If the taliban take power in afghanistan, then they will eventually take power in all central asia. and, if the taliban take power in all central asia, then they will take over the rest of the world. thus, once the taliban take power in afghanistan, they will take over the rest of the world. is the argument inductive or deductive? is the argument valid/invalid or strong/weak?

The argument is a deductive, valid, strong argument.

Explanation:

Considering the following premises:

“Taliban take power in Afghanistan” (P)

“Taliban will eventually take power in all Central Asia” (M)

“Taliban will take over the rest of the world” (S)

The model is:

Premise 1:    P = M

Premise 2:    M = S

Conclusion:  P = S.

This argument is a syllogism, and is a deductive, valid and strong argument.  

Is deductive because this reasoning is known as transitive inference: there is a relation between P and S that we conclude from both relations P-M and M-S. Is valid because the premises are true, and the conclusion (or result) has to be true and valid. It is strong because is logically reasonable and there is no to disagreement on this structure.

Actions taken by radical environmental groups to thwart the efforts of loggers and other industries that are legally engaged in logging and similar industries are called: Ecosabotage Ecosabotage is a form of actions that technically does not directly violate the environmental law, but still considered as 'wrong actions' on the eyes of society.