The Rhetorical Work I Picked

The Peace (Keepers) Prize is written by Thomas L. Friedman, who won three Pulitzer Prizes as a famous journalist for The New York Times. The reasons why I picked his article as my exemplary work to analyze are he is a famous journalist, who is in rich experience of the field of journalism, the other one is he wrote this article, which is related to the most controversial topic around the world recently. Apparently, the title of the article gives us the idea of what Friedman is going to talk about in his article-the Nobel Peace Prize winner of 2009, Barrack Obama, who is the incumbent president of the United States.

I like the work because Friedman is holding a different opinion from many other people in the world when those people are still arguing whether the president of the United States is deserve to the glory. There is no doubt about it Friedman insists President Obama should accept the prize because the prize committee would not give the prize to someone with no reason. However, he also consider the Nobel Peace Prize is not a personal prize, which means President Obama should not take the prize on behalf of himself, but the entire population of the United States, especially, on behalf of those men and women in the military.

The men and women of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps are the truly peace prize winners in Friedman’s opinion. We may doubt that the corps is the people on the battle field who bring war to the world. From the World War II to the contemporary wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, America plays an important role in those wars over the century. There is no a bit of connection between peace and military. Actually, the analysis of the article says there is no real peace in the world before wars break out. Friedman states not only the corps keep the homeland safe, but also perform meritorious service in keeping the world runs smoothly.

It is not that obvious but I still figured out Friedman’s main idea is praise the corps after I read his work. He talks about the president won the prize throughout the article, but he is also smart enough to borrow this event to spread out his idea in a different aspect. It is so interesting that he takes the advantage of the president who has not give a speech to the world in the peace prize ceremony, he assumes and designs which is the better way for President Obama to express the particular significance of the peace prize to the world. He supposes it will be more persuasive if President Obama will give the speech in Friedman’s way, he lists all the most important wars happened ever in the American history to support his point of view. Basically, his work is trustworthy. He introduces every detail of cause and effect in order to enhance the credibility of the article.