Rhetorical Analysis Of 'The Truth About Child Soldiers'

1236 Words 5 Pages
The rising crisis in the East brings to light the horrors of war and with it the need to discuss riveting matters such as the child soldier epidemic. “The Truth About Child Soldiers” is an article which seeks to make the reader think about the subject in a different light. To do this, Mark Drumbl uses deductive reasoning and ethical thinking to convince the reader that although child soldiers should pay for their actions, they should all be considered individually and given suitable punishments. While some areas of his article are confusing, his use of expressive language and reasoning ultimately succeed in persuading the reader.
While having a strong argument, Drumbl’s article has moments where he confuses his reader with an odd fact thrown
…show more content…
With his use of power words, Drumbl manages to imprint a certain image of the child soldier in our minds. He uses powerful adjectives such as “stomach-churning”, “demon”, “demented perpetrators” or “bloodthirsty” which effectively manipulates the reader into feeling whatever emotion is attached to the word. In conjunction with this, he takes on a tone that aims to incite action. His tone is stern as he states his warrant, which is the assumption that the international community wants to help these child soldiers. These words used together with this tone encourages the reader to attach negative emotions to the sentences where they are used, which in this case, is the negative conception of child soldiers. This discourages us to think negatively of the child soldiers and offsets the sympathetic nature of the previous paragraph restating his neutral …show more content…
Drumbl, who chooses the middle ground in the innocent versus guilty debate, tackles those who deem the child soldiers as innocent. He starts the paragraph asking us “Should a civilian who has been tortured, raped or had a limb amputated by a child be denied a remedy to what would otherwise be a war crime?” and immediately follows this up with the question “If someone’s family has been wiped out by a group of child soldiers, should he or she be refused justice because of the age of the perpetrators?” These rhetorical questions placed one after the other ask very serious questions at the same time painting dark vivid pictures of child soldiers and creating sympathy for their victims. The questions asked are so appalling that the reader feels cornered and submits to the urge to give the response that the author wants – a response which supports his

Related Documents