Blog Stage Four: Substantial commentary or criticism #2

I selected an article titled “Most Likely to Attack Iran”.  My primary reason in selecting this article is because it looked interesting.  The article talks about various reasons why Obama would be more likely to take military action against Iran and how his “intellectually elevated” personality could persuade European nations to stay in Afghanistan.

The author is Glenn Greenwald. According to Wikipedia, Greenwald has received the following awards: Izzy Award for independent journalism, Online Journalism Award for Best Commentary, and the EFF Pioneer Award for coverage and analysis of the 2013 mass surveillance disclosures. Greenwald is also a published author. The first ever book he wrote was titled How Would a Patriot Act? Defending American Values From a President Run Amok. According to Wikipedia, “Greenwald practiced law in the Litigation Department at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.”  He has also had numerous guest appearances on various TV shows. I think that all of the above make Greenwald a credible author.

Greenwald’s main claim is that Obama would be more likely to “risk other people’s lives with the use of military force against foreigners.” Greenwald believes that Obama would be more likely to confront Iran militarily “should sanctions and negotiations fail”. Greenwald’s evidence behind this claim is that Obama would be more likely to use military force against Iran then Mitromney is as follows: Greenwald thinks that from a political standpoint “Obama will be freer to attack Iran than Romney would be because Democrats, progressives, and the “international community”.  Greenwald also mentions “Obama’s more extremist assassinations without any judicial review or transparency”, as being even further evidence to support his claim. His logic behind this claim is that not only has Obama done things as president that would indicate he would be more likely to take military action against Iran; he would also face far less persecution from the international community for doing so.

I think that given when this article was published, Greenwald intended audience was undecided voters. He was trying to persuade voters. I do see how someone could read this article, and think that Greenwald was simply voicing his political beliefs. With the intended audience being other people who hold a similar view. However,  Greenwald published this right around election time, and meantionded to opposing candidates. That’s why I am positive his intended audience was undecided voters.