289). Coady (cited in Halwani, 2006) points out that lack of a good definition makes it difficult, if not impossible, to address the moral implications of terrorism. Coady defines terrorism as "the organized use of violence to attack noncombatants ('innocents' in a special sense) or their property for political purposes" (p. 290). This definition focuses on the targets, innocent "noncombatants" and does not consider the goals the terrorists aim to achieve. It does specify for "political purposes" rather than criminal, and does not mention causing fear. There exists some disagreement on whether threats, for example, as opposed to real acts, constitute terrorism. If the goal of inducing fear is part of the definition, then threats would be included, but if terrorist goals are limited to "political purposes," then threats would not qualify as terrorist acts. Coady (cited in Halwani, 2006) points out that some "acts of political violence may be very wrong even when they are not terrorist" (p. 291). This would seem to correct the everyday assumption that all terrorist activity is the worst...
In some rare cases, perhaps terrorism can be justified -- when the Jews drove the Syrians out of Jerusalem, for example, but Fotion (cited in Halwani, 2006) believes terrorists treat the human beings involved as objects, failing to see any humanity in them and thus failing to value human life. Perhaps the question for justification should be whether losing the innocent victims (and how many) results in a greater good. One would also need to question whether some other less painful way (non-violent resistance, for example) could bring about the desired change.
Terrorism The term "terrorism" is profoundly political, as can be seen by the numerous definitions of terrorism and the lack of a globally-agreed description. The myriad definitions show nations struggling to define "terrorism" in self-serving ways. Efforts to clarify and unify those definitions vary from legalistic to nearly bombastic. After listing many definitions from different nations and from within the United States, itself, this paper examines a legalistic attempt to lay
Terrorism Definitions of terrorism Under the U.S. Government, terrorism has different definitions, not accounting also scholars' own definitions of this concept. In a study by Mark Burgess (2003) for the U.S. Center for Defense Information, he identified five (5) definitions of terrorism, three from the U.S. Government and two from academic scholars. The common factors in each definition, according to Burgess, are the terrorists' motives, identity, and methods. The Department of Defense defines
Although they created considerable turmoil in Germany for over a decade, it is questionable what they actually accomplished. The Gang gradually disappeared from the scene and has not been heard from for a number of years. Their activities, however, did cause a major change in how Germany, as a nation, addressed terrorism within its borders. Because of the Gang's activities, Germany enacted some of the broadest enforcement laws available
Fundamentally, the insurgents are fighting an enemy with superior weaponry, technology, and resources, so therefore, must seek avenues to mitigate these disadvantages. In other words, insurgent forces out vastly outdone in the traditional aspects of warfare, so they are forced to resort to unconventional modes of attack. Early in his book, the Army and Vietnam, Krepinevich provides the broad game plan an insurgent force must follow to achieve final victory: As
According to Stefanie Olson (2001), the Act provides government with increased electronic surveillance, search and data gathering power. Under the guise of tracking down "potential" terrorists, the expansion of Internet eavesdropping technology provides the government with full viewing rights into any private life they choose. In this way, immigrants who enter the country and conduct their business in a perfectly legal manner are now targeted for such surveys (White,
Terrorism Justified? According to Purpura (2007), terrorism as a term does not have a fixed definition. This effectively means that its usage and application is largely hinged on a myriad of viewpoints, be they political or religious. In this text, I concern myself with terrorism; its justification, usage and application. The Use of Terrorism by Powerful Governments to Delegitimize Less Powerful Governments Though terrorism cannot be seen to be a wholly biased
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now