NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... extreme terrorism follows logical processes that can be discovered and explained. She believes that terrorist violence is justified in the mind of the terrorist as being logical. In other words, the move to violence and the motives behind it are strategic and the choice to employ them is willful. In opposition to this view is Jerrold Post, who states that, social and psychological factors lead one to resort to terror. Post believes that terrorists are driven to violence due to imbalances within themselves (Reich 25).
Their motives are therefore irrational because they move to terrorism merely to commit violent acts, which are justified by their cause. The two ideas above are drastically different and strongly oppose each other. By understanding them, one gains some incite into the motives behind terrorist behavior. If one goes by Crenshaws model, we can see the logical strategy behind terrorist acts. The motives are vastly different in different cases. In Nazi Germany for example, Hitler used terrorism to control his subjects.
Was this a logical choice or was it a psychological imbalance within Hitler, which lead him to these extreme means? Logically speaking, Hitlers motives were that he wanted to remain in power uncontested and therefore coerced the people of Germany into not opposing him. From the illogical point of view, he was a man obsessed with power and exerted punishment over his people merely because he was in a position to do so. There are a number of other cases in which terrorist motives are at issue. In religious terror, there is a fine line between logical and illogical. They believe that they are enacting Gods will when they take the lives of others (Laqueur 81).
In America there are a number of Millenarian sects who believe in the final judgment and are willing to take the lives of many innocent people because it is the will of God. They are also willing to take their own lives in order to achieve this. Examples of these motives can be found in many religious terrorist groups. The IRA and the ETA are motivated by the fact that they want sovereign control over certain territory. They employ violence in order to gain negotiating rights and political strength. Groups on the far left wish to achieve economic equality through violence.
The Weatherman in the United States used terror in an attempt to breakdown the capitalist system that they so despised. But were the actions of these groups discussed here logical or illogical? The debate is far from over. Proponents one both sides of the issue are very strong in their convictions and there is no compromise in sight. In conclusion, when studying terrorism, one is faced with many obstacles. There are a number of definitions for a word, which applies to some many different forms of violence and excludes so many others.
The history of this phenomenon has changed so very much yet remained in the same in certain ideologies. The motives behind it are sometimes so clear and at other time so cloudy. In America, we are fighting an elusive foe that is religious, political, fanatical, dangerous and hard to target. Millions of dollars are spent every year on counter-terrorism in the hopes that we can somehow control or limit our enemy.
Advances in technology mean advances for the terrorists. Those advances mean our lives are at risk. But we cannot live in fear, so we educate ourselves. We must know our enemy.
Essay # 3: Pillar on Terrorism When dealing with terrorism, states must be cautious to prevent further attacks and minimize casualties. Today, America is faced with numerous challenges concerning this issue. There are a number of scholars with opposing solutions to problems involving terrorism. Paul Pillar is one of them.
In his book, Terrorism and U. S. Foreign Policy, Pillar discusses his ideas on confronting terror in depth. He explores the nature of terrorism that the United States must deal with and creates a guideline for how we should manage our problems. Although not everyone agrees with his viewpoints, which are quite controversial, he deserves a great deal of attention. In order to gain a better understanding of what Pillar is trying to accomplish in his book, we must discuss a number of issues.
First, what is the nature of the challenge facing the United States, and then what principles should America adopt to deal with this issue. Finally, we will explore the reasons why Pillars ideas have sparked controversy. By looking at these issues, we can get a better idea of a possible solution to a problem that is so relevant today. Pillar suggests that terrorist activity has significantly decreased in recent times (Pillar 2). He attributes this to the fact that the United States has increased activities in the area of counter terrorism and has worked closely with foreign governments to combat this issue. He believes that a number of attacks have been prevented through diligence and brilliant detective work (Pillar 3).
But there are still a number of terrorist organizations that exist with negative intentions toward the United States. Since the end of the cold war, the U. S. has become the only ranking superpower and therefore, has become a target for terrorists (Pillar 57). Many groups and nations view us as a threat to their interests and retaliate. We set out to protect our economic interests in other nations and upset its people.
