Global Terrorism : Can It Be Stopped? Essay

“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 President Obama’s speech on drone policy, given on May 23, 2013 in Washington D.C., he asserts, “dozens of highly skilled al Qaeda commanders, trainers, bomb makers and operatives have been taken off the battlefield... Simply put, those [drone} strikes have saved lives.” Many American’s support this view. According to a July 18, 2013 Pew Research survey, 61% of Americans supported drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia (Drake). However, this belief that drone strikes make the United States safer by decimating terrorist networks around the world is widely contested. An opposing viewpoint is that these strikes create more terrorist than they kill. There is a common misperception that drones are precise, killing only the target and entourage. According to a meta-study of drone strikes, between 8 to 17% of all people killed are civilians (Sing). People who see their loved ones injured or killed in drone

The 9/11 attacks killed 2,996 people and injured over 6,000. According to the U.S. State Department’s annual Country Report on Terrorism 2015, 28,328 people around the world were victims of terrorists in that year. By killing terrorists with targeted drone strikes, the U.S. military disrupts and slows down terrorist organizations. In the War on Terror, it is difficult to determine how successful drone strikes have been. However, if we did nothing to fight or stop the terrorists they would be able to recruit, grow, and attack without fear. Despite potential downsides, drone strikes need to continue. It is impossible to estimate how many terrorist attacks have been stopped or how many lives have been saved due to successful drone attacks, but imagine the devastation of unrestrained terrorist

The emphasis of counterterrorism policy in the United States since Al Qaeda’s attacks of September 11, 2001 has been on jihadist terrorism. However, in the last decade, domestic terrorists have killed American citizens and damaged property across the country. Not all of these criminals have been prosecuted under terrorism charges. This is not meant to imply that domestic terrorists should be taken any less seriously than other terrorists.

After the terror attack of September 11, the U.S. began using drones to help fight the war on “terrorist.” The use of drones has secured the safety of our country to a certain extent. People claim that drone strikes are useful weapons in war because it kills the enemy without putting soldiers in danger. According to the article “At Issue: Targeted Strikes” by Staff, P. states, “Proponents credit drone strikes with the killing of many of top commanders of the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and argue that they are a legal form of self defense. ” The benefit of this is that U.S. soldiers do not have to step foot in unfriendly locations, where they will be exposing themselves to danger. The United States favors drone because “One advantage of drones is that they can be deployed for long periods

After 9/11, the U.S started to implement policies intended to combat terrorism in hopes of preventing further attacks and bring those who were involved to justice. One such policy that the U.S started was to implement the heavy use of drones- unmanned aircraft capable of bombing specific targets. These drones would be controlled by a pilot remotely from the U.S, thousands of miles from where the strikes were taking place. The U.S used these drones to assassinate suspects who were believed to have been linked to terrorism as well as various targets that were deemed to be associated with terrorism, such as weapons factories. Currently, however, there is a debate on the legality, morality, and effectiveness of drones. One side sees the drones as effective at destroying targets while at the same time, minimizing civilian casualties. On the other hand, the other side believes that drones are reliable for

The history of terrorism can be traced back as far as the French revolution. Some of these acts of terrorism only seem as distant reminders of our past, but at the same time, are not a far cry from today’s brutal acts; and although these acts seem distant, it doesn’t also mean they are no longer in the thoughts of individuals in today’s time.

As anyone with access to social media has observed, the “sharing” of catastrophic images and videos of violence, perpetrated by the Islamic State and other terrorist organizations has proliferated, resulting in increased awareness and greater fear among the general public. Modern terrorist organizations deliberately film the atrocities they commit as a means of inciting fear worldwide. The burning flame that is contemporary terrorism is fueled by the dissemination of these violent images as well as the resulting fear that emerges from the general public, particularly in the Western world. In a world in

Terrorism is not a problem exclusive to the United States, nor is it a new trend, in fact terrorism has been around for centuries and it is “one of the biggest threats to global security” (Spindlove & Simonsen, 2013). Though no universal definition for terrorism has been established the UN has stated that it is “imperative to define the term ‘terrorism’, because until all countries [agree] on the enemy they [seek] to defeat, there [will] always be loopholes and safe havens for those criminals to escape justice and the rules of law” ("Agreed definition”). Here in America, the U.S Code defines the federal crime of terrorism as “an offense that is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct” (18 U.S.C. § 2332b). This definition also includes any violation “of one of several listed statutes, including [the] … killing or attempted killing during an attack on a federal facility with a dangerous weapon; and [the] … killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the U.S” (18 U.S.C. § 930(c); 18 U.S.C. § 1114). Though there are hundreds of terrorist organizations around the world, few are as dangerous as Boko Haram. In this paper I will explain how Boko Haram started and why it is the world’s most dangerous terrorist group.

