Analytical Review of Cutting the Fuse

On September 11, 2001, a series of terrorist attacks were directed for the United States by means of four hijacked planes. Two of which hit the twin towers of the World Trade Center, one hit the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Department of Defense, and the fourth crashed in a field near Pittsburg after it was meant to hit the White House. The terror spread in the United States and brought concern and fear to the citizens. The impact of these terrorist attacks caused serious and detrimental damages within the country, and their result on the people were enormous; insecurity, helplessness, and susceptibility spread. Especially after the release of a videotape in which Osama Bin Laden, head of Al-Qaeda, admitted that he was responsible for the terrorist attacks. Hence, President George W, Bush declared the “war on terror” against all terrorists in the Arab world, specifically Afghanistan and Iraq. In the following paper, we will be discussing how the war on terror was waged, its effects on the target countries, and how it was perceived by political thinkers, where some saw it as a conspiracy theory against the Arab countries, and others believed the USA was the victim.

Foreign and domestic policies are not linear, rather the policies are connected in a circle, with each policy reinforcing the values of another. Domestic American terrorism in the prison and detention systems and governmental reforms are influenced by the mobilization and ethnocentrism abroad. The militarization internationally is justified by the domestic handling of the same cultural issues within the United State borders. The United States has strangely used a near Catch-22 to handle dilemmas. The United States has allowed perspective to become reality, whether with oneself or regarding issues abroad, specifically in the Middle East. Terrorism is the use or threat of fear for political or economical gain. An internal characteristic of terrorism is how dependent it is of perspective, one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. To understand “terrorism,” a focus must be applied to the history, what drove an organization to commit such acts. Respectively, the Middle East has been a hotbed for the key word “terrorism,” especially because of 9/11. Subsequently, Muslims have been stigmatized by the United States as terrorists. The consequences spawned because of 9/11 require a look to the past to understand the present.

In the article “Is Terrorism Distinctively Wrong?”, Lionel K. McPherson criticizes the dominant view that terrorism is absolutely and unconditionally wrong. He argues terrorism is not distinctively wrong compared to conventional war. However, I claim that terrorism is necessarily wrong.

Domestic terrorism has played a major part in shaping the societies of the United States. The ideologies of individuals can become radicalized. This can lead to a movement. This movement involves the infliction of fear upon the communities, in attempt to make it a better world. It is critical to examine the events created by one man’s extreme ideologies in effort to better understand.

This paper will discuss religious terrorism in particular. Religious terrorism can be defined as “the terrorism [is] carried out based on motivations and goals that have a predominantly religious character or influences.” (“Religious Terrorism”) An example of this will be the 9/11 attacks. It was “a series of four coordinated terrorist attack launched by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda upon the United States in New York City and the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.”(“September 11 attacks”) This attack had led to a serious causality, “almost 3000 people dies in the attacks.” (“September 11 attacks”) Osama Bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda, declared a “holy war against the United States” (“September 11 attacks”) In his “letter to America”, he stated the motives as follows: In opposition to western support for attacking Muslims in Somalia; supporting the Indian oppression against Muslims in Kashmir; the Jewish aggression against Muslims in Lebanon; the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia; U.S support of Israel and the sanction against Iraq. (“September 11 attacks”) The disastrous attack leads to a serious attention of re-constructing the old version of counter terrorism strategy, which had failed to protect the citizens against terrorism. However, ‘terrorism is far to complex for one solution to be effective in dealing with all the possible threats.” (Lygutas 146) Therefore, some of the measures have difficulties in balancing the rights of

The horrific events of that day definitively answered Linenthal’s question, the scale and scope of the 9/11 attacks understandably pushing the 1995 bombing from center stage. The 9/11 attacks, by their very destructiveness, helped to relegate the Oklahoma City bombing to a side exhibit in the national memory—to somewhere in the background of Linenthel’s “landscape of violence.” The 9/11 attacks were larger, far more deadly, and committed by a more faceless, harder-to-comprehend enemy, whether defined as Al Qaeda or more broadly as violent Islamic radicals in general.

This paper is aimed at outlining the events of the Terrorist attack against America, the results and actions taken by the United States Government in retaliation to the attacks. There is no way to legitimize terrorism, although deeply rooted in religion; there can never be a valid excuse to victimize innocent people. Terrorism is never easily defined and many individuals have an obscure idea of what it really is. Terrorism is a premeditated act of violence, geared at bringing about political change by intimidation; it is disruptive in nature and is intended to have an impact outside of its intended targets. Acts of terrorism are responsible for thousands of deaths, increased security measures and negative impacts to the budgets of many countries including America.

