| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "ASSESSMENT WAR TERRORISM": |
|
|
Assessment of War on Terrorism, 2004.
Assesses the war on terrorism through the application of the most appropriate and relevant concepts in international relations theory.
991 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper proposes that the best assessment of the war on terror must apply the appropriate and relevant concepts in international relations theory and that such an application will encourage a consensus and commitment to the basic ideology underlying the war on terrorism. Further, the paper suggests that there is a strong case to establish that the war on terrorism has seen the United States practicing hegemonic stability theory, and then goes on to expound on this theory and explain why this approach is in the interests of the U.S. and democracy worldwide.
From the Paper
"America?s ideology and consequently, foreign affairs policy changed dramatically in the aftermath of the security dilemma created by September 11th. Ever since Vietnam, the American public?s reluctance to engage in military intervention overseas has been an influential factor in foreign policy decisions. September 11th changed that view and opinion polls showed more than 90% approval for the placement of ground troops in Afghanistan, while 87% showed understanding that this unconventionally defined war will be a long one (Pobst)."
| |
|
The War on Terrorism and the War on Drugs, 2002.
An examination of the similarities and differences between the fight against drugs and terror.
940 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An analysis of the relationship between the war on terrorism and the war on drugs. Part II discusses the similarities between the war on terrorism and the war on drugs. In Part III, the relationship between the war on terrorism and the war on drugs is outlined. Lastly, this paper concludes with recommendations for effectively dealing with the war on terrorism and the war on drugs.
From the Paper
"Few events in life have the potential to impact each and every single member of society, whether it is on a macro (indirect) or micro (direct) level. Even fewer such events actually do impact every single citizen. The Columbine school shootings, the Kent State university shootings, the Oklahoma city bombings, Pearl Harbor, and Vietnam are just a few of the events which are forever embedded into the psyche of millions of Americans. On September 11, 2001, two airplanes crashed into the World Trade Center buildings in New York, another airplane crashed into the Pentagon, and a fourth airplane crashed into a field in Pennsylvania. In addition to the sheer magnitude of these airplane crashes, what makes these crashes notable is the fact that all four airplanes were hijacked by suspected terrorists. As a result of these horrific terrorist attacks, thousands of individuals lost their lives in an instant, countless others were left to stand by helplessly, to learn to rebuild their lives without their loved ones."
| |
|
Rhetoric of the War on Terror vs. the Cold War, 2008.
An analysis of the power of the definition of terms such as "Cold War" and "War on Terror."
1,288 words (approx. 5.2 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares the rhetoric and arguments that surround the Cold War and the War on Terror. It discusses how the definition of terms such as "Cold War" or "War on Terror" has a large impact upon how these wars are viewed. The paper argues that those who define and utilize the terms, primarily governments, often do so with ulterior motives, with the understanding that the one who controls the definition also controls the methodology of approach and influences public attitudes.
From the Paper
"The orthodox interpretation of the Cold War, for instance, stated that the beginning of the Cold War can be traced to the Soviet attempt to expand its sphere of control into Eastern Europe. This theory notes that the Soviets violated treaties made during the war to limit its reach. Thus, the U.S. is portrayed as acting in a purely defensive way to protect itself and stem the expansion of communism worldwide, through such strategies as the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan. This standard view of the Cold War, which certainly had much evidence in its favor, began to be questioned in the 1960s, as the failure of the Vietnam War, then a major theater of operations in which the U.S. faced off the communist expansion, became impossible to ignore. Some writers around that time began to argue that the U.S. itself was an "empire" with global reach, not unlike many other empires throughout history, and thus was not solely in a defensive position against its opponent. More recent writers, notably Noam Chomsky, make a similar argument. Related to this critique of U.S. actions is the argument that the U.S. economic motivation, to force all nations in the world to open themselves to U.S. trade and economic influence, is also a source of worldwide conflict and opposition, both during the Cold War and during the current War on Terror (Richelson and Evans)."
| |
|
War in Iraq War on Terror, 2007.
A discussion of how the war in Iraq and war on terror became linked as election issues.
2,646 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 13 sources, MLA, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper the author argues that the war in Iraq was utilized as a persuasive tool to win an election, in which the war was linked to the more global and less definable "war on terrorism." The author further contends that in the 2004 presidential elections the voters were seeking security, and therefore they linked the two issues. This paper demonstrates that the war on terror and the war in Iraq are not connected and in fact contraindicated for the long term safety of the US, specifically with regard to future acts of terrorism. Salient quotes from primary and secondary sources are used to support the author's thesis.
From the Paper
"The importance and reality of this link are now being questioned at every level. People, in both high and low places are questioning the validity of the connection and asking if this aggressive move, on the part of the US, even in the face of much international opposition was in fact appropriate to improve security in the US and her interests all over the world. The political positioning that has become increasingly obvious has undermined the faith of individuals in the nature and necessity of the War in Iraq, as people feel they were sold a bill of goods, rather than leveled with in regards to the strategic importance of the Iraq in the global war on terrorism in both the short and log term. In fact this work argues that the only connection between the war on terrorism and the War on Iraq is that the later has and will continue to serve to increase terrorist activities and actions against the US, no matter how the government spins it."
| |
|
Just Wars and Terrorism, 2001.
