In response to the Vietnam War, Martin Luther King Jr. argued that the American involvement in this war was unjust. He effectively persuaded his audience by using the three modes of persuasion along with a strong anecdote that shared his reasoning behind his argument.   
	Martin Luther King started his speech by using pathos to explain his frustration towards the Vietnam War as it plays a role of a “suction tube” on the poor’s hope. He states that “I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic destructive suction tube.” He spoke out with pathos; connecting to his audience’s emotions as he spoke out his view and frustration towards the impact the war has on the poor. He passionately argued that the Vietnam War was destruction, a hole that took away resources, money, and skills that could have helped the poor. By saying this, Martin Luther King connected to the audience’s frustration and their impacted life by the war. Thus, Martin Luther King was able to gain credence in his audience which led them to believe in his argument as he spoke out an experience that most poor went through. 
	Martin Luther King’s persuasion of his argument furthered as he then intensified his use of pathos and increased his ethos by talking about family. Martin Luther King used such a connectable and, in that time, one of the most painful subject to stabilize his credibility and increase the emotional connection between him and the audience. He now expanse his audience to all people, not just the poor as he stated: “It was sending their sons and their brothers and their husbands to fight and to die in extraordinarily high proportions relative to the rest of the population.” All audience is now connected to Martin Luther King’s speech as he includes the most significant impact people were enduring because of the Vietnam War. He now increases his use of pathos as he raises the emotional pain within the audience and by doing such, he gained more ethos and credibility as his argument became more and more true and believable to his audience. 
	Continuing, Martin Luther King now shares an anecdote that revealed his most dominant reasoning behind his argument, making his argument understandable, which then increased the persuasion his speech.  He shared his experience in the ghettoes and his brief anecdote; he shared a question asked by young and angry men within the ghettoes of the North as he tried to expand his ideal belief of social changes should come from nonviolent actions: “what about Vietnam?” Martin Luther King stated that after he tried to share his conviction of nonviolent actions, those young men asked if America was not using violence to solve and change their problems. Because of this question, Martin Luther King realized the moral wrong in his own government’s actions as he stood for nonviolent actions. He could not be silent in front of such cruel and violent actions within the Vietnam War that were established by the American government. He once again persuaded and boosted the audience’s agreement towards his argument as he shared why he could not hold back his disagreement and why he believed the American involvement in the Vietnam War was unjust.