Radical factions form against us and we must then cope with the consequences. Similarly many groups view the struggle as the weak against the strong. Because we are a target, we must develop a plan in dealing with terrorism. Now that we have a sufficient idea of the problem we are facing, we can turn to Pillar for the solutions. One problem with U.
S. policy on terrorism is that the American government tends to focus on terrorism in the scope of casualties. It matters most to them that lives are saved. Pillar believes that this is an inefficient way to view the problem. This idea plays into the possibility of a nuclear, biological or chemical attack that could cause massive deaths.
This also gains too much attention (Pillar 5). Even thought he effects would be devastating, it is not very likely to happen. Dwelling on these subjects takes away from more important problems. Pillar believes that a simple confrontational approach is also not effective.
He is deeply critical of Americas no deals and extreme punishment values against terrorists. According to Pillar, these actions only aggravate terrorists more and they do not address the basic issue of combating terror (Pillar 8). He argues that negotiating with terrorists is sometimes the most beneficial solution to a given problem. He also says that terrorist situations should be evaluated individually as they differ from one time to the next and a universal solution is not practical.
One of Pillars other ideas is that Americas government must trim away some of the counter-terrorist bureaus that are ineffective. By following these steps, pillar believes that the United States will be better suited to battle its elusive foe. Many of the ideas expressed above have been considered quite controversial. Namely Pillars belief in Americas stance on dealing with terrorists. The United States has a long-standing policy not to cooperate with terrorist demands, to try and bring them to justice and to apply pressure to states that harbor and sponsor terrorists. The government suggests that it can identify states that sponsor terror while Pillar believes that it is not that simple.
The government refuses to cooperate with terrorist demands and Pillar thinks that sometimes this is beneficial both in limiting further terror and bolstering U. S. interests. Bringing terrorists to justice is an idea that Pillar suggests could cause further attacks and not really address the problem.
The one idea that Pillar does seem agree with is the policy of using other countries as our allies in our struggle. But even this has its problems, mainly, whom can we really trust and whom will we really benefit from? Pillars beliefs obviously contradict those of the U. S government. But he assures that selectivity is the best means to achieve the goals. He does not offer a solution to terrorism.
The book merely states cautionary measures, which he believes the U. S. is not taking. This draws a lot of fire from those who strongly support the government and the policies, which it holds against terror. Being in opposition to the government is always a place where one may find ones self criticized. In conclusion, one can learn a great deal from Paul Pillars book.
It states that since the end of the cold war, America has become the target of many terrorist organizations. They are frustrated by U. S. intervention in their countries and feel that the United States has too much influence over them. Therefore they fight back with violence. Pillar believes that to combat this, America must deal with each group individually.
Sometimes we must make concessions and not punish the terrorists in fear of further damage against us. He has drawn a great deal of critical attention because of these views, which contradict U. S. terrorist policy. However, he is worth considering.
Bibliography: Richard Falkenrath et. al. , AMERICA'S ACHILLES HEEL: NUCLEAR, BIOLOGICAL, AND CHEMICAL TERRORISM AND COVERT ATTACK (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1998) Bruce Hoffman, INSIDE TERRORISM (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998) Walter Laqueur, THE NEW TERRORISM: FANATICISM, AND THE ARMS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (New York and London: Oxford University Press, 1999) Mark Juergensmeyer, TERRORISM IN THE MIND OF GOD: THE GLOBAL RISE OF RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000) Paul Pillar, TERRORISM AND U. S. FOREIGN POLICY (Washington D. C. , Brookings Institution, 2001) Walter Reich, ed. , ORIGINS OF TERRORISM: PSYCHOLOGIES, IDEOLOGIES, THEOLOGIES, STATES OF MIND (Washington D. C. : Woodrow Wilson Press, distributed by Johns Hopkins Press, 1998
Free research essays on topics related to: counter terrorism, washington d c, order to gain, u s foreign policy, end of the cold war
Research essay sample on U S Foreign Policy Washington D C
