I see him as someone who is a threat, and was misusing his power in Iraq. This war was questioned by NATO because of the lack of physical evidence. If I was able to see these weapons, I would have supported our effort in the beginning. The idea of Iraq having these weapons evoked emotion within myself and this justified, to me, us going to war. This is why a logical appeal mixed with emotion is the best approach to gain my support. When a speaker is able to give the people facts about the given situation and then correlate it to something that is very valuable to them, i.e. their personal freedoms and safety, its very effective war rhetoric.
One of the most compelling speeches ever given in modern history was the Pearl Harbor Address. Our then President, Franklin D. Roosevelt, was put under pressure after the first ever attack on American soil. Our country was bombed without warning or any sign of aggression prior to the actual date. The President made this known in his speech by saying, "It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago." He goes on to explain the how the Japanese deceived us with false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace. President Roosevelt gave a speech that fortified American resolve and marked our official entry into WWII. He mainly used a logical appeal to get his point across. The good thing about this speech was emotion played a vital part in the presentation. He belittled the Japanese by giving examples of how they went behind our back and attacked Hawaii without any formal declaration of war. President Roosevelt restored our patriotism by promising a victory over the "enemy". I quote President Roosevelt towards the end of his speech where he says, "No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.