A Few Good Men

You cant handle the truth Son, we inhabit in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whos gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a great responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the shipboard soldiers. You have that lavishness. You have the luxury of non knowing what I know. That Santiagos death, while tragic, belike saved zippys. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You dont deficiency the truth beca enjoyment deep down in places you dont let out about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall.We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the spikelet of a life spent defend something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain my self to a universe who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the musical mode in which I pr ovide it. I would rather you just state thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. either way, I dont take for a damn what you come back you are authorize to.RHETORICAL compend A Few Good Men is a consider that was released in 1992, a time when the United States was between military conflicts in the Iranian Gulf and Kosovo. The film investigates the nonions of absolute power, particularly in the military. Along with that, it overly is about the legal investigation into the mysterious death of a marine at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. At the films climax, Col. Nathan Jessup, contend by Jack Nicholson, is cross-examined by JAG lawyer, Lt. Daniel Kaffee, played by Tom Cruise.Accused of playing a role in the torture and death of a marine, Jessup is put in a space where he has to defend his actions and articulate his role of importance in the saving of American freedom. The hearing in the film which Jessup is seek to co nvince that he is absolved of any wrong doing is a dialog box made up of military officers. It is this group of people who decide the fate of Jessup. through and fire mixture of ethos, logos and pity, Jessup employs a short, but well-rendered monologue to appeal to the jurors.When establishing a sense of ethos with his reference, Jessup does so simply by stating his name. As a Colonel in the United States Marine Corp. , his consultation, also made up of military power would recognize that he is a high- sheer(a)ing officer whose words and contribution should carry prestige. He also establishes ethos with a series of rhetorical questions Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whos gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? When using rhetorical questions referring to whether or not Kaffee or his partner Weinburg would be up for the task of doing his job, Jessup is also inquire these questions of the jurors. The strategy is to ge t one to ask ones self if they could handle the tremendous responsibility that comes along with Col. Jessups role of defending Americas freedom at Guantanamo Bay. Chances are that given these questions, the members of the panel would recognize, if anything, that Jessups job and title are de servicemanding and that he is a man of honor.Similarly, when Jessup states, We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. What he his doing is essaying to persuade his audience by using the inclusive pronoun we and the scoop shovel you. By we Jessup is implying we the true members of the United States military, we who protect the freedoms of our country and we who live by the credo honor, code and loyalty. You, on the other hand, is referring to Kaffee who has the gaul to challenge Jessups role in a marines death.By implementing a we/you dialogue, Jessup is trying to appeal to his sense of credibili ty with the audience. Jessup also refers to the marines death as tragic. Using this type of word is important. By craft the death tragic his is exhibiting to his audience, the board, that he is sympathetic to the loss of life flat when he is being accused of causing it. Showing his audience that he can be compassionate is also a way of establishing ethos with the board Along with ethos, Jessup uses a good amount of emotional appeal, or pathos, in this monologue.The first line, for example, is You cant handle the truth This type of emotionally charged declaration is meant to inspire the emotions of the jury. By having established that he is not a man who will be pushed around on the escort stand, that he is a person who will fight back against his accusers, Jessup opens with an emotionally-loaded punch. before long after, Jessup refers to his interrogator a son. While this may seem like a casual and unremarkable word, it is not. By calling Kaffee son, Jessup is again showing his contempt for the people who have the nerve to question his authority.In short, it is an insult. Using lilliputian language to refer to someone who is in most regards Jessups partner emphasizes that while both people in this scene are men, Jessup holds rank over Kaffee. Jessups use of the word son to mark Kaffee is an attempt to persuade the jurys view of the lawyer. In fact, may members of the audience probably out-ranked Kaffee. If they would see him also in this light, they would side with Jessup. Finally, toward the end of the monologue, Jessup states, Either way, I dont give a damn what you think you are entitled to. Listening to the words spoken, these lines are the most emotionally impactful. Jessup personally attacks Kaffees assertion that he felt he was entitled to the truth. By this and the previous examples, Jessup uses pathos to try to persuade his audience. Effectively, he is exhibiting his pettishness and passion to the audience, the jury, to counter act any ar gument or certify presented against him. By trying to appeal to the emotions of the jury, Jessup hopes he can out-bully his opponent. While ethos and pathos are evident in Jessups monologue, he appeal to the audiences intellect, or logos, is also present.While logos is most unremarkably exhibited through the usage of statistical data, expert testimony and survey findings, Jessup appeals to the jurys sense of logos by constructing logical arguments. In the optic of Jessups monologue, he states, I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way. Here, Jessup is appealing to his jurys sense of logic.He is accusing Kaffee of engaging in hypocritical behavior. Jessup sees himself as almost a god-like figure, someone who provides America with safety and freedom with his actions . In Kaffee, he sees a beneficiary of that freedom who questions his authority. By trying to make Kaffee look like a hypocrite, he is attempting to persuade his audience with a logical argument. Jessup is effectively saying, all of your luxuries and freedoms are granted to you by me who are you to bite the hand that feeds you? In trying to make the jury see this logical argument, Jessup hopes he can persuade them to see things his way. Through an interesting mix of appeals to credibility, emotions and intellect, Jessup tried to persuade the jury to understand his direct of view. By using his military clout, choosing aggressive language and constructing logical arguments, Jessup defended his actions to the jury. though it is at times effective, it was all for naught as moments after delivering this monologue, he succumbs to all the pathos built up in his speech and admits he is guilty.