Pape's Realist Theory Of Suicide Terrorism

what they do and to whom. Pape is trying to convey that "suicide terrorism is rising around the

Another element of the strategy is untwisting the “spiral of violence”. The classic mechanism, which assume the existence of cycles of suicide terrorism activity in a “action-repression-reaction” it is aimed at lowering the public support for the government, and increase it for the terrorists. By curried out the suicide terrorism attacks, the intension and aim of the terrorists is to hit the repressive actions of the authorities not only in themselves but also in the group indentified with them and/or their supporters (a specified ethnic group, religious, social or the entire society). As a result, this process has lead to massive social explosion directed against the government. Such a model of strategy for terrorism has been used by most of the leftist groups in Europe in the nineteenth century, and in the

Terrorists deny the authenticity of states, the rights of people , the unique importance of individual human beings and ultimately morality. Terrorists for one reason or another, loathe our freedom and our way of life. (Zupan, 2004)

During the Iraq war, Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), the United States was introduced to suicide terrorism, which was used to threaten and exterminate the Iraqi security forces and to start a civil war amongst the Shi’i and Sunni Muslims (Hafez 2006). To dictate when a suicide attack is approaching, there are two developments that are involved: one is on the battlefield and the other in the political arena (Hafez 2006). On the battlefield, insurgents want to show their enemies and supporting audience they will not be intimidated, nor will they surrender their motives in the face of repression (Hafez 2006). In the public arena, suicidal terrorism arose “after the January 2005 elections for an assembly to draft a new Iraqi constitution, endorsement

Papes states to the reader why a terrorist attack and why are their motives. One of their motives is that they do not want a democratic power to occupy a weaker state. The terrorist attacks innocent people to force the democratic power to withdraw from their territory because the democratic power wants to change the way people thinks, and behave in the region that they occupy. Dying to win attempts to address the questions surrounding suicide terrorism in a broader

There are different elements clarify why terrorism is ethically wrong, regardless of the possibility that different types of murdering are every so often passable. Notwithstanding, terrorism slaughtering considers whether the utilization of different sorts of fear for political as opposed to military use makes terrorism altogether off-base. A few good qualifications that may be critical to the ethical quality and reasonable portrayal of terrorism are incorporated.

Terrorism can be defined and viewed in many different ways. As discussed in “Terrorism and Political Violence,” by Alex Schmid, there are multiple frameworks in which terrorism can be defined (Schmid 2010, 197). In Schmid’s article, he discusses the five ways he feels terrorism can be looked at, terrorism as/and politics, terrorism as/and crime, terrorism as/and warfare, terrorism as/and communication and terrorism as/and religious fundamentalism (Schmid 2010, 197). This is interesting because it explores the concept of terrorism in different lenses, where each has its own motives, its own background and its own participants. This is important to understand because not every act of terrorism is done in the same light and for the same purposes. Just as any other crime, there are reasons behind the act. When studying terrorism, understanding motives makes all the difference, and understanding what is at stake for the attacker or the attacked helps fully conceptualize the matter.

Throughout the 21st Century, the September 11 terrorist attacks have often been described as “the most devastating terrorist attacks in history”(). However, while the scale of death and destruction that resulted from these attacks was “indeed staggering”(), the millions of people killed by government acts of terror continues to go unnoticed by orthodox terrorism research(). In this case, there is a need to examine the repressive state practices that critical scholars describe as the “single greatest threat to human and societal security”(). While there has been a large number of human rights groups that have contributed to the wide body of literature on political violence(), the overall neglect on the subject is due to “politically biased research”() that rejects the concept of ‘state terrorism’. For instance,

During this week, I learned about the face of terrorism, as well as terrorist organizational models, and the psychology of terrorism. As a result, I am able to identify what terrorism is by identifying the political, psychological, violent, and deliberate objectives of a group. In addition, I now understand the structure of a terrorist organization and the four levels that make up a terrorist group, as well as the human behaviors that lead a person to become a terrorist.

In Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism Robert Pape examines the Western misconceptions of suicide terrorism and the failures of foreign policy towards addressing this trans-national issue. Failures to recognize the issue of policy towards Suicide Terrorism worsens the issue and making this issue only larger. This paper will analyze Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism and refute the unrealistic Western perception of suicide terrorism.

Initially, Gordon H. McCormick and Lindsay Fritz, introduce Hanadi Jaradat and her suicide attack during the Second Intifada (140). Jaradat was a law student with great potential however she resorted to detonating 22 pounds of explosives in an Israeli dinner. Her drive to do this heinous act was later explained to be retaliatory, her ”brother and fiance had been shot by an Israeli assassination squad” (145). This introduces that terrorism can be used in two strategic ways, political coercion and political mobilization, the intifada being an example of the latter. In the first, the audience being the state, terrorism is used to enter negotiations. In the second, the audience being constituents, terrorism is used to rally popular support.

Acts of terrorism come in many forms, using guns, bombs and even human beings as weapons of mass destruction. This paper will focus on the last one, the use of human beings as a weapon, otherwise known as suicide bombers. It will look into who they are, why they are used, how they are trained and the devastation they can cause by their actions. Everyone remembers September 11 and the massive destruction and the tragic loss of so many lives that fateful day in New York city, the Pentagon, and an empty field in Pennsylvania when three planes were taken over by suicide bombers, as an act of terrorism on the American people.

Objectives and goals of terrorist associations vary all through the world and reach from local single-issue terrorists to the points of transnational radicalism and terrorism. As the most conspicuous vote based system and noteworthy financial, military, and political force in the world, the U.S. is a helpful and engaging focus for fanatics. For instance, Martyrdom is when a man dies in a legitimate battling safeguarding his country, his honor, his respect, his opportunity, his pride, his nobility, his territory. No slaughtering is suffering, and no passing is affliction. Martyrdom is a specific death.

Brym and Hamlin (2009), argues that reasonable choice of its own cannot explain suicide terrorism, they argue that the culture is playing massive role in the process. Opposite to the argument that culture is a controlling

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