Final answer:
Ramona Peters would likely assess document 1 by considering its source, author beliefs, evidence, context, and intent to determine its perspective on historical policy.
Step-by-step explanation:
Without the specific content of document 1 and document 3, we can only generalize what Ramona Peters might say. However, we can surmise from the question that both documents relate to historical perspectives and that there is some form of comparison or competition between them regarding their views on the policy of containment or another historical policy. If document 3 supported a more critical or different view than document 1, Ramona Peters might critique the effectiveness, reliability, or perspective presented in document 1, possibly by assessing the type of source (primary or secondary), author beliefs, and evidence provided within the document. When evaluating the reliability of historical documents, it is crucial to consider the context in which they were written, the intent of their authors, and the evidence they present to support their claims.