Resolution in Crisis - a Comparison of Presidents Roosevelt and Bush

When there is an emergency, people panic and overreact. They worry and fret, ensuring chaos in the once peaceful society. Many United States Presidents faced this problem. Two, namely President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and George W. Bush, gave speeches after the crisis to ease the citizens of the United States. Roosevelt gave his speech after a Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. The attack injured many citizens and destroyed many ships. Bush gave a similar speech after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Centers on September 11, 2001, which both injured and killed numbers in the thousands. While both speeches were effective in easing the public's anxieties, Roosevelt's speech was more effective than Bush's speech because of Roosevelt describes in detail the result of the attacks, the circumstances with the enemy, and the actions that will be taken against the attacks.
Roosevelt and Bush both begin their speeches by stating the United States' position after the attacks. Roosevelt stated that the attacks "caused severe damage to American naval and military forces." During the attack, "very many American lives" were lost. Roosevelt's choice of diction and emphasis on the American tolls made the public remorseful. However, the overall tone of Roosevelt's speech was far from sorrowful; the speech was filled with determination. Roosevelt, while making the public reflect on the victims of the incident, filled his listeners with the willpower to fight back. While Bush also stated "thousands of lives were suddenly ended" by the "deliberate and deadly terrorist acts," his tone throughout the speech was weaker than that of Roosevelt's. Bush, instead of moving from the depressing topic of the losses of America, kept referencing the fallen. Despite his bold statements that America "is strong," his recurring connections to the attacks made his speech's tone mournful. Bush made it seem like the terrorist's intent to strike fear into Americans has worked. Roosevelt, on the other hand, makes the United States seem reflective on the event, but stronger and ready to fight back in the end. Roosevelt's detailed address of the state of the nation as a result of the attacks made his speech more effective than Bush's speech.
Besides addressing the United States' circumstances as a result of the attack, Roosevelt and Bush also discuss the situation with the enemy. In his address to America, Roosevelt emphasized Japan's hostile military campaign: "the Japanese...launched an attack against Malaya...Hong Kong...Guam...the Philippines Islands...Wake Island...and...Midway Island." The parallelism he used emphasized and persuaded his viewers that the Japanese empire was despicable and that actions against it must be taken. To make Japan seem even more terrible, Roosevelt exclaims that before the attack, "the United States was at peace with" Japan and that the attacks were "deliberately planned many days...ago." The addressees, after hearing how cruel Japanese bombed innocent America, would have been outraged. Roosevelt, in his statements regarding to Japan, built up powerful feelings against the United State's attacker. By pointing his finger and directing his words at Japan, he transferred the feelings of hate and anger to Japan. Bush, on the other hand, also addresses his opposing "nation's" state. Bush claimed that the attacks were committed by those who had the "very worst of human nature." The "evil, despicable acts" ended the lives of "moms and dads, friends and neighbors." Bush uses diction with powerful denotations associated with them to make everyone able to reflect on the events that occurred on September 11th; the words "moms," "dads," "friends," and "neighbors" carry strong emotional feelings with them. Due to this, Bush invoked the same powerful emotions Roosevelt conjured up in his audience - feelings of rage. However, unlike Roosevelt, Bush does not direct the feelings towards anyone, saying that the United States intelligence are searching "for those who were behind [the] evil acts," but fails to actually paint the emotions he establishes to a certain country. Instead, he directed the feelings towards a broad group, terrorists, whom many citizens cannot connect with. Bush, ultimately, failed to relocate the emotions he has established during his speech to the country. Because Roosevelt effectively connected the nation with the opposing country's situation, Roosevelt's speech was more successful than Bush's speech.
The effect of the two causes lead to both speakers' conclusions: how would the United States react? Roosevelt exclaimed that "our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger" if America does not retaliate against her attackers. He cried that with "unbounding determination," the United States will "gain the inevitable triumph" so that "treachery shall never again endanger" the country. The audience, after hearing Roosevelt's reasons for war, will be emotionally inclined to agree with him; if the United States does not fight back, the Japanese may attack again. As a result, the listeners would concur with Roosevelt's decision for war. Bush, like Roosevelt, states that America must take action against "terrorists...and those who harbor them." However, Bush does not provide any other justifications for war, unlike Roosevelt who stated it was for the safety of the nation. As a result, Bush's audience will not be filled with the emotions Roosevelt's audience was, making his plead for war less adequate than Roosevelt's. Because of the cause of the attacks, both presidents urged America to go into a state of war against their opponents. However, Roosevelt's constant cries that war was crucial to protect "the very life and safety of" the nation made his speech more effective in achieving his goal.
Roosevelt's address to the nation was more effective than Bush's address because Roosevelt touched up on the state of the nation after the attacks, the state of the opposing country, and America's response to the attacks more effectively than Bush did. Bush, while using the same rhetorical devices and arguments as Roosevelt did, did not effectively connect his audience with his words. As a result, Bush's arguments came off as weaker than Roosevelt's. We can deduce important information pertaining to the use of rhetorical devices through the analysis of Roosevelt's and Bush's speeches - when using rhetorical devices, the speaker must not only make sure that the rhetorical device is strong, but also that it can relate to the reader. As a result, the reader can connect with what the speaker is talking about. Because Roosevelt connected the rhetorical devices with his audience, he was more effective at convincing the American people should go to war than Bush was at persuading the United States should go to war.