The War on Terror is a preventive defensive strategy. The second is ostensibly preventive defense, the third may be interpreted to be so as may the fourth. The first and the fifth do not involve merely the use of force, and do not fall into the categories of defense, compellence, deterrence or swaggering.
It is plausible that the war is aggression mixed with defense, with the pretext of being entirely defensive. This would be supported by the observation that one and possibly another war has been initiated by the U. S without provocation, and statements have been made casually that show a willingness to disregard the sovereignty of other states, national integrity and human rights.
The war in Iraq is a case of failed deterrence, though the motives and outcomes in the situation are complex. American actions in the War on Terror are acting as demonstrations of power in some respects, as well as weakening in others loss of soldiers, vehicles, fuel, money etc. They might be instilling fear in some actors in the world, but are also arousing hatred and anger among others, many of whom are not easily intimidated.
If you need a custom essay, research paper, thesis, dissertation, term paper on Politics, Economics, Management or other discipline — feel free to contact our professional custom writing service. Order a custom written paper of high quality Professional Writers only. Free Quote or Order now. Related Articles Essay about Summer Traveling. Almost everyone agrees that summer is the best time for traveling, especially considering the summer break from school.
All countries welcome new visitors and are. There is a question on whether parents should be strict or not, and how strict they should be. If a parent is strict, many tend. Expository essays on what makes a great leader are focused on explaining the difference between an ordinary leader and a great leader. Former President George W. Bush stated that if the United States and the United Kingdom had not invaded Iraq, terrorists would not be idle.
By fighting these terrorists in Iraq, Americans in uniform are defeating a direct threat to the American people. Both arguments made by the two former leaders are relevant, yet they did not take into consideration the hostility and anger that both the United States and the United Kingdom would produce as a result of their occupation of Iraq. Invading Iraq may have deterred it from becoming a threat to the American people and the people of the world at the time, but overtime what has been evident is the increase in religious extremist and terrorist activity within Iraq and surrounding areas.
The global war on terrorism had begun in where the coalition of the willing was created by George W. Bush, which were nations who supported the U. The coalition of the willing was made up of forty-nine members, most notably, England, France, Germany, Japan, India and Russia. Out of the forty-nine members, only four supplied troops to the invasion force United Kingdom, Australia, Poland and Denmark. All forty-nine countries part of the coalition of the willing had strong support for the war on terrorism, but as of , support had decreased.
Moreover, less than half of the United Kingdom and Germany supported the war, only forty-three percent of France were in favor and a very low twenty-six percent of Japanese people supported the war. This decline in support was substantial, and according to a Pew Research Centre survey, most of the countries surveyed regarding the U. In fact, when surveyed regarding the war on Iraq, the majority of people living within the countries belonging to the coalition of the willing believed that the war in Iraq made the world more dangerous.
Such evidence suggests that these are the reasons why international support for the war on terrorism decreased. Furthermore, the Pew Research Centre discovered through polls that most countries within the coalition of the willing believed that the true purpose of the U.
S-led war on terrorism was to control the oil within the Middle East and to dominate the world. An additional underlying factor that can be contributing to this decrease of support for the United States may be the misunderstanding and misinterpretation between countries on the definition of terrorism.
Bush's interpretation of terrorism was the same as theirs. In his address to the nation, George W. Nevertheless, some may not disagree that there is decreasing support for the U. Issues of prisoner abuse arose, which were then made public throughout the world and left a stain on the United States effort to fight terrorism.
The images and stories coming out of Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq revealed that prisoners were abused, tortured and humiliated by American soldiers.
There was also the question whether the United States invasion of Iraq was justified and acceptable under international law. Therefore, the fact that it was a war made out of choice and not necessity could be the factor that renders the war unjustified. These arguments are relevant when one looks at the reasons for the decrease in support for the U. Countries are essentially more concerned about their own security than whether or not a certain state is following international laws or not.
Evidence of this is clearly shown in Pew Research Centre's poll where the majority of countries said that the war in Iraq made the world a more dangerous rather than a safer place. When a large amount of nations across the world united and supported each other in the global war on terrorism, their intentions were to decrease the amount of terrorism in the world and to make their own countries more safe and secure for their citizens.
The war on terrorism, controlled by the United States, was intended to disrupt the terrorist activities of the international system of terrorist organizations composed of a number of groups who were run under the order of al-Qaeda. However, what was evident after the first year of the war on terrorism was not a decrease, but an increase in the amount of attacks brought upon civilians by terrorists.
Bush had announced the global war on terrorism, the number of international terrorist attacks had consistently increased.
- Dangers of the War on Terrorism The President of the United State has used the phrases “War on Poverty”, “War on Drugs”, War on Illiteracy”, and the “War on .
Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. Terrorism is not just something that developed during the s. Throughout modern 3/5(5).
Since the goal of the global war on terrorism was to decrease terrorist attacks, the war cannot be seen as a successful one. In conclusion, the global war on terrorism led by the United States has been ultimately unsuccessful. America’s War on Terrorism Essay - America’s War on Terrorism The world has been changed forever since the tragic attack on September 11, An observer described the atrocity by saying, "It just went 'bam,' like a bomb went off. It .
Due to “War on Terror”, the countries’ buildings are destroyed and it prevents the citizens from enjoying government benefit. More than a fifth of Syria’s schools have been destroyed or made unusable in more than two years of conflict, jeopardizing the education of million young people. War on Drugs = War on Terrorism??? Essay Words | 10 Pages. War on Drugs = War on Terrorism??? The United States’ new claim in today’s world of propaganda and mind-warping media is that The War on Terrorism = The War on Drugs.