I'm stuck on a proof I'm reading.
Let $0\to M'\stackrel{\mu}\to M\stackrel{\sigma}\to M''\to 0$ be a sequence of $A$-modules. Then $\operatorname{Ass}(M)\subseteq \operatorname{Ass}(M')\cup \operatorname{Ass}(M'')$.
Let $P\in\operatorname{Ass}(M)$, so $P=\operatorname{ann}(m)$ for some $m\neq 0\in M$.
If $Am\cap im(\mu)=0$, the proof shows $P=\operatorname{ann}(\sigma(m))$, so $P\in \operatorname{Ass}(M'')$.
When $Am\cap im(\mu)\neq 0$ it says there exists $m_0\in Am\cap im(\mu)$ nonzero. Write $m_0=am=\mu(m_0')$ for $m_0'\in M'$. Then $P=\operatorname{ann}(m_0)=\operatorname{ann}(\mu(m_0'))=\operatorname{ann}(m_0')$ since $\mu$ is injective. So $P\in\operatorname{Ass}(M')$.
The only equality above I don't follow is $P=\operatorname{ann}(m_0)$. The containment $P\subseteq\operatorname{ann}(am)=\operatorname{ann}(m_0)$ is clear, since $P=\operatorname{ann}(m)$. But why does the converse hold?