In the above argument, the author assumes that the absence of leadership and police are

the only reasons for the increase in crime rate. however he fails to adress the follwoing
details making the argument stand on unbalanced support.

Firstly, the argument assumes that increasing the police force can crub the viouence and
crime in the city. however it might be possible that infact the existing police force itself is
corrupt and hence they are keeping silent on the on the ongoing crime rate.

Secondly it also fails to adress the reason behind the increasing crime rate. it might be
possible that because of inssufficient job opportunities and educational quality, the
disgruntied people are resorting to these kind of activities. If this is the case increasing
police force will not be as effeective as increasing budget on educational and other city
programs.

Finally, the argument fails to explain why there is sudden increase violence in southeren
paer of the city only. for instance it might be possible that the police force in the city is un
evenly distrubuted and hence the crime rate is high only in the areas with less police
force. In this case merely distrubuting the police force evenly can solve this problem
without compromising on the city programs.

To sum it up, the arugument is illogically arrives at a conclusion without addressign eh

issues like police involvement in the increased crime rate, distrubution of police network
in the city and the reason behind the violence. Hence by providing information that
refutes the above issues the author can strengthen his conclusion.

I agree with the above statement to a certain extent that the main focus of the leadership
of business and organisations is to attain success. However this process is permissable as
long as it should not harm the environment's or the nation's intrests

firstly supporting the view of the statement one can say that, the success of an
organisation depends on how well acheives its targets and whether it reaches it's success.
Hence as a leader who drives the organisation his main proiority must be the
organisation's sucess.Since several stakeholders, employees and people are dependent on
the organization, the success of the organisation is the suicess of the poeple associated
with it.

Moreover by acheiving the organisation's desired results and sucess the leader is indirecly
supporting the nation as bussiness and organisations are the pillars of the developing
nation, For example, by acheiving the company's turnover, the leader indirecly increasing
the nation's gross domestic product and thus it's adding weight to it's stand on the
international front.

However by acheiving this one should not damage the environment or the coutry's
reputation as it indirecly affects the oranization itself. For example, the recently CEo of
an Indian company was charged for distorting the facts on the company's turnover.
Though he had claimed that he has done it for the sake of the copany's goals,he could
sustain it longer and there by resulting the the loss of company's credibility and share in
the market.

to sum, though i agree that leadership of bussienss and organisations should prioritize on
getting results and oranisation's sucess, it should also take the long term repercussion into
consideration.