Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Short note on terrorism
Terrorism in the past and present
Essay on history of terrorism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Short note on terrorism
Terrorism has nothing to do with a certain race or a religion. It has to do with issuing fear into people’s lives and turning them upside. Terrorists are just evil humans who want to try and get people to do what they want. Terrorism is the use of violence and intimidation to get people’s attention for political reasons. It’s something that happens a lot, one of the most talked about acts of Terrorism was 9/11, where the Twin Towers fell because of the act of violence. It’s a big act of Terrorism that will forever change the way we view life. The 9/11 attacks have been called evil, but it has been compared to the Holocaust. People have argued that it’s not as great of an evil because it didn’t result in as much death. I disagree, that even though it didn’t have as many deaths it is still a great evil. You can’t compare two different events, based on the fact that there wasn’t as many deaths in the 9/11 attacks as in the Holocaust. An …show more content…
The answer is no, there is never a circumstance in which the act of violence on an innocent bystander is justifiable. To those of us that hear about terrorist attacks, we are shocked each and every time. The purpose of having these attacks was to have death and destruction. When one person or group performs a terrorist act, whether or not they are doing it for religious or political reasons everyone in that same group is accused. I don’t think that it is fair to blame everyone for one person’s actions. I can’t say that I remember 9/11, because I don’t but I do remember wondering why someone would do that. Do terrorist have any morals or are they just evil doers. Morally, I believe that violence isn’t the way to solve any problem so why do people who murder and terrorize people do it. Acts of terror are always evil. Terrorism has been an issue throughout history. Even though we have always been aware of the destruction of terrorism, we still have it
In the article “Is Terrorism Distinctively Wrong?”, Lionel K. McPherson criticizes the dominant view that terrorism is absolutely and unconditionally wrong. He argues terrorism is not distinctively wrong compared to conventional war. However, I claim that terrorism is necessarily wrong.
We cannot save lives without risking lives. The number of terror attacks today shows that the number of people slaughtered worldwide has risen by eight-percent in one year (that is a total of 32,658 people killed in 2014 around the world). Terrorism remains highly concentrated in five countries, with Iraq, Afghanistan, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Syria.
When we think of terrorist, we might think of radical Islamic individuals or groups who would take pride in killing anyone who is not Muslim. Even more, there are antagonistically people who want nothing more but to destroy the lives of innocence people because of their belief system. Take an individual like Theodore Kaczynski for instance; he was a former University of California at Berkeley math professor. Otherwise known as the “Unabomber,” he was indeed a terrorist because he used explosives that killed three people and wounded eighteen others in a span of almost two decades. Even more, his brother David Kaczynski was responsible for his capture.
Every time a terrorist attack happens the media jumps all over it, and puts their own twist on what had happened. “Thus, the media has a strong potential to influence how the public thinks about social problems like terrorism, especially because most people only experience terrorism through mass-media accounts...This research also finds that media portrayals of terrorism increase anxiety among the viewing public.” (Chermak, 2006) The media is one of the leading causes of stereotypes, and what influences our beliefs today. When you think of a terrorist, you may think of either a middle aged muslim male or a middle aged white male with some sort of mental or social disorder. This isn 't always the case. A terrorist can be of any race, age, and social class. Due to the media 's influence, we all believe in the same stereotypes and imagine the same description of what a terrorist may look like. This is one of the main reasons behind racial profiling.
In today’s society the word “terrorism” has gone global. We see this term on television, in magazines and even from other people speaking of it. In their essay “Controlling Irrational Fears After 9/11”, published in 2002, Clark R. Chapman and Alan W. Harris argue that the reaction of the American officials, people and the media after the attacks of 9/11 was completely irrational due to the simple fact of fear. Chapman and Harris jump right into dismembering the irrational argument, often experienced with relationships and our personal analysis. They express how this argument came about from the terrorist being able to succeed in “achieving one major goal, which was spreading fear” among the American people (Chapman & Harris, para.1). The supporters of the irrational reaction argument state that because “Americans unwittingly cooperated with the terrorist in achieving the major goal”, the result was a widespread of disrupted lives of the Americans and if this reaction had been more rational then there would have been “less disruption in the lives of our citizens” (Chapman & Harris, para. 1).
Hijacked planes were purposely flown into the twin towers in New York and killed about 3,000 innocent people. This was one of the most disastrous incident to ever occur during the era. After the release of who caused the attack, lots of people from the Islamic culture were the center of attention right after the event. They were falsely accused of being called terrorists without little to any evidence. It was mainly because of their appearance and beliefs. It was more like racism and stereotypes towards them. Society has painted them to be these terrorists because they were feared and immediately got the wrong idea when they approach them. The day the terrorist attack happened, it sparked a new beginning for their culture. They not only felt scared when they were around them, but they felt like they were going to become a part of a violent attack that they’re going to cause without them acknowledging it. It can be disrespectful and rude to assume they’re terrorist but they didn’t care. It was “[society] [who] feared what [they] don't understand. In a frenzied state of irrational behavior [they] will point fingers and name names and accuse the innocent because [they] are afraid” (Garcia). Society was terrified for their lives. They made them feel unwelcomed and unwanted. The fear exponentially rose and became a problem when they wanted to fly to a destination. Lots of “Americans became paranoid
We are all human beings and deserve to be treated fairly and with kindness unless we have displayed a reason to do otherwise. We as a nation cannot live in fear because a group of horrible individuals completed a devastating act. These acts may have shaken us as a nation but it should not break us completely and cause us to treat innocent people unfairly and without respect.