A brief description and analysis of just war theory, with particular emphasis on 9/11 and the subsequent and renowned 'War on Terror' in Afghanistan.
1,376 words (approx. 5.5 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 46.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides a definition of war and terrorism and debates whether war should happen at all and if so by what means. It looks at how the controversy also centres on who or what the war is against, giving rise to speculation about the nature of terrorism and its definition. It uses as an example the attack on 11th September 2001 and examines whether war was the most effective and tangible means of eradicating the immediate terrorist network in Afghanistan.
Outline
Can There Ever Be A Just War?
A Case in Question - The 'War on Terrorism' in Afghanistan
Can War Ever Be Just?
From the Paper
"The sheer scale of the attack on 11th September is perhaps the most commanding case for the justifiability of commencing a war on the perpetrators. War certainly seems the most effective and tangible means of eradicating the immediate terrorist network in Afghanistan-ostensibly terrorist leader Osama Bin Laden and his associates. Yet the public are far from convinced. It seems that, since the Enlightenment, people tend to have an inhumane concept of war-a bloody evil to be avoided at all costs. "
| |
|
Just War and Fighting Terrorism, 2002.
Looks at the seven criteria of the Just War theory and how the theory applies to the present war against terrorism.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 2 sources, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay discusses how the Just War theory applies to the present war against terrorism. Its seven criteria apply to the just war against terrorism.
| |
|
The Presidential View on the War on Terrorism, 2004.
A discussion of the 2004 Presidential candidates and their views on the war on terrorism.
2,521 words (approx. 10.1 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 76.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The 2004 presidential campaign illustrated the disparity in opinions on exactly what the war on terrorism should include. The major political candidates, Ralph Nader, John Kerry and George W. Bush, all had strong opinions on what they felt should be done, in order to keep America safe. It is these three positions that this paper analyzes. The paper includes a detailed explanation of each candidate's position on the war on terrorism. In addition, the reasoning behind their positioning is discussed. The strengths and weaknesses of their views on terror are evaluated. The paper finally looks at the impact their position had on the outcome of the 2004 election.
From the Paper
"Since September 11th, 2001, the war on terrorism has been an important part of American security and American candidate's political strategy. Although most Americans would agree that they do not wish America to fall victim to another terror attack, whether at home or abroad, there is a wide chasm of how this war should be conducted and what it should entail. From pacifists to war mongers and the majority of mainstream Americans somewhere in between, the war on terrorism is still a topic, even three years after the attacks on September 11th, and will continue to be for the foreseen future."
| |
|
The War on Terrorism, 2008.
This paper explores the causes and effects of the war on terrorism.
1,120 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper looks at why terrorists and terrorism exist and the major motivations and/or objectives of terrorism. The paper discusses the Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security that enabled several measures to detect, investigate, prevent and stop domestic terrorism that are results of the 9/11 incidents. The paper notes that dealing with the causes and effects of terrorism and the war on terrorism is not a one-sided affair but rather, it should be viewed from various angles and seen through the eyes of the different actors involved.
From the Paper
"Terrorism has been a bane of mankind since time immemorial. It has been used to justify bloodshed to gain freedom from oppression and other social inequities. One common adage goes: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter," thus rationalizing terror or terrorist acts. The terrorist incidents that occurred in September 11, 2001 were looked upon by the instigators and their sponsors as a rousing success with the death of thousands of people and causing untold problems to the American government and its people. The World Trade bombing on February 26, 1993 can be seen as a dry run for the 9/11 incidents and as a result, the world changed its security posture and the way people looked at terrorism is different now more than ever."
| |
|
Winning the 'War on Terrorism', 2008.
A synopsis of the article "Winning the "War on Terrorism"; The Need for a Fundamentally Different Strategy" by Anthony B. Cordesman.
827 words (approx. 3.3 pages), 1 source, APA, $ 29.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines the article "Winning the "War on Terrorism"; The Need for a Fundamentally Different Strategy" that is a detailed analysis of the counterproductive nature of the current state of international counter-terrorism. The paper explains Cordesman's assertion that the struggle against terrorism is not military or secular, but is a war that must be fought from within Islam at an ideological level. The paper notes that this work is limited since it presents logical findings of just one expert on the subject.
From the Paper
"Cordesman's article is a detailed analysis of the counterproductive nature of the current state of international counterterrorism. The work stresses that the current aggressive actions of the West coupled with the inaction of the Middle East create a counterproductive strategy that intensifies terrorism, rather than reducing it. The first point made by Cordesman is that the West identifies terrorism as a global situation, while in reality there are several smaller regional situations, that have little international effect and that any kind of terrorism that can be correctly labeled as global, in its effect is that that is spurned on by Islamist extremism, which he even more specifically identifies as neo-Salafi Sunni Islamist extremism."
| |
|
The War on Terrorism - Is it Justified?, 2002.
