Terrorism Essay -- essays research papers

terrorism is the unlawful use of force against persons or seat to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population or any segment thereof, in the furtherance of political or loving objectives". This definition includes three elements (1) Terrorist activities be illegal and involve the use of force. (2) The actions be intended to intimidate or coerce. (3) The actions argon committed in tolerate 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 state of state of war against terrorism is expanding and how American professorship 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 timid in the face of terror. The chairperson singled out three nations, north-central Korea, Iran, and Iraq as the axis of evil and that he might take soldiers action to pre-empt the threat from their weapons of mass destruction. Although such rhetoric may scarce be sabre rattling to intimidate those nations, the possibility of an expansion of the war is a real and chancy possibility. But those three countries hardly pay off 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 early(a). And disdain North Koreas continued harbouring of a few members of the Japanese inflamed 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 new(prenominal) nations. According to the Pentagon, 12 countries have nuclear weapons programs, 13 nations have biologic weapons, 16 countries have chemical weapons and 28 nations have ballistic missiles. Is th e president prepared to attack all of those nations? What if North Korea, Iran, or Iraq has already move intelligence operatives 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 hot 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 measures measures strategy based on the false belief that the best and merely way to achieve U.S. security is by forcibly creating a fracture and safer world in Americas image. A better approach would be a less interventionist foreign policy.It is too late to stop al fundament from targeting America and Americans. The United States must do everything in its power to lower the al Qaeda terrorist network worldwide, but the United States must to a fault 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.htmlhttp//www.asiasource.org/asip/bello.cfmhttp//www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/bush.speech.txt/index.htmlhttp//www.afa.org/magazine/oct1999/1099edit.asphttp//www.dsausa.org/news/director.html