Rhetorical Analysis

In his article titled “Too Many Obstacles Stand in the Way of a Syrian Intervention” Miller clearly communicates his points by urging readers to overcome their habitual nature to be compassionate, and to use logic and reason when considering intervention in Syria. In his writings, Miller presents a clear message, that the U.S. should not intervene in Syria, and he presents it in a superb way. One way that Miller presents his message is through his title. Firstly, his unique title clearly states his own stance, although it takes the guessing out of the reader’s hands, it allows the reader to know what side the author takes right off the back. The title also appeals to both sides of the argument by indirectly acknowledging that there should …show more content…
Miller begins by relating the Libyan conflict to a child’s story when he writes, “Once upon a time, there was place called Libya run by an evil and nutty ruler.” Miller makes the story almost child-like even going as far as to refer to foreign leaders as “kings” instead of their actual titles. By doing this Miller is attempting to downplay how serious the topic actually is and he is also trying to show how simple the situation is. By making the situation less complex, it makes the audience believe that there are indeed few or no options besides those outlined by Miller to pick from in solving the problem. Miller’s method is effective because people are less inclined to solve a simple problem with a complex answer, so his audience is more likely to lean toward Miller’s simple …show more content…
Miller points out the three models as, “(1) the Egyptian model—dictator overthrown by his own people because the military acquiesces, even participates; (2) the Yemen model—Arab backed diplomacy facilitated by the United States eases the strongman out; and (3) the Libyan model—collective military intervention.” Miller then goes on to say, “The first has yet to materialize and the second won't.” While Miller’s answers to the first two solutions are purely speculative, the audience is more likely take his opinion considering he has previously shown that he is logical and uses his reason. Miller continues to cement that he is reasonable when he offers a more in depth answer as to why door number three is not a realistic possibility. Miller logically states, “For the time being, Syria has serious allies (two of whom are permanent members of the U.N. Security Council) and Iran, a sophisticated air defense system; weapons of mass destruction; and the regime confronts an opposition that is neither unified nor able to secure discrete areas of the country which it can defend for long periods of time or from which it can be supplied or launch operations,” as his reasons for believing that door three is not a valid option of response to the Syrian situation. By providing more reasonable feedback, which incorporated logic and reason to support his claims,

Show More