What Are The Three Terrorist Categories Nationalist-Leftist Groups?

Terrorism in the twenty-first century has some similarities and differences from terrorism in the twentieth century. Terrorism is, in its broadest sense, the use or threatened use of violence in order to achieve a political, religious, or ideological aim. Also useful to remember that because the two entities involved, the terrorists and the terrorized, are on the opposite end of the political, religious or ideological continuum, the same act is viewed by them differently. There is much sense in the phrase one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.

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

This type of terrorism is also known as terrorism from below. Much of dissident terrorism is anti-state in nature, it is directed at political institutions and different types of governments with the aim of destabilizing the type of government in order to build a new one. These terrorists are often associated with “freedom fighters” attempting to overthrow a government that is looked as being unfair or to build a new state within the country that they decide to overthrow. An example of dissident terrorism would be the Basque separist group who strives to become a separate region from

Terrorism is notoriously difficult to define and is often used to mean different things by pundits, politicians and the media. The problem of defining terrorism has “hindered analysis since the inception of studies in the early 1970s”. It is therefore difficult to decide whether a particular organisation is considered a terrorist group. A widely used definition by Bruce Hoffman, a political analyst in the field of terrorism and counter terrorism, states that terrorism is violence or the threat of violence, against non combatants or civilians, usually motivated by political, religious or ideological beliefs.

Modern terrorism, as deduced from this literature, is acts to violence strategically used by secular groups spanning international borders with the aim of achieving a desired outcome. Further, it can be seen as organized activity whose genesis can be traced back to the 1880’s. From then to now there are identifiable traits and patterns observed from different (terrorist) groups which have allowed for the conceptualization of the term modern terrorism. This concept therefore, can be best explained in the context of being a wave or having a life cycle. That means it is a cycle of activity demarked by phases from inception and expands along the way then eventually it declines. The world, thus far, has experienced four waves of modern

Right-wing terrorism, also referred to as vigilante terrorism is defined as “Vigilante terrorism includes right-wing terrorism aimed at "restoring" the political relationships of an earlier time or realizing social objectives that are neglected or discounted in the contemporary world” (Professor Cadigan, 2015, Week 4 lecture). There is also left-wing terrorism, which is referred to as insurgent terrorism is explained as “forcing change through terrorist acts” (Professor Cadigan, 2015, Week 4 lecture). Left-wing terrorism has been around since the 1960s to 1970s.

The terms terrorism and domestic terrorism are very similar concepts. There are, however, slight differences in each. Entities that are apart of the Government have slightly different ways of explaining what they believe to be the correct definition of terrorism and domestic terrorism. In this paper the author will offer definitions of the two terms and state which one they agree with the most. The author will also state how the two terms are best differentiated.

The second Part of Jonathan R. White’s ninth edition Terrorism and Homeland Security deals with the national and ethnic movements of international terrorism, their emergence as well as well as motifs. Ideological terrorist and ethnic separatists are hard to differentiate since they use the same procedures and tactics to get their demands. Although both fall under the definition of terrorism, there is a difference in the definition of their goals and demands. While separatists have defined, achievable goal, religious terrorists have a nihilistic ideology that are from a rational point of view not feasible. Therefore, it is impossible for satisfactorily negotiation

As we move past defining terrorism we are now looking to give it an identity. Terrorism is an act that is acted out by groups and individuals. There are always some command grounds in differences when you evalute one terrorist to another. Person or group. Some command areas might be methods of employement and desired end result. One of the biggest difference between terrorists (group or person) is politics or motivatoin behind the act and a countinuing agenda. In order to obtain data and provide comparisons to such items as mentioned two executors of terrorism were selected. One individual Timothy McVeigh(domestic) and one group al-Shabaab (international). The intent of this paper will be to compare the key similarities and differences between Timothy McVeigh and al-Shabaab, reference one terrorist activity and the motives of the attacks for each and provide an assessment of which is a greater threat to the United States (threat should be interpreted as threat to the national security of the United States).

Terrorism has been an important part of social behavior for over 2,000 years. Between the years of 1980 and 1995, terroristic groups motivated by religious beliefs had increased by 43% (Hoffman). Religious beliefs and culture are a main reason groups and individuals resort to terrorism. Groups resort to terrorism as a consequence of seeing their culture demolished, as well as religious motives. Terrorist groups have many intentions when it comes to acts of terrorism. They main ones are they want to create fear globally, weaken the government, and obtain universal recognition for what they have done. Religiously motivated terrorist groups usually have high authority targets. These targets include government offices, banks, and national airlines. From the group’s perspective, terrorism is the only practical option. Groups are formed centered on certain factors like culture and religion. Many terrorists will receive support from their followers

Terrorism has been a part of the history in the world for centuries. Although the definition of terrorism has developed throughout time, many threats and events are described as terrorism. There have been several waves of terrorism, according to David Rapoport (Weinberg, Eubank 2014). These waves showed different goals and outcomes of the terrorist groups during a certain time period. The earliest forms of terrorism were considered assassinations in attempts to change political power. During the eleventh century, the Sicaril and Hashshashin were terrorist of that time because of their attempts at assassinations and kidnappings.

There are two types of terrorist groups that can cause major problems for the United States. One group is known as domestic and the other transnational. In this paper I will describe the two groups and explain how different their methods are when it comes to terrorism.

Sparked by the Versailles Peace Treaty, the second wave of terrorism began. The second wave, also known as the anti-colonial wave, is where terrorism campaigns were fought over political problems where it would look too weak to back out. The third wave, or “New Left,” began after the Vietnam War. The New Left was the beginning of hijackings with the mix of the first wave’s radical and nationalistic intentions. The second wave includes groups, such as the PLO and FLN, whereas the New Left includes the Weather Underground and the Red Brigades. Each group has their own objective, strategy, and support which made them stronger.

Although terrorist can be labeled into different categories, it is important to remember that even though a group of terrorist may fall under different labels that they have distinct similarities. In McEntire, there are five similarities that are noted. The first similarity is that terrorists see the world simply in the terms of right and wrong. The second similarity is that terrorists are disturbed by their current situation. What this means is that terrorists are saddened with current problems in the society and know what they would like to see differently. The third similarity is that terrorists have a unique image of themselves. McEntire elaborates further on this by stating that terrorist consider themselves to be more entitled than others,

This chapter was all about State terrorism and the different subtypes and examples. State Terrorism can be describe as; when the government is committed to using violence and extreme threats against their own civilians to get them to comply with the same views as the government to the point of submission. A country can involve in state terrorism with the aim of protecting the safety of its borders, guarding sovereignty or to achieving some political goal. The chapter breaks down state terrorism into two categories: internal and external terrorism. The first being internal terrorism, which is when the act occurs as a result against a domestic order, challenge to mainstream values, or internal human rights violation etc. A State may engage in terror acts for a variety of reasons. The main reason behind most state terror acts is to protect the sovereignty of the country. The government safeguards the independence and security of the country. This responsibility