In examining Islamic terrorism, we are presented with two very different viewpoints from politicians. On the one side, we have John Kerry, who contends that terrorism is the result of barbarism…says “this is a battle between civilization itself and barbarism” (Kerry, 2015), and describes religious extremists as “psychopathic monsters”. When we reduce the actions of these people to barbarism and separate their brand of violence from our, as Mary Moran puts it, "[...] it provides a satisfying depiction of the fundamental difference between the deployment of U.S. military might and the "senseless violence" perpetrated by others" (Moran, 200; p. 251). She is quick to explain, however, that this strategy of explanation is counterproductive because

It is nearly impossible to go an entire day in the United States without hearing of some act of terrorism. Whether it be a shooting in a public place or threats against a group of people, this violent form of conflict is prevalent in every American’s life. These ruthless acts of cold-blooded murder demonstrate evil in its purest form, and leave death and mourning in their wake. The article “Homegrown Terrorism: Is There an Islamic Wave?” gives an overview of the rise of domestic terrorism since the tragedy of 9/11. Though it was written in 2011, the core message is the same today: terrorism in the United States still continues to grow at a sickening pace, with each new attack seeming more barbaric than the last.

With the event of 9/11, bin Laden hoped to rally the support of the vast populace whose grievances al-Qaeda claimed to champion for; though, on the contrary, Muslim states and sects instead deemed al-Qaida as “too radical.” Bin Laden had envisioned a militant, Islamist, caliphate for the Middle East. With this objective, al-Qaeda had already began alienating itself from much of the Muslim world by targeting other moderate Muslims who didn’t share their views and vision. "They made a world of enemies, which is never a winning strategy," Bergen asserted. Thus, the 9/11 attack missed the mark in igniting the rebellion against U.S./allied presence in the

In this paper, the principles of distinction, proportionality and military necessity will be defined and discussed in relation to the event of 9/11. As well as, the legal constraints that are associated with the conduct of hostilities under the new conditions imposed. The term “terrorism” and “terrorist” were included following the events of 9/11, identifying a new type of enemy. Narratives of who the enemy was changed towards individuals who were or seemed like a Muslim. Muslims were perceived as the new enemy. This subsequently led to major legal constraints such as

On September 11,2001, the biggest terrorist attack on American soil that embarked a True American Form of Security against the parasitic influence of terrorism amongst organizations and civilizations. A targeted threat that many describe to have an affiliation with the Islamic State, a clear enemy against the United States, we have succumbed to fighting radicals of different forms in which they seek religious justice. Through time we have known terrorism as an attack on national security threatening the public, however since 9/11 we have identified the face of terrorism that follows through Islamic preach and influence. As a precedent factor to our xenophobic paranoia of an unknown attack, we can conclude or assume one suspect, however the

“Living with Terrorism,” is a blog post that was written by Norwegian blogger Bjorn Staerk on bearstrong.net in 2006. In this essay, Steark provides his perspective on how to manage and cope with the sensitive topic of world-wide terrorism. His essay is intended for the more conservative public and, most importantly, was written as a rebuttal to the far-right and anti-Islamic Norwegian blogger Peder Are Nøstvold Jensen (aka Fjordman.) Fjordman had suggested in one of his blogs that Islam, not Islamism, was the culprit behind terrorism, and this greatly displeased Staerk’s universalist creed and left-liberalist views. In contradiction to Fjordman’s remarks, Steark wrote “Living with Terrorism” to explain that terrorism does not always concentrate

One can scarcely turn on the television, or the radio, or open up a web browser without the mention of Islamic terrorism or unrest around the world. Though the United States and the rest of the world may not be engaged in a protracted religious war, for radical Muslim fundamentalist they are. Bernard Lewis brings to light possible reasons for the issues facing the world dealing with Islamic terrorism. The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror explains these issues in historical context as well as how some of the actions professed in the name of Islam and claim to

After the attack of 9/11 many American citizens sought out an answer to why one would hijack a plane and run it into the Twin Towers, killing millions. According to the Huffpost, Islam became the main reason for the attack and furthermore labeled religion as the inspiration for many terroristic attacks (Gibson, 1). According to many Muslims, however, the attacks are anti-Islamic because the Quran states not to harm civilians who are not involved with war and to avoid it at all possible times (PBS, 3). The conflict between Muslims and Americans is growing and many issues in the Middle East has become the focus for religious terrorism.