The war of September 11, 2001, is war justified? In the case of self-defense, it can be. This was not an act of war, but of terrorism. There were no massed armies at United States doors open ready to take over. The plane bombing of three buildings resulted in many deaths and much monitory hardship. This is not a border confrontation, nor an invasion trying to take over. The body of United States was not in threat of losing life or limb. It was just hit with a well planned attack to wake it up and make it smell the coffee. The resulting bombs and missile attacks in Afghanistan are not justified at all, as people there are dying too. The people dying were not threatening United States with guns drawn. There are a handful of people who are responsible for the attack on United States. It would be warranted to kill those people, if they were actively ca...
Do the actions ever justify the end result? The Reign of Terror, the revolution lead by Maximilien Robespierre, began on January 21, 1793 when King Louis XVI and his wife were guillotined due to the way they had led the government into a financial crisis and as a result when Robespierre took over with his radical new government 20,000-40,000 people were brutally executed. So was this radical period in France really necessary or was it just mass killings with little progress. The Reign of terror was not justified because of the threats against the revolution, the methods used by the revolution were not justified, and the ideals of the revolution were not justified.
Over the past century, terrorism has advanced from random killings to enormous plans for terrorist groups. To understand terrorism, you must first define it. Terrorism as we all know it is hard to define and understand, and has many different definitions as it is used widely. The word "terrorism" stems from the word "terror", which means to instill fear in. People become terrorists when they take the actions towards instilling fear and terror upon people to prove a certain point or agenda.
There a small but clear differences between domestic terrorism and international terrorism, that difference is where the terrorist act is planned, supported, and carried out. In the case of domestic terrorism, the act must be planned, supported, and carried out all within the boundaries of the United States. The domestic terrorists must also be domicile to the United States and not be current foreign nationals at the time of the act. If the terrorist act is committed with help from a foreign group, planned or supported in a foreign country or committed by foreign nationals inside the boundaries of the U.S., then the attack may be international terrorism. The 9/11 attack was a clear act of international terrorism as it was planned, supported,
First to determine if terrorism is in fact right or wrong we must understand what it is. Although there is not a universal definition to describe terrorism I relate closely to Walzers definition which is: “a random murder of innocent people, intended to frighten a population into demanding that their governments negotiate for their safety.” In Walzer’s article “Terrorism” (Cahn, 239) he lists the purpose and methods of terrorism as to “destroy the moral of a nation or a class, to undercut its solidarity; its method is the random murder of innocent people.” Innocent people or noncombatants, as people call them, are described as normal working civilians who do not play a role in the government or have any control of what is happening politically. These innocent people are the ones who are targeted with no regards to political affiliation, the only thing that makes them the target is simply belonging to a certain group. To offer an example in 911 innocent people were killed and were chosen only because they worked in the World Trade Center, they were not chosen for anything they had done politically. Wal...
A lot of people believe that Muslims, Islam, and/or the Holy Quran encourages killing, fighting, and terrorism. Events such as the 9/11 attack in the United States, the Boston Marathon Bombing, and conflicts in the Middle East causes the media to label Muslims as terrorists. When a specific group of people cause violence to another group it is categorized as ‘hate crime’, but if a Muslim does the same act, the media immediately labels it as ‘terrorism’ (Frater, 2009). As a matter of fact, regarding to the attacks of the mosques in Israel, the media did not use the acts to victimize or stereotype Judaism. Moreover, some extremist groups use Islam as a tactic to gain followers even though a lot of their practices go against the teachings of the Quran. A person would not be considered a Muslim if they spread fear or terrorize others. The Quran clearly states, “You shall not take life, which God has made sacred, except by way of justice and law.” (Quran, 6:151). Islam is against any force or violence towards another person. Often the word ‘Jihad’ is taken out of context by violent militants; it means to strive or struggle for the sake of ones’ self improvement with respect to their spirituality. Religious and political groups use Jihad to justify ...
As the theoretical consideration I mention above, my hypothesis would be that people’s economic condition (poverty) has no direct relationship with people’s participation and support for terrorism. As I mention above, people cannot determine the exact role poverty plays in determining terrorism. For example, educational level can work as a cofounding variable between poverty and terrorism since low educational level can both cause poverty and terrorism according to some studies. Also it is very hard for us to determine the position of political variables. For example, political repression and instability can both cause poverty and terrorism. As political instability increases, poverty and terrorism both increase. Under this circumstance,
Pakistan is the basis in the international fight against terrorism to this day. Many Pakistani terrorist groups have made many terrorist attacks around the world. Pakistan faced the choice siding with or staying against the United States during the aftermath of 9/11. Violence in Pakistan has increased for many years as terrorist groups have targeted many political leaders, tribal leaders, the military, and also schools. Pakistan is divided into people who see the country as modern and/o...