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.
For instance, acceptance of physical defeat will render the opponent victorious but with mild understanding of the ideological approaches taken. Moreover, the U.S. should capitalize on stating its ideology stand grounds so that any attack based on it will reserve retaliation. This will help the nation to be always upfront in cases of physical war (Wing, 2007).
Q2
The battle of ideas is more valuable than military and law enforcement aspects. The battle of ideas is a more critical aspect of war than any other battle. Differences in ideas have often been the reason behind any war, attacks, and plans for war in any nation all over the world. This means that ideological satisfaction among the raging groups will result in calm, and avoidance of any other war be it physical or of any other form. The war between the U.S. And Islamic terrorists culminated due to ideological differences in terms of religion and lifestyle of governments. If there were no ideological differences, there would be no physical war. Any other law enforcement aspects have...
As such, if the U.S. will manage to establish a base of understanding succinctly between its nation and the opponents, then rivalries will cease. When the U.S. wins the battle of ideas, the other groups resort to physical war, which are physically dangerous but do not change on the stance of ideological differences. In such a case, ideological satisfaction is fundamental in ending or culminating any war: this makes the battle of ideas be of considerable importance as the U.S. fights with its immediate enemies like the Al Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist groups (Satloff, 2004).
References
Satloff, R.B. (2004). The battle of ideas in the war on terror: Essays on U.S. public diplomacy in the Middle East. Washington: Wash Inst near East Policy
Wing K.C. (2007). Defeating the Logic of Islamist Terrorism. USAWC Strategy Research
Project
Prevent Another 911 What to Do to Prevent Another 9/11 and How to Fight the War on Terror On September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda caught many Americans off guard. With the exception of a few intelligence officers and politicians who had access to classified information, no one imagined that a foreign terrorist organization could attack the United States with such a precise and deadly strike. The attack left around 3,000 Americans dead,
Defeating Islamic Terrorism According to Chan (2007), in his article "Defeating Islamic terrorism," to win the war against terror, the U.S. must wage a battle for the hearts and minds of people living in the Muslim world, not simply fight the battle on the level of a military conflict. A largely negative perception of the U.S. In the Middle East has stoked the fires of radicalism and without counterbalancing that mindset
Mill, Kant, And Torture An Analysis of the Utilitarian and Kantian Arguments for and against Torture Alan Dershowitz expresses moral approval (with reservations) in his essay "Should the Ticking Time Bomb Terrorist be Tortured?" Dershowitz's argument is essentially that of a Utilitarian. But it also contains elements of Kantianism. While a Kantian, however, could argue against the moral correctness of torture, Dershowitz steers the argument away from a Kantian perusal of the
In short, everything depends upon perception. Clearly, some forms of calamity are worse than others. And there is no denying that harm is perceived, especially immediately following bad news. However, one does have control over one's reactions to these events, which I think is what Socrates' idea of "good" should mean to us today. Socrates is able to see the good in everything that happens to him, because, in his
In your explanation, compare and contrast domestic and international terrorism. Also, please indicate whether either type of terrorism is subject to defeat. or, in a free society such as ours, must we simply learn to live with the annoyance and tragedies of ideological, political, and/or religiously-motivated violence?) Domestic terrorism is much more statistically common than foreign terrorism, as those who feel they have cause to be angry enough to act
To wit, in Socrates' day, there were no official government prosecutors (commonly referred to in modern America as "District Attorneys"); in effect, any citizen could bring an indictment against any other citizen, and call for a trial. And that's basically what happened to Socrates. Here in America, in 2006, notwithstanding what Vice President Cheney said, President George W. Bush stated, "I will never question the patriotism of somebody who disagrees