Barrack Obama’s speech “Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation Syria” and Vladimir Putin’s op-ed, “A Plea for Caution From Russia”, in September of 2011 address the issue of chemical weapon usage in Syria. Obama’s speech looks at alternative solutions rather than slipping into a War; while Putin’s op-ed was made in reply to Obama’s, he requests a need for complete caution on any decision made. “Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation Syria” is more likely to address a country and the world in a more inviting way over “A Plead for Caution From Russia” due to the diction and control Obama presented in a time of distress. Barack Obama in the speech “Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation Syria” persuades his audience, the United States and the rest of the world, by showing the power he has in the situation
…show more content…
Vladimir Putin in the op-ed “A Plea For Caution From Russia” cries out for his audience to understand the risk at takes. He doubts the communication between societies and describes it as “insufficient.” He creates a sense of worry in his audience with the doubt and bitterness he uses in his diction such as “out of balance”. He states that a strike on Syria will only increase violence, which eventually could lead to a wave of terrorism. Putin supports his claim by using the credibility of high officials such as the Pope when building his argument that caution on such violence is essential. Though he admits he is an ally with Barack Obama in the issues debating Syria, he constantly doubts and questions the judgment of his decision-making. He lacks giving a direct message to his citizens on what should be done; which results in not having one clear message. Putin lacks the effects of pathos throughout his op-ed; which could create an effective argument in a time of conflict and
Vladimir Putin in the op-ed “A Plea For Caution From Russia” cries out for his audience to understand the risk at takes. He doubts the communication between societies and describes it as “insufficient.” He creates a sense of worry in his audience with the doubt and bitterness he uses in his diction such as “out of balance”. He states that a strike on Syria will only increase violence, which eventually could lead to a wave of terrorism. Putin supports his claim by using the credibility of high officials such as the Pope when building his argument that caution on such violence is essential. Though he admits he is an ally with Barack Obama in the issues debating Syria, he constantly doubts and questions the judgment of his decision-making. He lacks giving a direct message to his citizens on what should be done; which results in not having one clear message. Putin lacks the effects of pathos throughout his op-ed; which could create an effective argument in a time of conflict and