Consider the following premises. For all x_8, if x_8 were a police officer, then x_8 is drinking water. For all x_8, x_8 is bored or x_8 is an astronaut. For all x_8, if x_8 were a taxi driver, then x_8 is drinking water. For all x_8, if x_8 were an astronaut, then x_8 is a soldier. For all x_8, x_8 is not a soldier or x_8 is a taxi driver. For all x_8, if x_8 were bored, then x_8 is a soldier. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: For all x_8, x_8 will drink water.
 From the fact that for all x_8, if x_8 were bored, then x_8 is a soldier, that for all x_8, if x_8 were an astronaut, then x_8 is a soldier, and that for all x_8, x_8 is bored or x_8 is an astronaut we can infer that for all x_8, x_8 is a soldier via universal disjunction elimination. From the fact that for all x_8, x_8 is a soldier we can infer that for all x_8, x_8 is a soldier or x_8 is a police officer via universal addition. From the fact that for all x_8, x_8 is a soldier or x_8 is a police officer, and that for all x_8, x_8 is not a soldier or x_8 is a taxi driver we can infer that for all x_8, x_8 is a police officer or x_8 is a taxi driver via universal resolution. Finally, from the fact that for all x_8, if x_8 were a police officer, then x_8 is drinking water, that for all x_8, if x_8 were a taxi driver, then x_8 is drinking water, and that for all x_8, x_8 is a police officer or x_8 is a taxi driver we can infer that for all x_8, x_8 will drink water via universal disjunction elimination. Therefore, the answer is yes.