Analysis of Terrorism Cases

Modern terrorism, as deduced from this literature, is acts to violence strategically used by secular groups spanning international borders with the aim of achieving a desired outcome. Further, it can be seen as organized activity whose genesis can be traced back to the 1880’s. From then to now there are identifiable traits and patterns observed from different (terrorist) groups which have allowed for the conceptualization of the term modern terrorism. This concept therefore, can be best explained in the context of being a wave or having a life cycle. That means it is a cycle of activity demarked by phases from inception and expands along the way then eventually it declines. The world, thus far, has experienced four waves of modern

Since the terrorist attacks on 9/11, America has been on edge about the topic of terrorism. Groups like Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Taliban, and now more recently, ISIS, has kept the world cautious of their every next move. Looking more closely into how these groups are formed and operate could help us better understand how they can be stopped. Studying the history of terrorist organizations can help us better predict the future of terrorist organizations.

Throught the years terrorism have drastically changed our point of view of the world. In the 20th century terrorist did not have that much of technology to work with including aviation. Now a days they have more methods and forms to attack countries and states. A brief definition of terrorism is a use of violence acts to scare people in an area as a way to achieve political goals. Terrorism is the cause of many wars throughout history continues to this day leading to nations; such as Iraq and the United States fighting to rid the world of this evil.

Ever since 9/11 when both World Trade Center buildings were attacked by an Islamic Group, attacks by Islamic Terrorist on U.S. soil have been less of a threat than Domestic Terrorists. Domestic Terrorism has been shown these passed for years but yet again most of these cases have not been classified as acts of Domestic Terrorism they most likely fall into the category. Now the definition of Domestic Terrorism is basically "the committing of terrorist acts in the perpetrator 's own country against their fellow citizens". Now personally I don 't know how our government is working with these popular cases like Charlottesville, Las Vegas, and a new that just happened recently actually two but I 'll just say one, the New York attack that

The dilemma facing state leaders for the past decades has been whether to respond to terrorism through a criminal justice approach or a more involved military approach. The criminal justice approach treats terrorism as a law-and-order problem in which the main burden is placed on the judiciary and police. In contrast, the military approach treats terrorism as a perilous threat to the national security of the state, which can only be countered with military force and wartime procedures. The argument of this paper is that military procedures are not warranted in dealing with terrorism because the terror threat is not lethal or influential enough to threaten our democracy, and even if it was, military action has proven itself to be so fraught with problems and costly risks in past interventions that continued use of such a tactic would not only harm our national security, but also could precipitate the fall of the American Empire. Instead, law-enforcement has proven itself to be an efficient counter-terrorism tool that results in the capturing of terrorists, acquisition of intelligence, and spurring of cooperation with allied countries.

This article by Isabelle Duyvesteyn starts off by summarising the objectives that challenge the perspective of terrorism since the last decade of the twentieth century is fundamentally new. In this article certain questions have been debated regarding new aspects of terrorism and they are: “transnational nature of the perpetrators and their organizations, their religious inspiration, fanaticism, use of weapons of mass destruction and their indiscriminate targeting.” ("How New Is the New Terrorism?", 2017)In order to understand the depth of aspects of new terrorism the article talks about “national and territorial focus of the new terrorists, their political motivations, use of conventional weaponry and the symbolic targeting that is aimed in order to achieve a surprising effect.” ("How New Is the New Terrorism?", 2017)

The United States experienced one of the biggest scaled Domestic Terror Attacks on eleventh September 2001. These assaults against our incredible country were done with the capturing of numerous aircraft transporters. The repercussions of these appalling demonstrations left the aggregate decimation of the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and other relevant areas. After these occasions the USA Patriot Act of 2001 was passed, and the Department of Homeland Security started to devise and execute the first of numerous missions and conventions to alleviate any further dangers to the United States. Since the sanction of the Patriot Act, there have been various indications of fear based oppressor plots and thwarted assaults against the United States

“Terrorism's particularly heinous but highly attractive means to achieve political objectives or even radically restructure political foundations is manifest within societies in all reaches of the world. While the practical application of terrorist methodologies comes across as a relatively straightforward craft, the conceptual and ideological understanding, and subsequent evaluation of its socio-political influence, implementation, and psychological impacts present difficult questions, and in some cases conceivably insurmountable obstacles” (Romaniuk 2014, para

In chapter seventeen, terrorism, multinational criminal justice, and global issues I found many aspects of the chapter to catch my interest. I even managed to find something that came as a surprise to me within this chapter. And I was able to find a case of terrorism that greatly relates to the chapter.

Domestic Terrorism can be described as many things. The FBI describes domestic terrorism as, “Perpetrated by individuals and/or groups inspired by or associated with primarily U.S.-based movements that espouse extremist ideologies of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.” People who commit domestic terrorism crimes often have different motives such as: religion, political, and even race. A specific case that resembles this, is the shooting in Las Vegas which occurred on June 8, 2014.

Domestic Terrorism is the use of violent acts intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal. Domestic terrorism is a broad term, and several individuals who perform these attacks do not think their acts fall under that umbrella. Whether they believe it is an act of terroristic crime or not, several attacks that have occurred in the recent years whether it had a huge impact or not, still falls under domestic terrorism. Although the Global Terrorism Database has gone to great lengths to avoid the spread of terrorist attacks, attacks are still unavoidable; there is still a homegrown rise in domestic terrorism. As a society, we must ponder and try to find the reason why domestic

As a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, most Americans have a general knowledge about terrorism. The U.S. military has been at war for around a decade, continuing the concentration of the media and politicians on Middle Eastern countries and terrorist groups. Consequently, the focus of the nation tends to remain on international terrorist groups rather than domestic terrorist groups. There is a vast amount of terrorism groups in America, including the Army of God, the Aryan Nations, and the Animal Liberation Front, who possess extreme ideals and exist for different reasons. The fact that there are numerous terrorist groups that are composed of American citizens performing tremendous acts of violence within the U.S. seems to go somewhat unnoticed by the general public.

Is America doing enough to address “domestic” terrorism? The American people are misunderstood or what domestic terrorism consist of, because the government at times has times identifying what acts of crimes might considered domestic terrorism. If we want to understand the threats we face, we have to identify what the problem is. The problem is that there’s a racial and ideological dimension to what gets labeled terrorism and what doesn’t. It gets subjected to political and rhetorical manipulation. People need to understand that it doesn’t matter what your religion or your background is. There’s terrorism in all forms (). We don’t really have a good understanding of what terrorism is," Gerstein says, noting that Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter, killed 32 people, “but we’re not really calling him a terrorist – we’re calling him something else. But the Fort Hood shooter – he killed 13 people, yet we called him a domestic terrorist. People need to understand that it doesn’t matter what your religion or your background is.

The second Part of Jonathan R. White’s ninth edition Terrorism and Homeland Security deals with the national and ethnic movements of international terrorism, their emergence as well as well as motifs. Ideological terrorist and ethnic separatists are hard to differentiate since they use the same procedures and tactics to get their demands. Although both fall under the definition of terrorism, there is a difference in the definition of their goals and demands. While separatists have defined, achievable goal, religious terrorists have a nihilistic ideology that are from a rational point of view not feasible. Therefore, it is impossible for satisfactorily negotiation

Walter Laqueur’s book, “The New Terrorism: Fanaticism and the Arms of Mass Destruction”, is empowering readers with the entire spectrum of terrorism. The reasons behind terrorism are not easy to understand, but Laqueur goes into great detail to try and bring the reader to an understanding of what the terrorist is thinking in order to justify the means to the end.