Running head: Army Budget Cuts of 2015

Army Budget Cuts of 2015

Jonathan N. Michou
University of Texas at El Paso

Army Budget Cuts of 2015

Army Budget Cuts of 2015

In 2015, the Army will face another issue among finances: a new budget cut. The
understandings pertaining to this article are in relation to the budget cuts that will be soon
affecting the Army. The chosen article is about how the budget cuts that affect the Army were
made. The targeted audience is those of higher intelligence within the Army, often being officers.
The author uses very little Logos within this article, but rather focuses on the Pathos and Ethos
portions. All of these factors within the paper boost the effectiveness of the writing and
encourage the readers to one side or the other about the budget cuts.
Purpose
The purpose of this article is to explain how the budget cut decisions came to be
concluded. The title of the article is Leaders Explain Tough Budget Decisions, which is clearly
explaining to the reader what the purpose serves. The author (being former military) uses
language that criticizes the budget cuts, giving point to that the article is against the budget cuts
of 2015. The goal of the article is to eventually protest that the budget cuts may adversely affect
the Army in whole. The mission of this article is to raise attention to the leaders and how these
choices were difficult to make. The aim is only important to the article if there is an audience to
understand it.
Audience
The audience is the group that the message or purpose is directed towards within the
article. With the purpose being to show the difficulty of the choices of Army leaders, the ideal
audience would be the officers within the Army. If the budget cuts affect the majority of units,
the officers are important on keeping in the loop for smooth transaction when the time for budget

Army Budget Cuts of 2015

cuts occurs. The writer targeted the officers within the Army by writing in an Army newspaper,
as well as writing in an overly elegant form of writing that not all soldiers can easily understand.
The writer of this article is a retired Army veteran, making their understanding of how military
budget cuts affect all soldiers a useful tool when empathizing with those in danger of the newest
budget cuts. With the audience being officers within the Army, the writing consists of large
portions of content that are very influential.
Ethos
Ethos is the credibility of the author, and the information given. Without ethos, the paper
can succumb to being incorrect or even argued as a non-reliable source for other writing. The
newspaper used for the writing, the credentials of the writer, and the interviewed characters all
provide the support needed to give credibility to this paper.
Logos
The Logos within a paper refer to the amount of logistics and data used inside a paper. In
general, the less data covered over an issue of financial cuts is almost always a drawback for the
readers due to the lack of faith in the integrity of the writing. In this articles case however, the
lack of data strengthens the writing because the audience then focuses on the Pathos. With little
to no data for the audience to process or understand, the audience then looks to the feelings or
emotions within the article.
Pathos
Pathos is the emotions behind a paper, which is what the audience can actually identify
with or feel. The writer of this article used a large portion of the paper to devote to Pathos,

Army Budget Cuts of 2015

using very large names such as Raymond T. Odierno (retired Army General), Secretary of the
Army John M. McHugh, and t Rep. Adam Smith of Washington. The language used within the
article is describing the decisions made about the budgets to sound as grueling tasks to give the
readers the feeling that the leaders had to make very difficult verdicts. Congress has been
feeling pressure from the Army National Guard over budgetary decision (Maze 2015).
Evidence in Pathos
Maze 2015 stated that Secretary of the Army John M. McHugh said For the Army, the
priority appears to be keeping what it has and avoiding more budget cuts. We must have this
budget to properly restructure, we need it to protect your Army as we march on a dangerous
and unpredictable future, McHugh said. This year and next may very well decide the fate of the
worlds greatest combat force and could have implications for both our nations as well as the
worlds security for many years to come. (Para. 5.) After reading this paragraph, the reader can
sense a feeling of patriotism as well as the feeling that the budget cuts being made under stress of
this idea.
Conclusion of Rhetorical Analysis
The overall usage of Ethos, Logos, Pathos fueling the chosen purpose as well as the
targeted audience all come together to form an altogether well rounded article. The purpose of
this article is about how the budget cuts that affect the Army were decided by the leaders within
the Army and Congress. The targeted audience is those of officer status or higher based
intelligence due to the need for officers to help transition as well as the difficulty of
understanding the article in general. Author focuses on Pathos and Ethos within the article,
leaving out Logos for the audience to focus on the alternate two. This article is in total a very

Army Budget Cuts of 2015

well written, formatted, and cited understanding to the psychology behind the newest budget cuts
to the Army in 2015.

Army Budget Cuts of 2015

References
Maze, Rick. (2014, May). Leaders Explain Tough Budget Decisions. Army Times. Retrieved
from http://0-web.b.ebscohost.com.lib.utep.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?
sid=348f5042-9f77-4386-8fb1-033e6fe97a64%40sessionmgr113&vid=15&hid=116

Army Budget Cuts of 2015

5.) A. The subject matches the rhetorical analysis assignment.
B. My thesis point contains all of my main points.
C. My title is straightforward and enlightening.

6.) A. My paper contains fewer quotes than I would like to admit.

B. The paper is a collection of my opinion with one quote.
C. I offered the viable proof behind my opinions.
D. I did not offer why my opinion is different than the lesser publics.

7.) A. My quotes were all accurate.

B. I am positive that my reference was accurate.
C. My work is all properly cited.
D. My work is in APA format which is the assigned format.

8.) A. My paper is fully readying to the readers.

B. The paragraphs are of decent length, coherent, well-written, and to the point.
C. The paragraphs could use better transitions.
D. My conclusion is on point and accurate.

9.) A. My word choice is professional and dull.

B. My sentences are clear, effective, and economical.
C. My sentences are all of varying length and similar wording.

10.) A. My paper is directly mirrored to the APA guidelines.

B. The spelling and capitalization is all correct.
C. I use too many commas from what Ive been told.
D. The quotes are proper.