I will pay for the following article LOGIC Assignment. The work is to be 1 page with three to five sources, with in-text citations and a reference page.

I will pay for the following article LOGIC Assignment. The work is to be 1 page with three to five sources, with in-text citations and a reference page. Reliability and fallacies in Martin Luther King’s Speech Beyond Vietnam - A Time to Break Silence Indeed, Martin Luther King’s speech at the Riverside Church in New York City shows his ultra criticism and opposition to the American involvement in the Vietnam War. He used historical facts and the prevailing social condition in the United States to buttress his stance against the United States’ role in the Vietnam War. While some of the arguments he presented in the speech were reliable, others were fallacious. For instance, Martin Luther King urged the Vietnamese to view the Americans as “strange liberators” (American Rhetoric: Online Speech Bank). As pointed out by King in his speech, the United States gave ample support to France when the Vietnamese led by Ho Chi Minh struggled for liberty from the French. The United States’ support suggests that the liberty of the Vietnam people was not in the interest of the United States government. Indeed, this fact was further buttressed when the United States government declined to recognize the independence of Vietnam even after the French has been defected. Given the support given by the United States government to the French and the role the former play after the defect of the later by the Ho Chi Minh led revolution, it is, indeed, hypocritical for Americans to play the role of liberator of the Vietnam people. This argument by Martin Luther King was reliable. King was, however, guilty of hasty generalization when he mentioned that those who question his opposition to war “do not know the world in which they live” (American Rhetoric: Online Speech Bank). In this fallacious argument, King claimed that by questioning his opposition to war, these individuals were ignorant of who he, King, is and therefore they are ignorant of the world in which they live. In fact, King’s argument is guilty of hasty generalization since he based a broad conclusion (ignorance of the world) on a very small sample (ignorance of King). Furthermore, King was guilty of irrelevant conclusion when he claimed that he was “compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such” (American Rhetoric: Online Speech Bank). He meant American involvement in the Vietnam War diverted money meant for social welfare to finance the war. Indeed, the war diverted money meant for fighting war on poverty to financing the Vietnam War. however, the issue on ground was not social welfare rather the threat pose by communism on the international scene. Thus King masked the issue on ground with his augment for the cause of the poor. Works Cited American Rhetoric: Online Speech Bank. Martin Luther King, Jr. Beyond Vietnam - A Time to Break Silence Delivered 4 April 1967, Riverside Church, New York City. 10 March 2010. 31 May 2011 .