Winston Churchill couldn’t motivate a country into war without having some logical reasoning embedded into this speech. He informs his listeners of how much the army has improved, what strategy they will be using, and a very powerful ally that they possess. He does not give any standout statistics through this speech, but they aren’t needed because he does an exceptional job at giving logical reasoning without the need to bring in numbers. “Concerning a large-scale sea invasion, the British Navy is now ready, trained, and capable of meeting it. There should be no difficulty in this, owing to our great superiority at sea", in this excerpt he tells the nation that there is nothing to worry about because we have superiority at sea.
Henry also stated in his speech to the Virginia Convention, “armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone,” (Henry 104). Not only was Henry speaking to them to reach their emotions, but he was also reaching to motivate them as well. Henry lets them know that together they are invincible and together they can take down whatever conflict comes their way. The emotion and determination that Henry used was a great way to influence the public to go to war.
King George III was a smart man but let his power hungry personality get in the way of his rational decision making. Killing England gives the readers insight on what was actually going on during the time of the American Revolution. Many people such as George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, and many others paved this road for us today to live in this great nation. Their hard work and sacrifice is something honorable to look at. I feel that reading this book gave me a better appreciation for the founding fathers of our great
By pointing out past confrontations in an accurate manner, King George VI appeals to the people’s logos. If the reasoning behind his actions can be seen by his subjects, they will feel predisposed to put him in their favor and support the war effort. At the start of his reign, King George VI was doubted by many of his people, so he needed this speech to succeed to win them over. In order to achieve this, he epitomized the role of a compassionate leader during a somber time in trying to connect with his
In fact, he begins as a valiant leader only serving Duncan’s wishes to win a battle against a rebellious force. After this battle, he receives a new title which fuels his ambition and causes him to think of immoral ways to seize what he so passionately believes is his: the throne. Macbeth is then led to spin a web of lies to cover up his previous actions and ultimately becomes a deceitful tyrant. In total,, his strive for success got him very far, but it also revealed something in him that is universally human which is the desire for more power. Like Macbeth, not all of humanity is fit to serve since with great power comes incredible amounts of responsibility.
After a series of “paper wars” between the political opponents, Burr challenged Hamilton to a duel, which Hamilton accepted. According to Freeman, Hamilton accepted Burr’s challenge for a number of reasons. “In his mind, the duel; was a praiseworthy attempt to serve the common good... yet it was also an intensely personal attempt to preserve his public career. To prove to the world, and to himself, that he was a man of his word, a man of courage and principle, a leader.”
He was swaying people to his side of supporting equality while I felt like I had to solve a puzzle to find out what Swift was trying to accomplish. I also felt like Swifts audience did not understand his satire. King truly believes what he is fighting for and with that mindset, nothing is unreachable. Swift did not believe in what he was saying, he only wanted to catch the people attention on problems he never clearly states. King’s uses ethos in ways that are easy to point out and seems to be his technique all the way through his letter.
He provided alternative solutions to governing, a republican government and a constitution. However, some may argue that although it was a major influence it didn’t influence everyone’s minds, the loyalists. Thomas Paine was an American patriot that understood that independence was inevitable but the ultimate question was when (source 1). Paine was a person who fought for the average person against unfair monarchy systems (source 4). He always had the people in mind.
He promised that the United States would become the “arsenal of democracy”. To meet this promise, the president met Winston Churchill secretly at sea to make plans.
In his movies, Stone appears to be a forceful person who sees the world as a combat zone or a minefield, and himself as a rebel determined to triumph in the war. It is such an orientation that made him direct a film such as "JFK," which is the ultimate conspiracy film. He managed to make this film because of his sense of tranquility and security. Through these movies, it is clear that Stone is more political than most of his contemporaries and leans more to the left in his opinions (Riordan, p. 377). Nevertheless, his movies do not play like ideological criticisms but have an intrinsic energy and passion that sweep the audience along.
This essay disagrees with the statement ‘Terror, and terror alone, explains Saddam Hussein’s success in holding on to power’ and will argue that it was actually a combination of factors, including: his development of infrastructure and the economy; his indoctrination and cult of personality and his use of terror and force. Although, some may argue that terror was not at all responsible and in fact he held on to power because of the good work he did for the country. Others may argue that his use of terror was the only reason why he held on to power because people were afraid to go against his beliefs. However, evidence suggests that his use of terror was not wholly responsible and in fact, it was due to a combination of reasons; as civilians
Machiavelli was not looking for princes to become cruel, militant tyrants, but rather wanted effectiveness to unite a kingdom and to unite the people. Through Francesco Sforza, Cesare Borgia, and even Pope Julius II, the author is stating the unspoken truth, supporting it with the figures he derived inspiration, those who used underhanded methods when needed to hold reigns on their power, that "for a man who strives after goodness in all his acts is sure to come to ruin, since there are so many men who are not good. Hence it is necessary that a prince who is interested in his survival learn to be other than good, making use of his capacity or refraining from it according to need" (Machiavelli
Since we learn our first history lessons, we are instilled with the belief of the lionized legacies of our founding fathers. We are taught that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and their fellow-founding fathers were heroic men fighting for a noble cause. We are supposed to ignore the fact that these men were little more than rebels filled to the brim with paranoia that used immoral tactics in war, and refused to pay their debts for the protection they had from Britain. People tend to give the colonies the heroic stance of the war, when in reality the cause of the war was a complex one with both sides displaying less than moral principles. The sides of the war were a money-hungry empire that was starving financially and
In this essay, the following question will be discussed. Why did the Nazis choose to bomb London instead of the English Airfields, and how did this hurt them strategically? The following evidence and reasoning will discuss why the Nazis decided to take the course of action they did, and how it affected them in their conquest of Europe. The research will primarily be focused on the reasoning, and strategic effects of this decision by the Nazis, but will also discuss how the British used this to their advantage, and eventually won the battle of Britain. All of of the sources to be used in this paper were written far after the Second World War explosively concluded.
William Jennings Bryan Create, Innovate, Illuminate “The way to develop self-confidence is to do the thing you fear and get a record of successful experiences behind you” (William Jennings Bryan 1869). This quote belonging to Bryan has showed is way of seeing problems and obstacles. These types of things and this type of thinking put him into a growth mindset allowing him to create, innovate, and illuminate throughout his quest to convert the country. William Jennings Bryan created speeches such as “The Cross of Gold speech”, used persistence to innovate ways to overcome losing three presidential elections, and illuminating the world by taking part in women’s rights movement, income tax, prohibition laws, and creating a department of labor.