Rhetorical Strategies Comparison

He feels that the right time to fight against terrorists has come. “Just War -- or a Just War?” by Jimmy Carter is an article about launching a war against Iraq’s terrorist activities. Jimmy Carter explains his though in this article. He thinks that beginning a war with Iraq without international support is a violation of religious and international rules. Both articles have different explanations on war against terrorism. Jimmy Carters description on the other hand is not as subjective as Wiesel’s is. A reader that is not aware of the religious and international rules cannot get a clear picture of what Carter is talking about. His focus is the standards being broken. The explanation is too complex such that it does not express his thoughts and feeling properly.

For instance, he states that a clearly defined procedure must be used to initiate war against Iraq (Carter, 2003). This example shows the need to have America fight since the possibility of having positive results is high. The second example is about the negative effects of ignorance. He explains how Rwanda would have its almost one million citizens alive if other countries had intervened (Wiesel, 2003). The reader understands that more innocent people across the world will lose their lives if America fails to fight the terrorists. Wiesel’s examples are convincing the reader on the importance of fighting Iraq. This explains that he cares less about anyone but himself. The reader understands how cruel Sadam is. They also understand why the author insists on the war against terrorism.

Carter uses the contrasting strategy in his article. He explains the differences between the US attacking Iraq alone and doing the same with international support. The other paragraphs have information about his reasons of supporting the war. His article is organized systematically. It is easy for every reader to understand. The details have been aligned in a way that the reader is able get the main idea from one reading. Some articles require a reader to reread so that they can understand and get the main points. This does not explain how international rules have been violated. Generally, Wiesel’s article is more convincing to the reader compared to Carters. Both writer have used the rhetorical strategies but in different ways.