Terrorism is defined as the calculated use of violence against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature. “History shows, furthermore, that terrorism was by no means the exclusive domain of the revolutionary left and that it had been exercised at least as often by the extreme right fascist, or proto-fascist movements” (Laqueur 10). Terrorism dates back as far as we can remember, but it has been so spread throughout history and not always active that the idea was frequently ignored. As it pops up again and again throughout history people have a, “tendency to regard it as a new phenomenon” (Laqueur 7), because it would be so inactive for long periods of time. In this paper I will look at the many different factors such as tourism, resources, stock, capital and capital accumulation, and Foreign Direct Investment(FDI) that go into a county having a stable economy and how terrorism promotes an unstable economy focusing on the case of Afghanistan and its terrorist group the Taliban. I will also be looking into models of the economy based around terroristic attacks and many studies that have been done on the correlation of terrorism and a poor economy. Terrorism not only effects a country’s economy but the effect it has on the country eventually leads to the world’s economy. I will also look into the argument that

Terrorism has been a problem in the United States since the late 90s. Some of the key historical incidents are the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, 9/11, and the Oklahoma City bombing. A shadow that seems to hide behind terroristic acts is hate crimes and in particular, hate crimes directed towards Muslims. Is there a causation between terrorism and anti-Muslim hate crime incidents? If so, how big of an impact do terror attacks play on hate crimes? Studies have been conducted regarding the interrelationship between hate crimes and terrorism and whether one is dependent off of the other. The purpose of this study is to present data from the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) which provides data on hate crime incidents and the Global Terrorism Database (GTD) which provides data on terroristic incidents in order to understand whether causation exists between terrorism caused in the United States and anti-Muslim hate crimes. Hate crimes directed towards Jews will as well be considered because of the long standing tension and conflicts between the two. Do terrorism incidents cause anti-Muslim hate crime incidents to increase more than anti-Jewish hate crime incidents or vice-versa?

The Global War on Terror is a military campaign led by the United States and the United Kingdom and supported by other NATO members. It was originally against al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations with the purpose of eliminating them. This paper discusses how the Bush Administration handled the War on Terror as well as different aspects of it, including its terminology, its objectives, its military operations and criticism against it.

The immediacy and the primacy of any truly potent force is the ability to perpetuate itself. Sharp and energetic outbursts have their place, and can be known to have great effect-cataclysmic forces, despite their maximum destructive potential, are temporary in their total effects in relation to some absolute goal. In other words, they are generally limited in scope, and well defined in purpose; there is a tactical objective, which is usually consummated quickly. The more dreaded force creeps along, escalating incrementally, and while it may abide a strategic goal, or even a policy, it is generally open-ended. This sort of ambiguity I am referring to differs from the flexible tactical necessity in that strategic outcomes are very much

The war on terror is at the peak and there are vivid indications that every stone will be turned to halt it. A central assumption is that terrorism is a religious war, apparently between Christians and the Muslims. This is just a moral claim that terrorists are using to attract more people over to their side, as well as create solidarity among the Muslims. As a result, the imagery and the reality of terrorism differ overwhelmingly. There are various terror occurrences around the globe that are similar and can be classified as terrorism. Otherwise, terrorism has been a means to carry on a conflict without the antagonist realizing the nature of the threat, mistaking terrorism for criminal activity. Terrorism should be a global concern

Terrorism, which has been around for as long as people can remember, has been on the rise for the past ten years. Terrorists usually use murdering, kidnapping, hi-jacking and bombings to achieve their political purpose. For instance, according to Wikipedia.com (2006), in 1985 816 deaths, then in 2003, more than 1,000 people died by terorist acts around the world. In recent years, terrorism seems to be at a new height and attacks are much more violent than in the past. Unfortunately, in spite of many anti-terror campaigns, projects and organizations are being created for prevention (to prevent) terrorism, the number of terrorists only is increasing. These days terrorism is all over the world.