Terrorism Essay -- essays research papers

Terrorism is the unlawful use of force against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population or any segment thereof, in the furtherance of political or social objectives". This definition includes three elements: (1) Terrorist activities are illegal and involve the use of force. (2) The actions are intended to intimidate or coerce. (3) The actions are committed in support of political or social objectives. The main topic here is Terrorism and Foreign Policy. The two terms that are going to be discussed is how the war against terrorism is expanding and how American President George W. Bush misnamed his National Security Strategy. In his State of the Union address, President Bush threatened to expand the war on terrorism to countries that are developing weapons of mass destruction and nations that are â€Å"timid in the face of terror.† The president singled out three nations, North Korea, Iran, and Iraq as the â€Å"axis of evil† and that he might take military action to pre-empt the threat from their weapons of mass destruction. Although such rhetoric may simply be sabre rattling to intimidate those nations, the possibility of an expansion of the war is a real and dangerous possibility. But those three countries hardly constitute an organized alliance against the United States, as did the much more dangerous collaboration among Japan, Germany, and Italy during World War II. In fact, Iran and Iraq hate each other. And despite North Korea’s continued harbouring of a few members of the Japanese Red Army, North Korea has not actively sponsored terrorist attacks in many years. Although North Korea, Iran, and Iraq are developing (or have acquired) weapons of mass destruction, so are many other nations. According to the Pentagon, 12 countries have nuclear weapons programs, 13 nations have biological weapons, 16 countries have chemical weapons and 28 nations have ballistic missiles. Is the president prepared to attack all of those nations? What if North Korea, Iran, or Iraq has already sent intelligence opera tives or terrorists to the United States with weapons of mass destruction to lie in wait in case a strike is needed in retaliation for a U.S. attempt at regime change? Iran or Iraq might do the same to Israel. The fact is that the United States must live with an increasing number of nations that have acquired weapons of mass des... ...tegy promulgated by President Bush in September 2002 does just the opposite. It prescribes a global security strategy based on the false belief that the best and only way to achieve U.S. security is by forcibly creating a better and safer world in America's image. A better approach would be a less interventionist foreign policy. It is too late to stop al Qaeda from targeting America and Americans. The United States must do everything in its power to dismantle the al Qaeda terrorist network worldwide, but the United States must also avoid needlessly making new terrorist enemies or fuelling the flames of virulent anti-American hatred. In the 21st century, the less the United States meddles in the affairs of other countries, the less likely the prospect that America and Americans will be targets for terrorism. In sum, an apparent widening of the current war designed to enhance U.S security could have the opposite effect. http://www.workersparty.org/expanding-war-against-terrorism.html http://www.asiasource.org/asip/bello.cfm http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/bush.speech.txt/index.html http://www.afa.org/magazine/oct1999/1099edit.asp http://www.dsausa.org/news/director.html