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.
In this case, another category should be defined where the act was intentional, and the long-term eventual outcome was to commit an act of war against the United States, but this effect was not a direct threat to national security. In this case these acts would still be classified as crimes.
In order to be classified as an act of terror, there must be an indication of purpose. The purpose must be a direct threat to national security; for example, flying planes into a building would be an act with a purpose to threat national security. Obtaining passports for those intending on flying planes into a building would also be considered to be an act of terror, because this act has a purpose, and is a direct contributor to the compromise of national security. However, committing forgery on papers to enter the United States would not be considered an act of terrorism, even if eventually that person would become involved in some type of plan to attack the United States. The rationale here would be that if the plan was already in motion, planned with others, or even in outline form, then this would...
If the person was forging paperwork to enter the United States illegally and had no current plan of attack but associated with those who did, then this should be considered a crime, not an act of war.
Conclusion
Thus, one can examine the actions taken by the United States against those that commit violent acts against the Untied States. It appears that in some cases, these acts are considered crimes and in other cases, they are considered to be acts of war. A review of the relevant cases indicates that modern terrorism consists of a combination of the two. The roles of each branch of government have changed the definitions as the study of these acts has evolved, but the existing legal categories do not properly address how to react to these incidents. Therefore, new categories that used the factor of intent and purpose to more fully define the categories would implement some order and consistency to the manner in which the judicial, executive and legislative branches treat acts of terror as either crimes or acts of war.…
S. interests. What is different is that we have names and faces to go with that warning."3 This emphasis on recognizing the adaptability 3 Dennis C. Blair, Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, (U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, 2010). of the terrorist is central to the government's overall response, in terms of both planning and execution, as evidenced by findings presented in the
Terrorism Influences Terrorism has no specific definition and its definition largely depends upon the viewpoint of an individual for example Samuel Adams (a well-known revolutionary fireband) or Thomas Gefferson would have been terrorist from British perspective but they have been Great heroes from American perspective. Take the case of George Washington who was previously fighting with British army against French and was loyalist of British crown but later on he sought
Terrorism refers to threats, violence, bombings, etc. Terrorism is known to have a long history, but even today, the reason behind this terror by the super powers and the government remains explicit. The acts of terror are very common these days and could be found in current political and social environment. A part of terror is still confused when it is applied in the actual present world (Robb, 2007). Where the
Rational choices are limited in this setting, and may merely consist of making the best of the worst available alternatives. The American public is becoming increasingly frustrated with national policymakers who seem to be firing global broadsides but are not able to hit anything. In fact, Butler even questions whether the war on terrorism is a struggle against Osama bin Laden, his Al Qaeda network, and a few similarly minded
Terrorism Final Examination Questions #1, #3, & #5 Bjorgo discusses levels of causation in the introduction of his book. These include structural causes, facilitator (or accelerator) causes, triggering causes, and motivational causes. At a macro level, how does each of these contribute to terrorism? In other words, concentrate on each of these types of causal factors at a general level (e.g. all kinds of structural causes), instead of focusing on individual causes
As any crime, an act of terrorism can happen at any time and anywhere without anyone suspecting it. In spite of being unable to stop all terrorist acts from happening, the fight against terrorism has surely contributed to diminishing it. After the 9/11 attack in the U.S., terrorism has been taken to a whole new level, as, the whole world has been traumatized. Most people regard terrorism as one of