Social Effects Of Terrorism

During his presidency and after the attacks of 9/11, Bush declared war on terrorism in the form of global containment to a global threat. (Bergen L. Peter, “September 11 Attacks). With this action, Bush has effectively created a political platform and government focus that continues and will continue today on wiping out terrorism, more specifically terrorism in the Middle East. This also pressures other foreign nations as a moral obligation to help the U.S. contain such a threat. Another aspect of war that was influenced is the war readiness being a factor in creating war (Ehrenreich, 598).

The western public opinion started to see Islam as being inherently violent as they see Islamic State's (IS) actions. Sheila Carapico argues that "while lynchings, hate crimes, and family violence in America are individual exceptions to a sound social ethic, but ‘Islamic terrorism' is portrayed as if it were a religious expression" (1997, p.30). Violence is mainly motivated by some kind of political aims. Therefore, what we should be looking for is politically motivated Muslims, not the Islam itself. Muslims with a political aim in their mind are called the Islamists.

Bush and his administration in reference to the United States of America post-9/11 policies. to place it more accurately, he argues that the Bush administration skillfully used the shock that affected the country once the fear attacks, so as to attain its own goals, as well as the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The author stands on the bottom that the United States of America authorities used mass media as means that of pressure on the mass audience. Moreover, media served as suggests that of psychological pressure on Americans since they accelerated the worry that flooded minds and souls of American individuals. At a similar time, the author implies that American’ reasoning skills were much unfit due to the overwhelming power of mass media that bombarded the consciousness of American citizens with terrible news and even additional terrible forecasts regarding the longer term of the USA (Gore, 2007).

This paper provides an insight into the methods that were adopted for the racial profiling of Muslims after 9/11; as suspected perpetrators of terrorism globally. This paper examines the history and origin of the word islamophobia, some phenomena that is effecting the stature and identity of Muslims worldwide. The purpose of this study is to analyze the tone, structure and themes presented by the print media prior to a terrorist activity, with the aim of finding out whether any inherent bias was visible or not. This paper will explore the role of international press in linking Islam and terrorism and will highlight the effects of subtle print messages that can lead to racial profiling of Muslims and generation of islamophobia. The data for

It has gone under terrorism’s label many times and has made contributions to a sense of wavering out of all fractions to its material, as divergent to its representative importance (Laqueur 1999). The reason for using terrorism in such an insufficient fashion is mainly because it has been much complex to describe and no usually accepted definition has sought to be effective in spite of huge efforts by policy making as well as academic spheres. However, terrorism is unquestionably a form of political violence, but such form is not essentially terrorism. It

Terrorism is a huge problem in the United States and all around the world. It is a federal offense that ends with the death penalty--or at least it should. In fact, the exact definition of terrorism is, “the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.” From a worldly perspective, Batman represents the government, and the Joker represents terrorists. Since the government should put terrorists to death, Batman should do the same to the Joker.

But in the context of our discussion Decapitation refers to the removal by arrest or assassination of the top leaders or operational leaders of a group. The leader of a terrorist group can either be held alive or dead. Decision about whether to capture or kill a terrorist leaders is dependent upon the goals that the states aim to achieve. Capturing of a terrorist leader depicts the thought that he is a criminal authorised to a legal hearing.

Terrorism & Homegrown Extremism Terrorism is a confusing term that it is very difficult to clearly define due to the many different meanings that it has acquired throughout history since the French Revolution (Hoffman, 2006). Many different current events that have occurred since then, such as the 9/11 attacks among many others, have altered or modified the meaning of terrorism. However, most modern definitions of terrorism agree that terrorism is the use violence to accomplish a political, religious, or ideological objective (Hoffman, 2006). Therefore, my own definition of terrorism is the use or an act of violence that seeks to create terror to a large segment of the population in an effort to coerce the population or decision makers to follow the demands of those that are using violence and creating terror.

Modern terrorism is not conducted only by one man or one political regime. Today's terrorism represents premeditated violence that is politically motivated and is mainly carried out on the civilian (non-military) targets by terrorist groups or individuals. Those who apply terrorism, regardless of their secular or religious goals, seek to undermine the rule of law and to impose change through violence and fear. Terrorism is, roughly speaking, trying to be a sensation, which is best evidenced by the execution carried out by the Islamic State.

However, United States and United Kingdom’s airstrikes were ought to be extreme since the bombing sabotaged the innocent ones. The possible reason for US to undertake such actions was to avenge for the severe losses from the 9/11 event. Additionally, in order to demonstrate US’s strong military power to the globe, US had taken this as an opportunity. Whereas the US had successfully proven its troops’ strengths, Barrack Obama now faces criticism: rash, uncooperative, and brutal. Indeed, the United Nations Security Council might not be able to come up with the most feasible resolutions to cope with the dilemmas that take place in the Middle East and was unable to execute immediate actions; however, US’s defilement might provoke other series of social unrest in neighboring regions and more unknowing residents have to be sacrificed.

The events of 9/11 intensified the fear of terrorism and the war on terror became the sole purpose of American politics, thus putting terrorism and war on the same outlook. Unfavorable views of Islam and overall negative views of Muslim may be associated with the support for the War on Terror. It is safe to say that public attitudes toward Muslims help one 's stance on the War on Terror. Cainkar expresses that terming a “war” on terrorism provokes fear and promotes violence. On the other hand, the attacks of 9/11 provide a justification for creating this campaign.

The terrorist group Al-Qaeda knew they couldn’t beat the U.S. in a straight up firefight, so they tried to destroy us through economic failure and imposing fear into American lives. By doing that they sought out the world trade centers, it was a national symbol to Americas '

After a terrorist attack of any kind there are always consequences that must be faced. Sometimes the point of the terrorist attacks is because the organization wished to send a message or to influence policy in their favor. However, after the 9/11 attacks administrators realized that the United States was not prepared for a tragedy of this kind and had little to no measures to prevent one, this lead them to create new programs and policies. Terrorist organization’s goal often comes down to one of the following: regime change, territorial change, policy change, social control and status quo maintenance. The main purpose of a terror attack may well be to influence public policy.

The president has made statements to invade Iraq since 2002.Stating that "Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror," and even adding that “states like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger.” is Bush during his speech to invade Iraq. Saddam Hussein -was president of Iraq from 1979 to 2003. In his time in office Saddam suppressed the groups that opposed him.

As time elapsed from September 11, 2001, the public began to break ideas about who was to blame for the attacks on September 11. A vast majority believed that the 9/11 attacks were solely to blame from the Islamist radical group, Al-Qaeda, a terrorist regime that sought to rebel against western civilization norms and enact their hate among the United States. The other idea, which is highly noted as a conspiracy theory, was that government knew the terrorist attacks were likely to happen and the only reason the government took a back seat was to conduct a reason to mobilize troops into the war-riddled Middle East. Whether the public believed either or, a paranoia was created, later to be recognized as Post-9/11 Paranoia. This paranoia would harbor certain ideals in American brains, creating a specific view and caution for certain areas, actions and personnel.