Hand-in on Bush’s declaration of war.
Sept. 20, 2001 - Bush Declares War on Terror
Analytical Essay
”On September the eleventh, enemies of freedom committed an act of war against our country.” This is how former president George Walker Bush initiated his speech and declared war on terror. He identifies terrorists as enemies of freedom, but are they? Some people would characterize the word “terrorist” as an emotive. Some people would not know what the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter is. That makes me petrified.
In 1989, USA won the cold war. Many historians and sociologist expeditiously agreed that there now was brought an end to the century of extremes, and the new world order could begin. One of them was Eric Hobsbawn, who stated USA as the, now only, superpower in the world. From 1989-2001, USA transformed the western values such as market economy and democracy to the rest of the world. In this period, USA solved many international conflicts and orderly made the world a better place.
I sat down and thought about, why anyone would start this war against terror, who started it, and who was to blame for it? In this analytical essay, I will go through the main points in Bush’s speech. For instance, what does he mean, when he says: “The terrorists are traitors to their own faith”? Furthermore, I will go deeply into the consequences of the war on terror. Can the war on terror have had an effect on the globalization? If so, how big an impact has it played in the last 25 years?
I look forward to come up with my subjective answers and theories for you and hopefully, in the end, come up with some possible solutions to the war on terror.
President George W. Bush speaks this speech in Washington DC the 20th September 2001. The primary receiver are the joint session, but the secondary receiver is the citizens of America, and then, the whole world.
When a politician like President George W. Bush makes a speech, metaphors and different forms of appeal, respectively Ethos, Logos and Pathos, support his arguments.
George W. Bush used many metaphors and e-motives in his speech, which contributed to preferable picture of him. For an example, he calls the people who committed the attacks on 11th of September, “Enemies of freedom”. For another example, he calls America for “the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world”. He defines America as a defender of freedom. When he compares the 9/11 situation, and the situation America faced in 1941, with the war against Nazi terror in Europe, it contributes to the ethos of America as being a defender against evil, because they have fought evil and defended freedom before. He is thus making an opposition between the good (America) and the evil (Terror). George W. Bush do not say “I”, but instead he says “We” and “America”. This associates him with America (the good). Therefore, his metaphors are not contributing to the ethos of him, but to the ethos of America, which the audience associate with him.
These metaphors also appeal to the audience’s feelings. President George W. Bush says: “The terrorists practice a fringe form of Islamic extremism that has been rejected by Muslim scholars and the vast majority of Muslim clerics, a fringe movement that perverts the peaceful teachings of Islam. The terrorists' directive commands them to kill Christians and Jews, to kill all Americans, and make no distinctions among military and civilians, including women and children.” When he says this statement, the audience feel fear of attacks from the enemy. It arouses emotions that are associated with protection of family, friends, other children and nation.
By calling the terrorists enemies of freedom, and state that Al-Qaeda is to terror what the mafia is to crime, George W. Bush presents the evil in the terrorists. By saying things like “we”, “us” and “America”, he creates a community for all Americans and makes them feel a unity. The President appeal to the audience’s pathos and makes them feel that this war is their war too.
Behind many of George W. Bush’s metaphors are logical and rational arguments. For instance, when he defines Al Qaeda by comparing them to the mafia. It is logical, that the mafia is bad. Therefore, Al-Qaeda is bad too. Another example is when he calls Al Qaeda “Enemies of freedom”. The logical argument here is that Al Qaeda is enemies to freedom.
It is obvious that George Bush and the rest of the American core are against terror, but which consequences do it have beyond the border of America?
Recently I have seen a documentary, Armadillo, where Danish soldiers are going to Afghanistan and fight terror. When George Bush started the war on terror, it was not just USA against Al-Qaeda and Taleban. It is the whole world against terror. Therefore, Danish families now have to fear for losing a family member. Because of the globalization, the world is now much smaller, and wars are not fought between two countries. The war on terror is a perfect example. USA want to transfer the western values to the whole world and the terror organisations want a Muslim world with no democracy.
The war is going on in Afghanistan. This means that many civilians suffer heavy losses. The globalization have led to inequality between countries. Afghanistan is currently the number 10 poorest country in the world. Taleban and Al-Qaeda are hiding around the civilians. Therefore, the soldiers have to fight on civil ground, which leads to many civilians death. Because of the big poverty in Afghanistan, a family is lucky if they have a cow, some hens and a mark. If Al Qaeda has put a landmine on the mark and it destroys the mark and kills the animals, the Afghanistan family has nothing.
These consequences does not face America, but it do face many other countries and THAT is globalization. When a country starts a war and it has an effect on a hundred other countries.
The war on terror is a subject with many different views. Personally, I think the war could be fought differently than it is today. As George W. Bush says: “after all, we are currently its largest source of humanitarian aid”. If America is Afghanistan’s biggest source of humanitarian aid, I ask myself why USA does not just cut the help to the Afghanistan people until they follow President George W. Bush’s demands. If USA did this to Afghanistan, there would be no human losses and Afghanistan would have to cooperate with USA sometime.
I do not say that this method will guarantee a win in Afghanistan, but if it does, the war on terror will still be far from won.
To sum up the main points of my essay, it is clear that USA has the leading role in the world. They are the big ones, who other countries follows. In Bush’s speech, we see him making many metaphors, which casts a light on America and a shadow on Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. His main point is that America is the defender of freedom and the terrorists are the enemy of freedom.
When Al-Qaeda made the attacks in September 11th 2001, it was clear for USA, that the world are no bigger, than they an attack could arrive anytime, because of the globalization and a “smaller world”. Therefore, USA started the war on terror, which not only has consequences for USA and the terror organizations, but for the whole world.
It is worth noting that terror also found place before 9/11. But the war on terror started after. Even if USA wins in Afghanistan and take down Al Qaeda, the war is far from over.
(1302 words)

--------------------------------------------
[ 1 ]. https://www.gfmag.com/global-data/economic-data/the-poorest-countries-in-the-world