The Definition of Terrorism

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Terrorism may be defined differently, depending on how a person is affected. While one may be defined as a terrorist for injustices he causes in the affected country, those who share similar causes consider him as a freedom fighter (Jewish virtual library, 2010).

The FBI characterizes terrorism as an unlawful use of force against people with the aim of intimidation typically to attain social or political ends. The definition from the VP’s task force and individual scholars concurs with that of the FBI, further explaining that terrorism targets to change the victim’s behavior.

Most of the definitions revolve around influencing political and social change through the creation of fear by intimidation (Whitaker, 2001). The American focus, however, does not mention spreading fear as terrorism. I find their meaning to be most appropriate as terrorists at times mark buildings. I would thus define terrorism as a systematic violent attack on unarmed civilians in order to achieve social-political awareness.

Terrorists conjure different explanations, usually religious or political to justify their actions. Scholars and the general public would not immediately see the morals that some terrorists integrate with their actions. This action may be launched with the purpose of defending oneself from peripheral attack, or protect an innocent public from domineering regimes.

Lack of diplomatic channels of information may resort to acts of terrorism in order to reach a message across. For example, America may be attacked by a country which feels that they should remove armed forces from their country (Kapitan, 2007).

Intimidation behavior is not a personality disorder; rather it is acquired through social observances and teachings (Matthews, Ryan & Vanderlick, ND). The mindset of one influences the acts of terrorism, but it is exaggerated when gathering dynamics links causes with companions. Such organizations have their own beliefs, thus the religious following. Conventional endorsements that one had against hostility are thus offset (Ulusoy, 2008).

The aim of terrorism is to intimidate a wider audience. This commitment is best amplified through the recruitment of new members. The organizational structure enables us to interpret the patterns of enrollment and why terrorist guarantee adherence to their groups. The strategic design discusses terrorists as rational actors who attack victims to achieve political objectives. The project that maximizes the most output is chosen among the present valuable options.

Groups with tens of thousands of members are much harder to beat than smaller groups. The size of these groups usually proves a challenge for eradication (Libicki & Jones, 2008). Bigger assemblages also tend to last longer than lesser groups.

Police can exploit these structural impediments through, for example, freezing their funds and financial assets. All fear gangs often stop, either after they join mainstream political organizations or after the demise of their leaders (Libicki & Jones, 2008). There are active supporters of such groups who provide sanctuary to terrorists. These individuals are usually on the ground and as such can give information about intelligence operations to their friends. Breaking down this line of data is vital (Hamilton, 2007).

Destroying a terror group involves a lot of policy instruments including intelligent military service, opinionated consultations, and budget authorizations. Terrorism activities are often carried out by one or two individuals. Police thus face small numbers of people who create exceptionally large impacts. The body in most cases commits suicide in the process and thus able agencies cannot get leads to the larger group or its leaders.

Terrorism continues to grow in unusual dimensions. Laymen will percept it to be instillation of fear through violent attacks, but its transformation to become an instrument of strategy for antagonists to determine the societal and opinionated surrounding is becoming apparent. At the world stage, they are developing new sources of funding and developing new capabilities.

Huntington’s theory proposed that religious and cultural interests would be the source of conflict in the present society. Future variances would arise when civilizations clash (Graham, 2004). He also says that the idea of having a common culture is a western idea, typified by the promotion of human rights, which is not common in other societies. Thomas view echoes these sentiments relating the rate of change and conflicting interests to terrorism.

The purpose of eliminating terrorism is not to destroy the offenders, but to protect the innocent civilians. This can be achieved if such offenders are organized groups which can be dealt with summarily.

However, law enforcers line a formidable challenge when the acts of terror are based on religious beliefs, for example, the al Qaeda. This usually means that the terror group has a following and their actions are supported by a majority of people. Eliminating such parties would therefore not mean the end of terrorism (Bodurian & Nelson, 2010).

The council has invested human, financial and diplomatic efforts in their programs aimed to defeat terrorism. Foreign policy has not been effectual in convincing such organizations to resort to dialogue. The policies must thus be rethought and focus more in combating the faith and beliefs as a whole, rather than fighting individual groups.
5

Anarchism is a political philosophy considering the administration to be unsightly or even detrimental. It does not support power in the demeanor of a human being association. Socialism discusses common ownership and concern in finances and politics (Zimand, 2008).

Anarchism movement has influenced the present society in opposing all hierarchies of power, and being committed to following ones beliefs. Such people so tend to be hostile to authority and to capitalism in general (Epstein, 2001). Socialism attracted many individuals due to both its devout and radical nature. Bakunin, Marx, and Lenin were some of this activist who shaped the definitions of terrorism.

I think modern America should not pursue such activists; instead, it should strive to create cultural and educational equity so that acts of terror associated to religious beliefs can be eliminated. Such fomenters influence the opinion of listeners. Without ethnic or religious barriers, and the promotion of a democratic administration, equality will undoubtedly stop the dissemination of such ideologies.

References

Bodurian, B. & Nelson, R. (2010). A growing terrorist threat? Assessing “homegrown”. Extremism in the United States. A Report of the CSIS Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Program. CSIS. Web.

Epstein, B. (2001). Anarchism and the Anti-Globalization Movement. Volume 53, Number 4. Monthly Review. Web.

Graham, J. (2004). Samuel P. Huntington’s clash of civilizations. HistoryOrb. Web.

Hamilton, L. (2007). Terrorist organizational model. A military guide to terrorism in the Twenty-First century. Web.

Jewish Virtual Library (2010). Definitions of terrorism. The American-Israel cooperative enterprise. Web.

Kapitan, T. (2007). Can terrorism be justified? Web.

Libicki, M. & Jones, S. (2008). How terrorist groups end. Lessons for countering al Qa’ida. RAND Corporation. Web.

Ulosoy, D. (2008). Political violence, organized crimes, terrorism and youth, volume 46. Amsterdam: IOS press.

Whitaker, B. (2001). The definition of terrorism. Guardian. World news. Web.

Zimand, S. (2008). Modern social movements: descriptive summaries and bibliographies. South Carolina: BiblioBazaar, LLC.

Click Here To Order Now!

The Definition of Terrorism

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)