Rhetorical Analysis Of 9/11

America had lots of changes to make the attacks on September 11, 2001. Little did we know that this would affect the nation for years to come. Shortly after the attacks on 9/11 the Government acted very quickly. As stated in an article by Jaeshin Kim, “The Bush Administration launched the bombing of Afghanistan, and Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act allowing law enforcement powers to detain foreign nationals or immigrants suspected of terrorism” (Kim 1). In situations as these, the President has no option but to quickly react, so he did.

There is no time to consider carefully all the arguments and objections that might arise during peacetime. Former President Bush instantly and instantly reacted to the news of the attack by saying simply, “We are at war.” Thus Former President Bush is associating the 9/11 attacks with warfare. Former President Bush again is employing rhetorical techniques to define reality in a new way. In addition, he is also disassociating the “new” war from the old style wars. All of this begins to highlight the pertinence of Schmitt’s theory for understanding post 9/11 rhetoric.

In his address he knows that he is the first president and that the he has shared responsibility of the president and Congress to preserve and start tradition. Washington realizes that since he is president he is called to help preserve "the sacred fire of liberty.” Washington knows that he must help preserve the republican form of government so he can create new tradition. Washington really just wanted to create a mantel and tradition for other future presidents after him to follow and rely

As stated in document A, President Truman believed that it was his duty as president to use every weapon available to save American lives. By making the decision to employ atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it successfully brought an end to World War II. Now, while these bombs did ultimately spare thousands of American lives, it did also put an end to about 200,000 lives as shown in document E. Document A stated that Admiral William Leahy, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, opposed using the bomb because it killed civilians indiscriminately. He believed that an economic blockade and conventional bombing would convince Japan to surrender. As an opposite end of the spectrum though Truman’s advisor, James Byrnes thought that the use of “the A-bombs would not only cause Japan to surrender, but also impress the Soviet Union, and hopefully stop its expansion” (Doc C).

A key part would be how Larson intensively wrote about the dirty antics of the politicians. For example, Alexander Hamilton trying to prevent Adams from becoming Vice President. He willingly put words into Adams’ mouth to make him seem unfit for the position. This has ultimately changed my perspective on Alexander Hamilton. I thought of him as a very key figure in history because of the Revolutionary War not because of his sabotage of political affairs.

He uses logos when he said that, he would support with George W. Bush claim about keeping the military strong and have freedom and not go with Kerry cause, he wants to weaken the military. Zell Miller doesn’t like the fact, that Senator Kerry was weak and only wanted to use military force only approved by the United Nations. Kerry was a war protestor and blamed our military, so that why he wanted to weaken the military by shut down some of the national security. But George W. Bush doesn’t want that to happen and either does Zell Miller that’s also why Zell Miller is on his side on the strength military instead going with Kerry.

I believe that Truman had to make a decision that was harder than most could imagine. While killing so many people is wrong, it was his job to protect his citizens first. He did not just decide to drop a bomb in a quick minute, this decision was well thought out. The amount of Americans who would die if the war went on any longer was far too great for the President to risk. While it is very tragic what happened in Japan, I believe that Truman made the best decision that he could to try to keep as many people as he could from

In his time as President, he had had to deal with the Quasi-War, “America 's first major international crisis,” between Britain, France, and America (Florence). This meant that Adams had to make many major decisions in regards to the nation’s commerce and defense. “Some extreme Federalists were ready for a fight, but President Adams disappointed them, refusing to press war against Virginia or France (Florence).” His decision angered many

Other attributes of both a presidential candidate and president include, honesty, trustworthiness, an optimism. However, presidents are expected to provide clarity of national leadership. Presidents are no longer candidates trying to make promises to the American people. They have to now put their campaign promises into action. They have a clear sense of where they want to lead the country and an ability to communicate.

In another article, Judge: man won’t be prosecuted for flag ‘desecration’, I found this quote “Allegheny Township police charged Brubaker with two flag desecration crimes. Maliciously hanging or taking down a flag and mutilating a flag.” I understand that this isn’t against the law, but I also feel the actions from the 2 different men were very wrong. I feel like people should never do this because it is like they are trying to express they hate America and hate being an American. The last reason why the flag should be protected from desecration is because it is a symbol of how amazing of a country the United States really