terrorist act
JUNE 1914: a young man in Sarajevo steps up to a carriage and fires his pistol. The Archduke Ferdinand dies. Within weeks, the first world contend has begun. The 1940s: the French resistance kill occupying troops when and how they can. June 1944: at Oradour-sur-Glane, in central France, German SS troops take revenge, massacring 642 villagers. awful 1945: the United States Air Force drops the worlds first nuclear weapons. close to 190,000 Japanese die, nearly all of them civilians. Within days the siemens world war has ended.
Which of these four events was an act of act of terrorism? Which achieved anything? Which, if any, lead history judge as justified? And whose history? Terrorism is not the simple, sharp-edged, bad-guy phenomenon we all love to condemn. No clear promissory note marks off politics from the threat of force, threat from recitation, use from covert or open war. Who is or is not a terrorist? The suicide bomber, the rebel guerrilla, the liberation front, the armed forces of the state?
Terrorism is fundamentally a political act. Terrorists act to advance a answer they mean to create tyranny, either directly or indirectly, so that the political put together that they prefer can take the note of the current one.
Terrorists can be either rebels seeking to turn back a state or states seeking to overthrow the world-wide order or states seeking to maintain privilege for rulers and cramp dissent among the people. In every case the motivation for terrorism is explicitly without an exception, political.
Terrorism has a long, if tainted,. pedigree. Aristotle recognized it, even if it had no recognise at the time, when he wrote that the first aim and end of tyrants is to become flat the spirit of their subjects. What we know as terrorism can be traced to the Russian nihilists and anarchists...
If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment