Many times throughout U.S. history attacks of unimaginable magnitude have take place. A symbol for freedom and hope, the hubris of the United States in believing it is invincible has been proved wrong. During these times of impending doom, the president of such a powerful nation must recognize the horrors and facts and reply with wisdom, intellect, and uphold American values, expected from a strong and powerful leader. Two leaders analyzed are George W. Bush responding to 9/11 and Franklin Roosevelt responding to Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor. Both respond to unprecedented attacks on the U.S. threatening the freedom America represents and each effectively give their audience a reason to fight for their nation. Both Bush and Roosevelt set a
…show more content…
Bush makes many comparisons between Americans and the foundation for our biggest buildings, saying that the terrorist acts “shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American Resolve” and describes America as the “brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world,” not allowing anyone to “keep that light from shining.” These symbolism helps demonstrate that American Ideals can withstand any sort of beating, weathering or tampering and that it cannot be removed by any sort of foreign attack and represent hope across the world, acting as a sort of beacon. This was done by Bush to give the audience a much larger sense of responsibility in believing how strong the nation truly is. Similarly, Roosevelt uses similar nationalistic appeals, using the attacks on U.S. territories as support that the Japanese did it completely to debilitate the U.S. An example of Roosevelt’s nationalistic appeals is the parallel structure created to emphasize the purpose the Japanese had in attacking Pearl Harbor. He states “Last Night Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong. Last Night Japanese forces attacked Guam….attacked Wake Island.” These territories were vital in creating the sense of nationalism toward his audience as these territories owned by the U.S. were gained during its path to a global superpower, dominating in terms of land, navy and economic success. The Japanese forces attacking these locations had given the Americans much more context for the purpose of destroying the Hawaiian islands, not just wanting to hurt the U.S. but wanting to destroy what the U.S. stood for. This need to defend the ideals America stood for was a large factor in leading the U.S. to become involved in World War I after being neutral for many
Bush makes many comparisons between Americans and the foundation for our biggest buildings, saying that the terrorist acts “shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American Resolve” and describes America as the “brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world,” not allowing anyone to “keep that light from shining.” These symbolism helps demonstrate that American Ideals can withstand any sort of beating, weathering or tampering and that it cannot be removed by any sort of foreign attack and represent hope across the world, acting as a sort of beacon. This was done by Bush to give the audience a much larger sense of responsibility in believing how strong the nation truly is. Similarly, Roosevelt uses similar nationalistic appeals, using the attacks on U.S. territories as support that the Japanese did it completely to debilitate the U.S. An example of Roosevelt’s nationalistic appeals is the parallel structure created to emphasize the purpose the Japanese had in attacking Pearl Harbor. He states “Last Night Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong. Last Night Japanese forces attacked Guam….attacked Wake Island.” These territories were vital in creating the sense of nationalism toward his audience as these territories owned by the U.S. were gained during its path to a global superpower, dominating in terms of land, navy and economic success. The Japanese forces attacking these locations had given the Americans much more context for the purpose of destroying the Hawaiian islands, not just wanting to hurt the U.S. but wanting to destroy what the U.S. stood for. This need to defend the ideals America stood for was a large factor in leading the U.S. to become involved in World War I after being neutral for many