Some of the greatest speeches in American history have come on right after the greatest tragedies. Lincon 's Gettysburg Address, Reagen 's speech after the Challenger Shuttle accident, and Wilson 's War message to Congress are all examples of how the times molded some incredibly powerful speeches that swayed the United States. Although Crisis are horrible things that endanger the United States, they often allow for the greatest changes. The examples of this are the speeches given after the only two attacks on American Soil; Pearl Harbor and 9/11. The day after each of these attacks the president stepped up and gave a speech that would unite the nation and send it into war, changing it. Franklin D. Roosevelt 's "Day that Will Live in Infamy"
…show more content…
FDR 's speech was very direct and to the point, using very little imagery and only using powerful words to emphasize points. In example; "righteous might will win through to absolute victory" and "the unprovoked and dastardly attack." Aside from that it 's all facts. A large portion of it just listing all the places that Japan attacked and betrayed alongside the U.S. The directness and honesty of the speech made it very effective and powerful. This was emphasized when in comparison to Japan’s traiterousnous and deception. By keeping his speech simplistic and plain FDR made it contrast with the foreign relations surrounding the event. Bush on the other hand took the opposite approach by using lots of images and figurative language than FDR. The entire introduction is painting a picture of 9/11. "The victims were in airplanes or in their offices: secretaries, business men and women, military and federal workers, moms and dads, friends and neighbors." Then he goes into comparing the United States to the twin towers, but the U.S. wouldn 't fall. Although his speech style was …show more content…
FDR’s speech was predated by the U.S watching years of war in Europe before and peace talks with every country involved in WWII. This set the tone since before Pearl Harbor the U.S was in debates about joining WWII. That had prepped the U.S for war since we knew that something would happened that would get them more involved, but they hadn’t been prepared for a surprise attack after weeks of talks with Japan. This made the speech more powerful because the U.S realized that it couldn’t stay neutral anymore. FDR emphasized this by saying “I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.” The years that predated Pearl Harbor had prepared the U.S, but Pearl Harbor and FDR’s speech put us into war. Bush’s speech was likewise predated by circumstances that made his speech more powerful than it would have been normally. In contrast to FDR’s however they had made the public more complacent. Before 9/11 the Cold War, Vietnam, and other off shore conflicts had created an idea of America as an untouchable fortress. When the terrorists hit one of America’s biggest symbols it destroyed that illusion of untouchability. That left the U.S open to Bush’s rhetoric, making the speech more powerful. Both of
FDR 's speech was very direct and to the point, using very little imagery and only using powerful words to emphasize points. In example; "righteous might will win through to absolute victory" and "the unprovoked and dastardly attack." Aside from that it 's all facts. A large portion of it just listing all the places that Japan attacked and betrayed alongside the U.S. The directness and honesty of the speech made it very effective and powerful. This was emphasized when in comparison to Japan’s traiterousnous and deception. By keeping his speech simplistic and plain FDR made it contrast with the foreign relations surrounding the event. Bush on the other hand took the opposite approach by using lots of images and figurative language than FDR. The entire introduction is painting a picture of 9/11. "The victims were in airplanes or in their offices: secretaries, business men and women, military and federal workers, moms and dads, friends and neighbors." Then he goes into comparing the United States to the twin towers, but the U.S. wouldn 't fall. Although his speech style was …show more content…
FDR’s speech was predated by the U.S watching years of war in Europe before and peace talks with every country involved in WWII. This set the tone since before Pearl Harbor the U.S was in debates about joining WWII. That had prepped the U.S for war since we knew that something would happened that would get them more involved, but they hadn’t been prepared for a surprise attack after weeks of talks with Japan. This made the speech more powerful because the U.S realized that it couldn’t stay neutral anymore. FDR emphasized this by saying “I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.” The years that predated Pearl Harbor had prepared the U.S, but Pearl Harbor and FDR’s speech put us into war. Bush’s speech was likewise predated by circumstances that made his speech more powerful than it would have been normally. In contrast to FDR’s however they had made the public more complacent. Before 9/11 the Cold War, Vietnam, and other off shore conflicts had created an idea of America as an untouchable fortress. When the terrorists hit one of America’s biggest symbols it destroyed that illusion of untouchability. That left the U.S open to Bush’s rhetoric, making the speech more powerful. Both of