This epistemological study will define the political ideology of “blowback” that occurs through the contextualism of American foreign policy and the rise of ISIS in the Middle East. The origins of ISIS in the Middle East was a historical development that occurred within the historical context of American foreign intervention in Afghanistan and other Islamic nations that involved the funding of Muslim terrorist organizations. In this contextualist conception, the history of American funding of terrorist organizations, such as Al Qaeda in the 1980s, defines why the concept of “blowback” has become a major political ideology in the rise of other, more advanced terrorist organizations, such as ISIS, that have grown in the 21st century. Blowback is a theory that defines the increased presence of terrorist organizations in the Middle East due to the historical funding of Islamic terrorist organization by the U.S. government. On the other hand, American nationalism tends to define the “war on terror” as a basis for nationalism and foreign interventionist policies, which would contradict the political idea of “blowback” as a cause for the rise of ISIS. These relative terms define the contextualism of the increasing power of ISIS in the Middle East, yet the premise of “blowback” provides a more accurate ”context” for epistemological purposes. In essence, a …show more content…
The epistemological context of the “war on terror” has become a major political issue in terms of the effect of American militarization throughout the Middle East. More so, it defines a historical framework that contextualizes the premise of “blowback” as a feature of the growth of international terrorism through Al-Qaeda and, more currently, the lager institution of ISIS. In this manner, contextualism defines the ways in which political ideology can be defined within an epistemological
The book “How Terrorism End; Understanding the Decline and Demise of Terrorist Campaigns”, written in 2011 at the height of Al-Qaeda, the most well-known international terrorist group of our time. The author of this work, Audrey Cronin, at the time of print, served as a professor of strategy at the United States National War College in Washington D.C., and a senior associate at Oxford University’s Changing Character of War Program. Both positions allowed her to impact strategic policy making in the execution of the Global War on Terror by allowing her access to senior military and civilian policymakers. Her previous area of her prior work has been mainly focused on international terrorism with an emphasis on al-Qaeda. She has authored
Transnational terrorism points toward an ideological globalism ignoring a world divided by national frontiers. by acknowledging the nature of transnational terrorism, policymakers may come to realize that the structure of terrorism has changed. At least two major international terrorist groups embrace a transcendent ideology-al Qaeda and Hezbollah-and both groups are motivated by religion. In addition, several smaller groups want to follow in their path. Second, at first glance, because many of these groups are Islamic, it would seem to suggest the beginning of religious conflicts beyond nationalistic
The historical accuracy of Selma's story has been the subject of controversy about the degree to which artistic license should be used in historical fiction.[79][80] The film was criticized by some for the omission of various individuals or groups historically associated with the Selma marches, while others challenged how particular historical figures in the script were represented. Most controversy in the media centered around the film's portrayal of President Johnson and his relationship with King. To people such as LBJ Presidential Library director Mark Updegrove[81] and Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Johnson was seen as a champion of civil rights legislation and a proactive partner of King, and they accused the film of falsely depicting Johnson
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.
“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 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
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
As the central protagonist of the novel Enduring Love, Joe is evidently an extremely significant character. Not only does the plot revolve around his own experiences, but also the first person narration means that everything is seen from his own perspective and bias. Ian McEwan creates Joe’s character through multiple techniques, resulting in a complex character. For example throughout the novel, the conflict within Joe between his instinctive rationality and his decline in mental stability highlights the intense level of emotional distress created by Jed. This can be seen in the increase of Joe’s rhetorical and short sentences, showing the loss of control and the transformation into an almost stream of consciousness narration.
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.
Additionally, John Mueller lambasts what he labels as the socially constructed ‘terrorist industry,’ which he attacks for artificially inflating concerns over terrorist attacks. Instead, Mueller confirms that the damage caused by terrorism is not materially significant but stems primarily from the fear that it creates. Violent retaliation is viewed as a form of ‘self-flagellation’ that provides the terrorists with exactly what they want. As mentioned, realist definitions of power, self-interest and rationality lack explanatory prowess when non-state actors are able to subvert states thanks largely in part to the use of suicide-terrorism. The proliferation of terrorist groups and their use of suicide-tactics in many ways defies realist expectations and conclusions.
On September 11, 2001 the United States of America was forever changed. A series of attacks lead by a man named Osama Bin Laden, the leader of the organization called Al-Qaeda, would bring America into a new war, the War on Terror. This war would not be like the wars of before, nation against nation, but would rather be a much more global conflict (“War”). The war would also not merely involve the United States, but also every western country. The reason behind this war is one word, Jihad. The definition of jihad is “a war fought by Muslims to defend or spread their belief” (“Jihad”). The United States of America has changed the way it
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
Divulging into Ambition: An Analysis of Lady Macbeth’s Power The play Macbeth is one of Shakespeare's most known tragedies due to its violent nature as well as its portrayal of the fight for power. In the play, Macbeth, Lady Macbeth plays a pivotal role in the couple's struggle for power in the sphere of Scottish royalty. Though the way her manipulation, lies, and misguided ambition, resulted in the consuming guilt she experienced in the end, Shakespeare uses the characterization of Lady Macbeth to exemplify how the pursuit of power can devour one's soul—ultimately highlighting the corrupt and obsessive nature of the desire for power and how it results in the downfall of Lady Macbeth. Murder is a prominent theme throughout the play, the murder of Duncan acts as a catalyst for the
Differing accounts on either pole focus on al-Qaeda’s continued relevance as the premier terrorist network, whether it is any longer effective or not. From there, the natural conclusion comes around to asking how effective al-Qaeda is, and by which mechanisms does it project that effectiveness. Aside from this, both parties agree that al-Qaeda has an uncanny habit of surviving in the turbulent international dialectic that spawned radical Muslim distress, vicariously.
Kegley and Raymond stated: “The shape of the world’s future will be determined not only by changes in the objective conditions of world politics, but also by the meanings people ascribe to these conditions.” Terrorism is presently a major factor in international relations and has impacted the world to change in many significant ways. Terrorism is a political ideology that has been problematic in defining definitely because of its various interpretations around the world, as well as the fact that it is constantly evolving. Since the terrorist events of 9/11, the lives of many have been changed forever. A small group of individuals, which are a mere fraction of the population of the world, have managed to impact and shape the way international and domestic relations are looked at and handled. People question how secure and safe they feel due to uncertainty of public safety because of events such as 9/11. The war on terrorism in the 21st century has certainly and inevitably changed the landscape for global politics. However, the relationship between terrorism and global politics is troublesome and in ways problematic to describe accurately. Both terrorism and global politics individually are complicated phenomenon. It is erroneous to propose that one is responsible for the other or vice versa, but they are inextricably and inevitably linked. In the study of international relations, there are multiple theories and theoretical perspectives. In this essay, realism and liberalism