Is the U.S. More Secure After September 11, 2001?
This paper argues that the United States is more secure following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks than it was before them. Drawing on peer-reviewed sources from Middle East Quarterly and The Washington Quarterly, the paper examines several dimensions of post-9/11 security improvements: enhanced domestic security measures, the creation of new intelligence-coordinating agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the killing of Osama bin Laden, and the Obama administration's use of drone strikes against al-Qaeda leadership in Pakistan, Yemen, and Sudan. The paper acknowledges ongoing controversies, including civilian casualties from drone strikes and the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, while maintaining that offensive counterterrorism efforts have made America meaningfully safer.
- Introduction: The Question of Post-9/11 Security: Thesis: U.S. is more secure after 9/11
- Domestic Security Reforms After 9/11: Physical security measures and public screening changes
- Intelligence Coordination and Communication Improvements: New agencies improve inter-agency intelligence sharing
- Offensive Counterterrorism: Hunting Terrorists Abroad: U.S. targets terrorist networks and funding globally
- Example 1: The Killing of Osama bin Laden: Navy SEAL raid eliminates al-Qaeda's iconic leader
- Example 2: Drone Strikes Against al-Qaeda Leadership: Drone campaigns neutralize key al-Qaeda figures abroad
- Conclusion: Offensive strategy has made America measurably safer
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper states a clear, debatable thesis in its opening sentences, immediately orienting the reader to the argument that the U.S. is more secure after 9/11.
- It uses a mix of peer-reviewed academic sources and contemporary news reporting to support both policy-level claims and specific real-world examples.
- The paper anticipates counterarguments — such as civilian drone casualties and the Boston Marathon bombing — and addresses them without abandoning its central position, demonstrating balanced reasoning.
Key academic technique demonstrated
This paper effectively uses specific, labeled examples ("Example #1," "Example #2") to anchor abstract policy arguments in concrete events. This technique helps readers follow the logical progression from general claims about security improvements to particular evidence supporting those claims, a useful structure for persuasive academic writing at the undergraduate level.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a direct thesis statement, then moves through three layers of evidence: domestic security reforms, intelligence agency restructuring, and offensive counterterrorism operations abroad. Two dedicated example sections — bin Laden's killing and drone strikes in Yemen — provide focused case studies. The conclusion synthesizes these threads and restates the thesis while acknowledging its limitations. A Works Cited list in MLA format closes the paper.
Introduction: The Question of Post-9/11 Security
Is the United States more secure or less secure following the attacks of September 11, 2001? The position of this paper is that the U.S. is in fact more secure. Even after the bombing at the Boston Marathon in April 2013 — an example of a domestic terrorist event — it can be said that America is more secure than it was prior to the attacks of September 11, 2001.
Domestic Security Reforms After 9/11
There have been significant changes made across a number of aspects of life in the United States. A peer-reviewed article in the journal Middle East Quarterly points to several changes that are clearly intended to make the country more secure. The main government buildings in the nation's capital are now surrounded by concrete security barriers, and Pennsylvania Avenue — the street in front of the White House — is now closed to traffic (Zakheim, 2011). Airline passengers willingly remove their shoes, belts, and jewelry, and they fully expect that their bags will be searched for possible explosive devices or weapons.
These security checks on Americans are part of everyday life, and according to Zakheim, Americans take these routine security checks "in stride" (p. 1). Football fans attending NFL games are searched for potential weapons as they enter stadiums, and the same scrutiny is applied in other sports venues.
Intelligence Coordination and Communication Improvements
In addition, the U.S. government created the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to help coordinate activities and information sharing between the military, the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA, with the goal of preventing breakdowns in communication. It is well known that if the FBI agent in Minnesota had communicated to authorities in Washington that a wealthy Muslim man was taking flying lessons but did not want to learn how to land, perhaps the tragic terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, could have been prevented.
Offensive Counterterrorism: Hunting Terrorists Abroad
According to the peer-reviewed journal The Washington Quarterly, the U.S. has "relentlessly hunted terrorists around the world" (Boyd et al., 2009). The U.S. has also managed to destroy terrorist training facilities and has interfered with funding sources for al-Qaeda. Alongside those strategies, President Barack Obama used high-tech drones to kill suspected al-Qaeda leaders.
Conclusion
While some of the tactics used by the U.S. government are controversial, the fact is that by going on the offensive against terrorists where they train and plan their attacks, the U.S. is more secure. Rather than simply preparing to ward off attacks on home soil, the Obama administration focused on eliminating terrorists in the Middle East before they could carry out attacks against American citizens. Additionally, while the increased domestic security efforts did not stop the Boston Marathon bombing, terrorist plots against Americans within the United States have, in most cases, been successfully foiled.
Works Cited
Boyd, Dallas, Lewis A. Dunn, and James Scouras. "Why Has the United States Not Been Attacked Again?" The Washington Quarterly, vol. 32, no. 3, 2009, pp. 3–19.
CBS News. "Yemen: U.S. Drone Strikes Kill 5 al-Qaeda Members." Retrieved May 19, 2013, from http://www.cbsnews.com.
Zakheim, Dov S. "What 9/11 Has Wrought." Middle East Quarterly, vol. 18, no. 4, 2011, pp. 3–13.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.