They suggest that as a concept, "terrorism" has been greatly abused by political interests and has too many negative cultural and political connotations to retain any real analytical value. This failure of leadership is a dangerous concession to armed groups.
Poverty, infectious disease and environmental degradation create conditions in which extremism thrives and new conflicts emerge. Many worried that various countries around the world would also use this war on terror as an excuse to pursue more aggressive options on their own citizens.
Accepting that terrorism can only really be described according to the nature and quality of the particular act of violence—rather than the purported legitimacy of the actor who commits it —has a number of serious consequences and implications.
If the US public mood at the time was understandably full of anger and vengeance as well as shock and disbelief, it also reflects badly on US society that voices for more measured and appropriately calculated responses could be drowned out; an individual acting in a regrettable way due to a moment of anger is very different than an entire state apparatus that should have time to think things through more thoroughly doing that.
In the decade since then, tens of thousands of new books and articles on terrorism have been published. In the current climate, virtually every state and international organisation has adopted new anti-terrorism legislation, and military force—including "strategic bombing"—is frequently being used as a tool of counter-terrorism.
For example, such an approach would argue that a car bomb detonated on a city street by clandestine state agents is not an act of terrorism, but an identical attack by non-state actors is. With vague definitions of "terrorist" and "enemy combatant," police can arrest and imprison any US citizen based on suspicion and without evidence.
Lastly, and most commonly among the leading scholars in the field, terrorism is defined as a violent strategy or tactic that actors employ in pursuit of particular political goals. Bombs in public places or the widespread use of torture against regime opponents for example, are clearly intended to terrify the wider society.
The cases of U. Both actions are breaches of international law, as the use of military force is illegal unless used in response to a prior attack. Importantly, it also implies political motivations, as a way of distinguishing terrorism from other forms of violence designed to terrify, such as the intimidation of communities by organised criminals seeking to obtain financial reward, the terror caused by a serial killer, or the fear caused by a one-off mass killing.
People like Gandhi who used nonviolence to invoke change are not classified as terrorists because they did not use terror or violence. That appears to be the strong consensus of the foreign-policy elite which, with only a few exceptions, believes that the administration of President George W.
Lastly, it implies forethought and intentionality, as opposed to the terror induced by rioting or communal disturbances, for example. The has in some respects, led to what has been described as a war on freedom Back to top Mainstream Media While citizens everywhere, especially Americans, were rightly outraged at the attacks, the mainstream media has largely concentrated on the effects, the various aftermaths and impacts, and reporting what political leaders are doing, saying or not doing, or not saying, etc.
Such fear mongering resembles the behavior of the previous administration. The discussions are therefore within those confines, mostly.A broad definition would say terrorism was the use of violence for political ends by any group which breaks the Geneva Conventions (which govern actions between armies in wartime) or ignores generally accepted concepts of human rights.
It was with disbelief and shock that people around the world saw footage of the terrorist attacks in the US on on September 11, when the planes-turned-missiles slammed into the World Trade Center towers and damaged the Pentagon.
A good starting point would be for the international community to agree on a common definition of terrorism, which does not ignore the deadly phenomenon of. Terrorism is a global tactic utilized by different ideologies both religious & non religious- separatists, nationalists, white supremacists, communists, neo.
The causes of terrorism have been under much debate. There is evidence for and against every reason on this list however, more often than not, it is a combination of several that lead to terrorism.
Below are the most common causes cited by leaders in the counterterrorism field. Check out the online debate Terrorism.
Piers Stefan Pughe-Morgan, known professionally as Piers Morgan, is a British journalist and television host .Download