second sentence:
He countermanded his order to attack when he saw the white flag raised by the enemy sailors, and was actually relieved that he could bring an end to the hostilities.
This sentence is trying to support the claim that the admiral is not bloodthirsty. (The implication is that if he were bloodthirsty, then he would have pursued the attack even after the enemy surrendered; or, failing that, that he would at least have been disappointed that the hostilities were over.) This sentence is not trying to support the claim that the admiral is not a pacifist; apparently he isn’t one, but that’s not the focus of the sentence. (To support such a claim, we’d instead write something like “He ordered his troops to attack first, and he did not call off the attack until after his victims had raised a white flag and accepted his terms.”)
So, the first sentence must be saying “the admiral was not a bloodthirsty man”; otherwise the second sentence would not make sense in context.
Source : Link , Question Author : user2378 , Answer Author : ruakh