Argumentative Analysis

602 Words2 Pages

In discussions of whether America is winning the war on terrorism, on controversial issue has been if the United States have been winning the war on terror. On the one hand, James Fallows argues The United States Is Winning The War On Terrorism. On the other hand, Seth Jones contends that Al Qaeda Has Not Been Defeated. My view on the subject is I believe that The United States is Winning the battle in some places and maybe winning the battle on Al Qaeda, but I believe that there will still be acts of terrorism around the world.
One point is, Seth Jones argues that Al Qaeda has not been defeated. Seth Jones explains how since September 11, 2001 the number of affiliated groups has expanded, and a decade before this there was no organizations like this that existed. Al Qaeda is growing in its alliances with Arab organizations such as, Pakistani Taliban, Pakistan’s …show more content…

He believes that the real danger is overreaction. When the media blows everything up it puts a big fear on American lives. “It is not the people al-Qaeda might kill that is the threat,” concludes David Kilcullen. According to David Kilcullen, “Our reaction is what can cause the damage (Kilcullen). It’s al-Qaeda plus our response that creates the existential danger” (Kilcullen). He is stating that the real danger isn’t terrorist attacks against us. He is stating that the real danger is our media blowing it up and us going to war that doesn’t have to happen. I think that James Fallows is mistaken because he overlooks the alliances that are being created between al-Qaeda and Arab organizations. We are losing American lives over terrorist takes made against us and he states that we are bringing it out of proportion. I believe that no American should lose their lives for terrorist actions made against us. We have hampered al-Qaeda and might possibly take them out, but I still believe that there will be more organizations popping

Open Document