Critical reasoning — identify implicit assumptions Statement: It is not true that the mightiest superpower always wins wars and receives accolades from other countries. Assumptions: I. Winners are sometimes admired and appreciated. II. Winners are occasionally criticized (i.e., accolades are not guaranteed).

Introduction / Context:
The statement denies an absolute claim about a superpower “always” winning wars and “always” getting accolades. Our task is to find which minimal assumption must hold for this denial to make sense.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Denial: The conjunction “always wins and always gets accolades” is not universally true.
• Assumption I: Winners are sometimes admired. (A truism but not required.)
• Assumption II: Winners are sometimes not admired; they may be criticized or denied accolades.

Concept / Approach:
To refute “always wins and gets accolades,” it is enough that there exist cases where a superpower does not win or, even if it wins, does not receive accolades. The necessary assumption concerns the possibility of non-accolades despite victory, not the existence of admiration per se.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
If at least on some occasions winners are criticized or not celebrated, then the “always gets accolades” clause fails. The statement stands without any commitment to how often winners are admired.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only I / Either / Both: These include an unnecessary statement about admiration.
• Neither: Overlooks the exception-based logic needed to defeat “always.”

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming that to deny “always” one must discuss both praise and criticism; actually, showing the possibility of criticism suffices.

Final Answer:
Only assumption II is implicit