Fagetti 1 James Fagetti Prof.

Babcock ENG 137H, Section 024 8 October 2013 On September 10, 2013, after proof of chemical weapons use by the dictatorial regime of Bashar al-Assad, President Obama presented a message to the American people that intervention of some degree was necessary to maintain the United States security. This speech can be seen as politically and socially important. The primary audience of this speech was the American people and the secondary audience of the speech is the world; because after the reports of confirmed chemical attacks on innocent civilians by the Syrian Army, the world was curious to see how the United States would respond to a blatant violation of the worlds ban on the use of chemical weapons. Thus, the President speaks appeals to the American people to agree with his policy that the Syrian leader should be brought to justice. President Obama uses the three rhetorical appeals, various styles of diction, the three occasions of rhetoric, as well as narration, cause and consequence, and process analysis in his plea to the American people to support his plan for intervention in the Syrian Civil War. President Obama uses all of the rhetorical appeals to present his case to the American people that in the interest of the United States, intervention is necessary in the Syrian Civil War. President Obama cites the number of casualties and the number of refugees in order to establish an urgency to the situation. Through this urgency, it makes his plea believable and credible. The President at the beginning of the speech cites the numbers to provide credibility, Over 100,000 people have been killed. Millions have fled the country. Later in the speech, the President cites

Fagetti 2 that he is the Commander in Chief and that he has the authority to make these judgments on United States military policy. He establishes a logical basis to his argument for intervention through his mentioning that it is proven that Assad used chemical weapons against innocent civilians. President Obama states, we know the Assad regime was responsible in stating that there is no doubt that Assad was responsible for the attack. The next logical step of action is an intervention to prevent any use of chemical weapons. The President makes an emotional connection between the American people and the conflict through his mentioning of the various images that had been released showing the victims of the attacks. President Obama states, A father clutching his children begging them to get up and walk This a powerful mental image hopefully pushes Americans to become emotionally attached to the suffering of the Syrian civilians who were brutally attacked by their own military. And in response to a question posed by many Americans to the President, he replies, I will not put American boots on the ground This appeals to the emotions of the American people by reassuring the population and easing any fears that the United States will be pulled into another long, arduous war in the Middle East. President Obama arranged his speech to emphasize the emotional appeal of the Syrian people for help from being abused by their own government. Through the various rhetorical appeals that President Obama uses his argument touches all of the points to appeal to the American people. President Obama uses different styles of diction in arranging his speech for the most impact in reaching out to the American people. The speech is emphatically arranged, first stating the facts to appeal to pathos through facts and mental images of the dead, then the President provides a historical background on the use of chemical weapons, and why they are banned. Then, President Obama states what he believes the world should do, and then the United States itself. Finally, at the end of the speech, President Obama presents some of the most important

Fagetti 3 information on intervention through his answering of questions through his speech. The statement of historical facts on chemical weapons is the low style of diction according to St. Augustine, and the Presidents answering of questions at the end of the speech is meant to please the American people by relieving any potential fears about intervention. Finally, the high style of diction according to St. Augustine is fulfilled through the Presidents pathos appeal at the beginning of the speech. Several different tactics are used in this speech. Narration is used to tell the story of how chemical weapons were used in a historical context, and to tell the story of that horrible day when chemical weapons were first used against innocent civilians in Syria. Narration provides interest in the speech, and gives context to why chemical weapons are banned in international law. Cause and consequence is used to show how without intervention, the Syrian Civil War, without intervention, will lead to negative consequences in regards to worlds safety with chemical weapons. Finally, process analysis is used as the President Obama gives a step by step plan on how he plans to intervene to stop Bashar al-Assad from ever using chemical weapons again. Was the speech effective? Only time will give us that answer. The Syrian Civil War still rages, however, progress seems to have been made in deterring Assad from using chemical weapons again. Also, he has agreed to destroy the rest of chemical weapons. Americans were mixed in their reaction to the Presidents plan to intervene. A slight majority is against any intervention, however, there is a large population of Americans who would stand behind the President in intervening. However, as world news and politics goes on, it would seem that the Syrian Civil War has been swept hypothetically under the rug with the federal government shutdown, the Nairobi mall attack in Kenya, and more recently the Special Operations raids

Fagetti 4 committed by the United States to capture high level operatives in Al-Qaeda have all blocked out the question of whether the situation in Syria is improving or worsening.