Statement: “No war, yet 1,874 Indian Army personnel were killed or injured during the 10-month forward deployment along the Indo-Pak border last year,” says an opposition leader.\nAssumptions I & II:\nI. Soldiers lack basic necessities such as decent helmets, proper webbing, or bullet-proof jackets.\nII. The casualties during the 10 months have surpassed the estimated limit of casualties along the Indo-Pak border.\nChoose the option that correctly identifies the implicit assumption(s).

Introduction / Context:
The speaker highlights a high casualty figure “despite no war,” implicitly criticizing the situation. We must identify which premises are required by this criticism. Note the statement does not specify causes (equipment, training, terrain) or compare against an “estimated limit.”

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I. Troops lack necessary protective gear.
• II. Casualties exceed an established estimate.

Concept / Approach:
The political point is rhetorical: casualties are troubling even without declared war. This sentiment does not need a claim about inadequate gear (I) or reference to a benchmark (II). It could be driven by dangerous patrols, infiltration, mines, weather, or accidents—none asserted.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) The statement observes casualty numbers and contrasts them with “no war.”2) It does not attribute causation to equipment deficiencies (I); many causal stories could fit.3) It does not cite or require an official casualty cap (II) to make the rhetorical point; the absolute number itself is used to shock.

Verification / Alternative check:
Even if gear were adequate and casualties within historical variance, the speaker could still lament high numbers in peacetime deployment. Hence neither I nor II is necessary.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I/Only II/Either/Both all import details (cause or benchmarks) not needed for the contrast to be meaningful.

Common Pitfalls:
Reading implied causation into political rhetoric; the statement stays at the level of contrast and concern.

Final Answer:
Neither I nor II is implicit.