Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Terrorist Organizations
What sort of policies could the U.S. implement to prevent terrorist cells from forming in Africa? Do you believe that the U.S. should intervene, or should the problems of Africa be eliminated from within the individual countries? Why?
This is a thorny question, because U.S. intervention can often backfire, making other countries resent us for being "bullies" or for meddling in their affairs. However, we know that many of these African organizations receive at least some funding and support from groups like Al Qaeda, so we need to do something to monitor them or intervene if they become too dangerous. It would be nice to leave the intervention to the individual countries, but many of them are so corrupt or underfunded that they have little recourse on their own, and they need help from someone stronger and more powerful if they want to eliminate these groups from their area.
In some cases, when there is no other alternative, the U.S. should...
However, if they can provide funding to the country's government, and it is not corrupt, the country should manage the project on their own. The fiasco in Somalia that the film "Black Hawk Down" portrayed is a good example of why intervention often does not work, and why the people themselves need to take on these extremist organizations and eliminate them on their own. That being said, if the organization poses a threat to our people on foreign soil or here at home, then it is our duty to keep our citizens safe, by just about any means possible. If that include intervention, especially if there is intelligence that the group is getting ready to attack, then it is justified, and keeping these organizations under control and eliminating them is simply an act of public safety in these cases. It would be impossible to intervene with each and every extremist organization, however, and that is another problem with this issue.
2. Using…
Weapons of mass destruction are just an excuse. But is known that "President George W Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney were both oil company executives before entering politics, as was half the present US administration," which means that not only do you have friends in the oil business but that they dictate your policy (Vesely 2002). Having such deceptive and underhanded policies and engaging an entire nation in a war that not only kills Amerians,
" Drug trafficking began to finance and impact the politics in Colombia during the time to an unprecedented degree. (Schmid, 2005) as a way to stifle their political adversaries' revenue stream and fight against them, the FARC began trafficking drugs as well. Researchers see the increase of laboratories in the country as evidence to the link between FARC and drug trafficking. The FARC claims publically to not be involved in
American Terrorist Threat Since the events of September 11. 2001. Americans have had an increased concern about the possibility of more terrorism within United States borders. Although our government has made monumental efforts to prevent future attacks. A terrorist only has to slip through once. whereas our vigilance has to be 100% successful at all times. Because of that fact it seems inevitable that eventually. we will see more terrorist attacks
The Al-Aqsa Intifadah (which began, I believe, in about 2000 when the Camp David talks were then stalling) was begun by PLO and still exists today (much less actively than from about 2000 to about 2004, roughly) under the PLO umbrella. 3) Democratic nations including Great Britain and the United States have long called for democratic elections in Palestine. Now that Hamas was the unexpected winner of the first elections,
Targeting Innocents There are numerous reasons as to why terrorists deliberately target those who are considered innocent people, such as civilians and non-combatants. One can argue that the very definition of a terrorist organization is one which challenges "the peace of mind of everyday people" (Augustus & Martin, 2010), which is done effectively by targeting them. In many instances, terrorist organizations lack the resources to scale a full-fledged military assault
Following from this is the assumption that ideological connections may be the precursor to more definite and practical interactions between these groups and organizations. In other words, terrorist groups, whether representing different nationalistic and ideological persuasions, can also be linked by shared concerns, objectives and perceptions. The increase in the ease of communications and the Internet has also accelerated the possibly of these connections. This has highlighted the threat of