Thesis (Ph. D.)--Auburn University, 2008. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (p. 143-151).

Thesis (M.S.)--School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, 2008. / "June 2008." Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 141-148). Also available via the Internet.

Thesis (M.A. in National Security Affairs)--Naval Postgraduate School, June 2002. / AD-A405 987. Includes bibliographical references (p. 63-65). Also available online.

Thesis (M.A. in National Security Affairs)--Naval Postgraduate School, June 2002. / Thesis advisor(s): Glenn F. Robinson, Harold D. Blanton. Includes bibliographical references (p. 63-65). Also available online.

Thesis (S.T.M.)--Trinity Lutheran Seminary, 1998. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 95-96).

Thesis (M.M.A.S.)--School of Advanced Airpower Studies, 1995. / Subject: This study attempts to determine whether Air Component Commands are capable of developing effective airpower strategy. Cover page date: June 1995. Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.)--Naval Postgraduate School, 2005. / Title from title screen (viewed Jan. 31, 2006). "June 2005." Includes bibliographical references (p. 63-67). Also issued in paper format.

Thesis (M.A. in National Security Affairs)--Naval Postgraduate School, June 2005. / Thesis Advisor(s): Daniel Moran. Includes bibliographical references (p. 63-67). Also available online.

No description available.

Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is an interdisciplinary approach that studies the relationship between power, language, ideology, and social structures in the various forms of discourse.  Fairclough’s three-dimensional model was employed as the foundation and van Dijk’s ideological square as an assist to deepen the analytical focus on the speeches held by George H. W Bush addressing Somalia and Kuwait. The size of conflict and period differ, this study sees the relevance of comparing the two speeches since they were given by the same person during his period as presidents of the United States and Commander in Chief. The results have shown how Bush uses language to lay arguments for U.S. military action in the out-group nations. By employing concepts such as national self-glorification, empathy, lexicalization, victimization, and polarization: He lay the grounds for the U.S. interventions through language. The results show that representing the United States in a positive light and the out-groups in a negative light e.g. as threat leads to the justification for U.S. intervention but also exposes the underlying power structures and inequality of power.