There are 60 articles on this title. You are reading the article ranked and rated #16 by Helium's members.
The War on Terror
The current war on terror' is being waged by a coalition led by the USA and it is surrounded by rhetoric and political influences. In order to win' such a war, one must cut through rhetoric, political and religious ideologies to understand the situation as it is on the ground'. The nature of the enemy' and the resources available to them must be known in order to combat them.
This becomes even more important when the enemy consists of non-state actors which have the ability to move and act in a relatively undetectable manner. Only then can one develop and implement strategies that will accomplish the expressed aims of a war on terror'. With insidious adversaries consisting of individuals, small groups or global networks, direct physical combat becomes almost impossible. As such, the main course of action must be to identify the resources that can be addressed in order to reduce the terrorists' capabilities. These resources are not only physical finances, arms, personnel but also more abstract opportunity, possible impact, ability to succeed politically. It is through this process that one can realise the best possible way to fight the war on terror'.
What is the War?
To fight what President George W Bush has termed a war on terror' one must first understand what that war entails. The most recent war on terror' was proclaimed by US President George W Bush on the 20th of September 2001, nine days after al Qaeda terrorist attacks in America killed 2,973 (AP 2006). When analysed from an academic standpoint the phrase war on terror' is misleading on a number of levels. Firstly, on a grammatical level, terror' is an abstract noun which describes an emotion; it is obvious that the states united in this war are fighting something more specific than an emotion. We can therefore assume that terror' is being used as a synecdochic metaphor for the method and effects of terrorism'. However, war cannot be fought against a method, so one can assume that the war is actually against practitioners of terrorism and those who support them (Colonel Martin, J. 2002 p.7).
Though the current US administration has fought the war on terror' through more conventional wars against Afganistan and Iraq, the actual war on terrorism is an irregular conflict' (Miles 2006). In this form of warfare the targets are terrorist networks, insurgents and other non-state enemies. Bush outlined the scope of the war in his state of the union address, "Our war on terror begins
Below are the top articles rated and ranked by Helium members on:
by Aamir Saleem
The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, were acts of war against the United States, peaceful people throughout t... read more
by Trav McGee
Something that is not understood in many parts of America is the fact that America is at war. We are dealing with fo... read more
The so-called "War on Terror" is not winnable in a conventional sense, because it is not a conventional war. Making ... read more
by Eldon Penner
The methods employed by international terrorists prove that no nation on Earth is safe from the scourge of inhuman be... read more
by Kasey Sailer
In today's world it is easy to say that terrorism has stretched to every corner of the world. Potential targets of te... read more
View All Articles on:
Winning the war against terrorism
Add your voice
Know something about Winning the war against terrorism?
We want to hear your view.
Write now!
Already a member? Log in.
Cast your vote!
Click for your side.
Featured Partner
Needful Provision's mission is to research, develop, demonstrate, and teach innovative self-help technologies to assi...more
hide