The United States, like any large nation, experiences its fair share of domestic terrorism. Domestic terrorism comes in two forms, within the United States, secular terrorism and religious terrorism. The broader category of terrorism, of which secular and religious terrorism fall under, is defined as a violent act committed against defenseless civilians in order to incite change. The distinctive difference between secular and religious terrorism is the motivation to commit the act. Secular terrorist are motivated by ideology, that is separate from religion, and Religious terrorist are motivated by an interpretation of their religion. Because of these terrorist acts the United States is forced to take action, in order to prevent terrorist acts,
Terrorism
The United States has unfortunately been affected with random acts of violence. These violent actions are intended to frighten people in achieving a political and religious goal. This is known as terrorism and is a problem that the United States has been dealing with for a long period of time. Because of these terrorist attacks, the United States has had to make changes to better protect its people and the country as a whole.
Combating terrorism is not only a battle of the swords but also a battle of brains. Thus, the response to terrorism must be a combination of both direct military responses (hard power) to terrorism and indirect responses (soft power) to terrorism. Both policies must be carefully intertwined and must work in tandem with each other in order to avoid contradictions between policy and action. Military responses will sow the seeds for soft power to be effective “Soft power strategies have utility but they are ineffective absent hard power” (Rubin 235). If the military threat is credible then it usually enough to coerce and change terrorist behavior. This lays the ground for effective non-military strategies such as public diplomacy and denial strategies that may shape public opinion by delegitimizing terrorists and prevent them from attacking in the first place.
After September 11, 2001, terrorism took center stage in the debate among security studies, international relations, and foreign policy specialists over a grand strategy for the US in the post-cold war era. The characteristics of international terrorism emphasize the fact that counterterrorism will require strenuous efforts. In contrast to warfare and public order problems, governments engaged in the battle against terrorism have to deal with opponents who do not observe any rule or convention. Terrorists wage an asymmetrical war. They do not attack state organizations but society and particularly innocent citizens. Contrary to groups that put public order to the test, they avoid confrontation with the national institutions responsible for maintaining law and order. The United States of America is committed to emerging victorious in the war against terrorism. This commitment has been demonstrated through funding, the federal government has dedicated a lot of money to fighting terrorism; this money has been channeled through the Department of Homeland Security to advance the war against terrorism (Memon, 2009).
Following the 9/11 disaster, the issue of government surveillance has sparked a controversial debate. Today, technology has allowed certain government run programs to monitor peoples lives. Whether it’s through phone tapping, street cameras or even twitter statuses, the government can “watch over” it’s citizens to remove potential threats. However, over the years there have constantly been opposers to this infringement of personal privacy and whether it should be restricted or completely disbanded. Party opinions on this matter have flip-flopped between George W. Bush’s presidency and Barrack Obama’s. As a republican president, Bush had ordered the National Security Agency to secretly eavesdrop on Americans in an effort to find the sources of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This seemed to be a huge problem for many people as the program was first completely secret and furthermore did not require court-approved warrants. This program last about 3 years. Many Democratic politicians during the time accused the White House of passing down to much power to the N.S.A, allowing them to break domestic and international laws. They even received the nickname “No Such Agency,” becoming one of the worl...
Last year was a watershed in terrorist attacks and plots in the United States, with a record total of 11 jihadist attacks, jihadist-inspired plots, or efforts by Americans to travel overseas to obtain terrorist training. They included two actual attacks (at Fort Hood, Texas, which claimed the lives of 13 people, and the shooting of two U.S. military recruiters in Little Rock, Arkansas), five serious but disrupted plots, and four incidents involving groups of Americans conspiring to travel abroad to receive terrorist training (Bergen & Hoffman, 2010).
In 2001, just weeks after the 9/11 attacks on the United States, the Bush administration signed the USA/Patriot Act that revised the U.S. surveillance laws. It significantly expanded the government’s power on spying on its own people. The Act is implemented through the nation’s security system, the National Security Agency (NSA), to protect the U.S. citizens from further terrorist attacks. For the past recent years however, the NSA has been heavily criticized by the public after Edward Snowden, a former CIA employee, leaked the information of the NSA program in 2013. After this event, many people have been arguing whether the government through the National Security Agency have crossed the limit on the people’s liberty and privacy. In light
...e question, does surveillance actually work at preventing acts of terror or other events that would merit the suspension of some aspects of privacy. Due to the recent fallout concerning the American whistleblower Edward Snowden the NSA was under fire for what many deemed to be invasive data collection. In a statement Army General Keith Alexander, the current Chief of the NSA, said that these programs helped to foil over 50 terrorist plots. However, it is difficult to determine exactly how effective these policies are, as the nature of state security doesn’t allow for the disclosures of such information. This is a point that I will admittedly neglect, as my argument is not that the current implementation of privacy reducing security-enhancing programs is both ethical and effective, but rather when making a choice between the two one is compelled to choose security.
America has become the central targets for terrorism more often than those of any other country. As long as America is a strong power in the global community, the threat of attacks creating massive casualties will continually grow. In order for the United States to protect itself, this nation must develop and continuously refine counterterrorism policies.
Let me just start by saying that terrorism is a very bad thing, always has been and always will be. So what is terrorism you might ask, well I am going to tell you. Terrorism is an act of using violence or threats of violence in order to purport a political, religious, or ideological change, it might affect just one person or it might affect thousands of people. There are multiple types of terrorism one of them is state terrorism which means that it is the government that performs the terrorism, it is commonly used by dictators to control his/her subjects, then we have religious terrorism, which is the most well-known and most common type of terrorism, the reason for that is because of the media. The media is huge news outlet and they choose what news they want to show, mostly it is the news that the people are interested in, not necessarily the ones that are most significant. Let us take the American news, for instance, the Ferguson protest which turned very violent was overshadowed by the Ebola virus and ISIS coverage.