The Potential Chemical Attack On American Soil

For our purposes, we will use the Title 22 of the US Code, Section 2656f(d), to define terrorism. It defines terrorism as “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents” (Central Intelligence Agency, 2013). Examples of terrorism persist on a near daily basis around the world. Unstable countries, such as Afghanistan and Syria, deal with terrorist attacks on a constant basis. The common thread of these attacks is deliberate targeting of civilian populations in order to achieve political objectives. The best known and largest example are

The ongoing conflict/insurgency has well provided a “juicy” avenue for growing terrorists in Syria. The conflict has served as a magnetic attraction to terrorists such as Salafi-jihadist as well as other Islamic

President Obama attempts to gain the support of the Conservative population through a more logical approach, detailing the potential consequences of his actions or lack thereof to our nation 's credibility. He begins his appeal to the Right with a warning that “[dictators] depend upon the world to look the other way until those horrifying pictures fade from memory”. This means that if were to do nothing, as Assad hopes, he will likely attack more and commit more war crimes. With more war crimes, President Obama points out that it “is not only a violation of international law, it’s also a danger to our security”. Because American conservatives are traditionally more isolationist, they are less likely to agree with President Obama 's plea to intervene. Though, he argues if we let Assad continue, we will likely be threatening our own safety. The reason it would threaten our national safety, President Obama says, is that “as the ban against these weapons erodes, other tyrants will have no reason to think twice about acquiring poison gas, and using them”. The

On the other hand, the Bush Administration claims the whole aim of the operation in Iraq was not to only disarm Iraq, but to stop the dangerous spread of weapons of mass destruction through the military force (Schell). Although the support of many U.S.A. citizens is weak, President Bush insists “We muchs prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world (Schell). President Bush also mentions how we will “not permit” (Schell) Iraq to

A poison gas attack allegedly perpetrated by pro-Assad government forces in Syria’s civil war has prompted a predictably stupid response from President Trump. According to Trump, weakness and a refusal to act by President Obama in 2013 to the use of poison gas by Assad resulted in this week’s attack although hypocritically Trump’s tweets reveal that he opposed any U.S. intervention at the time.

President Obama’s tactics in Syria is much different than President’s Bush’s tactics in Iraq. In August 2013, Obama seeked Congress approval on military action in Syria after the Syrian government used chemical attacks that killed over a thousand innocent civilians. On September 11, 2013, military action was placed on hold

With the events that happened on September 11, 2001, the American people and all government leadership realized that the U.S. was fight a whole new other type of war. The U.S. has dealt with foreign terrorist networks abroad and the 1993 World Trade Center bombings. With the tragic event of 9/11, it became something of a nightmare because no American in history had the knowledge to deal with this kind of attack. Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) wants nothing more than to destroy America and the threat of another attack is imminent but, when? Every year these FTO’s will evolve and want to use chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons (CBRN).

In addition to conventional threats, chemical, biological and radiological weapons of mass destruction have far greater lethality and scope and pose a greater risk than they have in the past. The kkk terrorist attacks demonstrate the extremism and the uncivilized society of terrorist techniques and challenge the traditional approach to security. The Secret Service is challenged to identify and neutralize potential threats by individuals and groups in this increasingly sophisticated, mobile, and violence prone environment.

The fear of a Chemical or Biological attack has been a concern to many governments. These attacks, either by state agencies or individuals, have caused loss of life and the United States has not been spared in this forms of attacks.

The Iranians have clearly provided support to the Assad regime during the civil war, as indicated by the increasing number of Iranian generals dying in Syria (Wright). Clinton has admitted that not acting after Bashir Al-Assad crossed the proverbial “red line” and used chemical weapons on his own people was detrimental to the administration’s integrity. With the Islamic State (ISIS) operating out of Syria under the protection of the Syrian government, throughout her tenure as Secretary of State and as a presidential candidate, Clinton has always maintained the mantra “Assad must go.”

As of recent, there is an ongoing debate over the response of the Obama administration related to the events occurring in Syria and the potential violation by the Syrian government of customary international law and relevant treaties and conventions in the use of chemical weapons against its own people. The conflict itself has history which is required to be thoroughly examined before conclusions can be placed and actions are to be carried out. The Syrian Civil War has not only affected the lives of Syria’s citizens but has becoming a pressing issue in direct international relations between countries like Russia and the United States. Obama’s administration has their own response to the crisis at hand and believes that a military strike is a fully legal move to make given the situation present at hand. According to the evidence, it would seem possible that a violation has not occurred and that the threat by Obama’s administration to use force in the Syrian crisis stands on illegitimate grounds because the proceedings are done by Syrian government on their own grounds. However the atrocious actions committed by the Assad regime could in fact provide legality to military intervention by the United States. Finally, the focus will be to determine whether chemical weapons are in fact the sole factor for international intervention.

Since The First world War up to now, toxic gases died thousands of people. How many people have been suffering from toxic gases? How many people have permanent diseases because of toxic gases? Toxic gases have been using as chemical weapons to attack people. Chemical weapons had been using in The First World War and they had been using in Iraq against Iran and Kurdistan. Also, chemical weapons have been using in Syria. Chemical weapons killed and injured thousands of people. Therefore, chemical weapons can destroy our life, cause many permanent diseases and attack our world.

     Laqueur sheds enlightenment into a new arena for terrorism: Arms of Mass Destruction. The chemical and biological weapons of yesterday are available and relatively cheap on today’s open market. Mr. Laqueur goes into depth on previous usages by terrorist organizations using these types of weapons as well as the

Modern terrorists have come to the realization that “they cannot defeat the United States in a conventional war, but they can impose significant pain through acts of terrorism,” (Stern, p.5). After a century of American military, economic, and social success, the US has been elevated to the forefront of the global community. A defense budget of $401.7 billion makes the United States the dominant military force in the world, (2005 US Federal Budget). Furthermore, our history of success has established a general sentiment of invincibility among American citizens, and an attack on our civilian population would have tremendous ramifications, as was seen with the occurrence of September 11th. However, unlike al-Qaeda in Afghanistan under the Taliban, a nuclear attack may come from a group that does not enjoy the sponsorship of a state, making retaliation quite complicated. This sense of anonymity is another issue of terrorists with nukes that trumps a state with such capabilities. In the case of a state, there is a particular, defined, and easily identifiable party