A paper which questions the justification of the United States' declaration of war on terrorism and its difficulty in defining who exactly the enemy is.
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 46.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
After the September 11th attack by terrorists on the World Trade Center in New York, President George Bush declared war on terrorism. But, unlike past wars where the enemy was known by face or nationality, this new form of warfare, with terrorist cells in a multitude of countries, makes the enemy much more difficult to identify. The question is therefore asked whether a declaration of war on these "evildoers" is justified.
From the Paper
"One major concern, even in the face of all the senseless horror that started this "War on Terrorism," is that we haven't found a way to clearly define exactly who the enemy is, and how and when the war will be done. This is new and uncertain territory; any of us can go to the library and find a picture of our country's leaders signing pacts with both Germany and Japan, signifying that both sides agree the war is over. Our history books show specific dates, and they are often printed on calendars. We don't have this for the "War on Terrorism." As the fighting in Afghanistan waxes and wanes, we hear government officials debating who the next targets of our warfare will be. We know the fight against the Al-Queda will continue; we are assisting the Philippines in their fight against terrorists to the benefit of both governments. But we no longer have a clear focus."
| |
|
The War on Terrorism, 2002.
An analysis of the policy of the War on Terrorism.
1,650 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 5 sources, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This seven-page undergraduate paper examines the war on terrorism as a result of the September 11th terrorist attacks and analyzes why terrorism is an important topic in the study of 20th Century world history.
| |
|
The War on Terrorism, 2005.
An analysis of Bush's ideological view of the War on Terrorism post-2001, as it pertains to Afghanistan.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 10 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper uses a psychohistorical approach to explain Bush's ideological view of the War on Terrorism post-2001, as it pertains to Afghanistan. It mentions the propaganda war that complies with Bush's view of religion, ideology and politics.
From the Paper
"This paper discusses the American 'War on Terrorism' (WOT) in Afghanistan in developments, at several levels. One sees that individuals can shape foreign policy developments, in conjunction with state interests and also, systemic patterns, towards complex events that, nonetheless, pertain to what is individual. One also sees the tremendous imprint of culture on how events develop, are presented to voters, and how unexpected twists occur when assuming Americans venture into culture zones of which they have no familiarity, but expecting similarity. This may be particularly important when a society valuing an honour system is forced to contend with a pecuniary, materially advanced society presuming what the former will accept. "
| |
|
Media and the War on Terrorism, 2002.
A paper which discusses the media?s manipulation of the war on terrorism.
3,200 words (approx. 12.8 pages), 16 sources, MLA, $ 92.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A paper which presents a detailed discussion about the war on terrorism and the media?s manipulation of the war. The writer outlines the societal views of the US attacks on Middle Eastern soil. The writer also describes the way the media has manipulated society members regarding the attacks by refusing to cover certain issues and cooperating with the US government.
From the Paper
"One of the earliest ways that the media began to manipulate the world opinion about the United States attack in the Middle East was its coverage of Bin Laden?s reaction to the attacks on 9-11. The media on an almost world wide basis began to claim in November that Bin Laden had proclaimed credit was his for the attacks(Truth pg 10). Media in the United States, Britain, New Zealand and other nations insisted that he had admitted, ?we did it? (Truth pg 10). It was reported that he confessed on a news network in England. This would have a very heavy impact on the way society would view Bin Laden and the war against the Middle East. Until this occurred, America as well as other nations were outraged at the attacks on America which killed thousands of civilians but there was a hesitation about who to attack. "
| |
|
War on Terrorism, 2004.
An analysis of the book, "Before and After: U.S. Foreign Policy and the War on Terrorism", by Phyllis Bennis.
1,401 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 46.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to introduce, discuss, and analyze the book, "Before and After: U.S. Foreign Policy and the War on Terrorism", by Phyllis Bennis. Specifically it presents a book report, including a summary. "Before and After" is a book about the terrorist attacks, but it is also a book about a nation's arrogance and how the United States has turned into a world power with 'attitude'. The author shows how that is affecting our global presence and our global situation.
From the Paper
""Before and After" is a compelling book about the September 11 terrorist attacks on the United States. Reading it is difficult, because it does not always convey the same sense of "patriotism" that pervaded America after the terrorist attacks, but it portrays another side of the attacks ? what led up to them ? and their aftermath. The author's main thesis for writing the book was to give a deeper understanding of the events surrounding the September 11 terrorist attacks. What actions by the US led up to the attacks, and what will the US's insistence on the pursuit terrorists on a global scale mean to us, and to the world? Bennis hopes to create more understanding of the US policies that mean so much to the entire world, and give an inkling of why so many people around the world see us as a threat and a menace."
| |
|
War On Terrorism, 2002.
A comparison of 2 country's policies towards the war on terrorism, Russia and the USA.
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This is a paper comparing the United States and Russia's "war on terrorism". The paper looks at whether there will be cooperation between Russia and the United States.
|
|
|
