Terrorism And The Pursuit Of Political Aims Essay

Terrorism is defined as an act of violence that is committed by an organization or a single person in order to be heard. Terrorist acts are usually based on a couple factors such as, historical grievances, foreign policy decision, poverty, and religion. Terrorism is not a new act amongst the world but something that has been around since the beginning. To understand a criminal you must think like a criminal, and understand why they committed a crime or a violent act, then you can prevent and conquer.

Terrorism is an act that threatens or carries out violence with the intention to disrupt, kill or coerce against a body or nation in order to impose will. This means that a lot of groups use this method to get what they want. The groups use a variety of methods, groups such as:

In order to determine whether an action is a terrorist act or not, terrorism must first be defined. Terrorism is the use or threatening the use of violence as a weapon to influence a person or a group of people to change policies or influence decisions according to the terrorist’s desires. The terrorist can be a single person acting on personal wishes or a group of people with an ultimate goal. The goals of a terrorist are normally political, ideological, or religious in nature.

The word ‘terrorism’ can be traced back to the French Revolution and the reign of terror committed against the population of France in the 1790s. During this time, thousands of people were killed and the general population was severely oppressed. Also, some of the first instances of terrorist tactics, such as assassination and intimidation, were witnessed in the killing of prominent officials and other opponents of the Revolution. In general, terrorists aim to incite fear in the population through pre-meditated violent acts and gain publicity as a medium in achieving their goals. Such acts include taking hostages, bombings and assassinations, all of which create fear and compliance in a victim or audience. Terrorism can be distinguished from other types of political violence through its disregard for and intentional harming of innocent civilians. Also, terrorists usually adopt a state of mind where one side is always good and any opposition is bad and deserves to be punished. As a result, terrorists will always have some supporters who share the same radical thoughts as them and thus terrorism, as a whole, will always be accepted as a legitimate use of violence. This is the reasoning behind the famous phrase by Gerald Seymour, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”(QUOTE

The term terrorism is used widely in present day especially in the United States. Terrorism is a double standard, the people who commit those terrorist acts, commit the acts out of beliefs and in their eyes ok. Terrorism can be described as the illegitimate use of force to achieve a political objective by targeting innocent people (Laqueur, 1987). To me the definition mention above is a great definition to describe terrorism as a crime. To aim for innocent people to prove a point which lead major injuries or death in most cases is to most people would be a crime, no questions asked. According to Martha Crenshaw (1995), “Terrorism cannot be defined unless the act, target and possibility of success are analyzed”. So to think, terrorist are people who commit these acts as a way to get their political or religious point across. If we look at the some of the most famous terrorist acts they are automatically labeled crimes. 9/11 was a crime because the persons affiliated with the act, targeted the

Terrorism in its simplest form is a practice of violence where the perpetrator strongly believes in his cause and is willing to die for the perpetration of his violence. Terrorism today extends beyond the perpetrator's local country and has become a global phenomenon.

This leads into the second and main premise of my argument; even though it is not as bad as modern warfare, terrorism is not morally justifiable. I will grant McPherson the fact that he has successfully proven that war is equally, if not more unjustifiable than terrorism, yet this however, does not mean that one can automatically conclude that terrorism is morally sound. It is the lesser of two evils, but I do not think it is justifiable. Walzer understands terrorism to be the “random” murder of innocent people, intended to spread so much fear that those who are subject to this violence feel as if they are in danger and will demand that the state fight

Terrorism is hard to be defined accurately as no universal agreement has been made on the definition of terrorism. This is because the term is politically and emotionally charged. The National Security Council (NSC) of Malaysia defined terrorism as “unlawful use of threat or the use of force or terror or any other attack by person, group or state regardless of objective or justification aim at other states, it citizens or their properties and its vital services with the intention of creating fear, intimidation and thus forcing governments or organisations to follow their impressed will including those acts in support directly or indirectly”.

In this essay I will examine and discuss the issue “is terrorism always wrong by definition?” taking into consideration the questions raised above. The rationale behind this essay is to explore the different approaches used to define terrorism, the nature of terrorism and whether terrorism can be justifiable in a certain way. To understand the wide range of definitions, I will compare and contrast the different approaches scholars used to define terrorism. Alongside this I will use some historical examples to explore the topic further.

Terrorism is a significant and recurring situation that has changed the lives of people around the world, overwhelming them with fear and uncertainty of their future. It has become part of our daily lives today as we are still fighting wars to resolve many of the issues that began with the 9/11 attacks on the United States. Terrorism does not have a definitive definition but must meet certain conditions for it to be considered terrorism. There has to be a reason for an act that is deemed political, and it must affect the lives of innocent people, putting a sense of fear into them (Combs, Slann, “Terrorism”). Not only may the reason behind an act be political, but it could also be seen as religious as well (Sterba). Since the 9/11 attacks, terrorism

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines terrorism as, “the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal” (Terrorism, n.d.). The various definitions of terrorism are typically close in comparison but can carry a slightly different tone when used by a government for purposes of the law.

The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims is what we define as an act of terrorism, although technically there are 100 other different ways to define terrorism. When you hear the word terrorism in the United States, majority will automatically think of 9/11 or Osama Bin Laden. A lot automatically think of these two topics because they are not aware that terrorism occurs all over the world and not just in the United States. Overall, terrorism comes with a lot of concerns and information many need to know about.

•The definition of terrorism is clear and simple is to inflict harm to innocent individual due to a religious, misguided belief or their actions are justified as the truth. The complexities of terrorism are everybody thinks that there mission is most important with so much conviction that they do honestly believe that their cause is valid. There varieties miss truths in our society due to race, dictatorship, and regional location in society culturally. The definition of terrorism is different in the United States than from Russia. The countries all over the world have to get their own house in order to effective against terrorism.

The concept of terrorism as defined by Hoffman in his book, Inside Terrorism, is not easily defined. Hoffman indicates that most definitions do not give the word “terrorism” a clear definition for today (Hoffman 2006). However, according to Hoffman, the Oxford English Dictionary does provide a definition that embodies terrorism since its beginnings. “Any one who attempts to further his views by a system of coercive intimidation.” (Hoffman 2006, 3). The views that are typically political or idealogical in nature (Hoffman, 2006, 2-3).

In recent decades, society has been victim to one of the worst scourges ever known: terrorism, which is an expressive act of violence seen throughout history (conquests, wars) with varied forms of expression and cruelty. If a general definition of terrorism could be given it would be, in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1269, a terrorist act is any act intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or other person not directly involved in armed conflict, when the purpose of such act, by nature or context, is to intimidate a population or compel a government or international organization to do or abstain from any act.