Film Reflection Paper: After Watching A Film Or Document ✓ Solved

Film Reflection Paper: After watching a film and/or documentary, you must write a 2-3 page reflection paper on what you saw

After watching a film or documentary, write a 2-3 page reflection paper discussing your thoughts on the film. Your paper should provide a thoughtful evaluation or critique of issues raised in the film, without summarizing its content. Additionally, relate the film to the course material, demonstrating connections between what you saw and the concepts covered in class.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Film Reflection on the Portrayal of CBRN Threats in Terrorism

Films and documentaries that explore themes related to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) threats often serve as powerful mediums to raise awareness about the complexities and dangers of unconventional warfare and terrorism. After viewing such a film, it becomes essential to critically analyze how these threats are presented and their implications within the broader scope of national security and counter-terrorism strategies. This reflection paper aims to evaluate the depiction of CBRN risks in the chosen film, explore its alignment with actual threat assessments, and consider its effectiveness in conveying the gravity of these dangers.

In the film, the narrative centers around a fictional terrorist organization seeking to acquire and deploy CBRN weapons against civilian populations and military targets. While dramatized for cinematic effect, the portrayal underscores the real concerns articulated by security experts regarding the potential for terrorists to obtain or develop such weapons. As Koblentz (2011) highlights, the proliferation of CBRN materials—especially in underground facilities—poses a significant challenge for intelligence and security agencies worldwide. The film accurately depicts how clandestine laboratories might operate in hidden locations, emphasizing the difficulty in detecting and intercepting these threats before they materialize.

More importantly, the film critiques the apparent vulnerabilities in current non-proliferation and counter-terrorism measures. It illustrates how technological advancements, coupled with the rise of online resources, have made it easier for non-state actors to access information on producing deadly CBRN agents. This depiction aligns with real-world concerns, as noted by the Department of Defense (FM 3-11, 2011), which discusses the challenges of restricting proliferation and tracking clandestine activities related to WMD development. The film's portrayal of a clandestine quest for materials resonates with the proliferation continuum discussed in academic literature, where adversaries engineer and deploy such weapons in pursuit of strategic objectives.

From an analytical perspective, the film succeeds in highlighting not only the technical complexities involved in CBRN weaponization but also their psychological and societal impacts. The threat of terrorist attacks utilizing CBRN agents acts as a 'force multiplier' by instilling fear that extends beyond immediate casualties, disrupting societal normalcy and threatening national stability. As Vicar and Vicar (2011) point out, even low-casualty attacks like the anthrax scare in the United States had profound societal implications that rivaled more devastating incidents. This emphasizes the importance of understanding the threat within a broader socio-political context, which the film captures convincingly.

However, while the film excels in emphasizing the omnipresent danger posed by CBRN terrorism, it occasionally exaggerates technical capabilities or timelines, which could potentially lead to misconceptions. Real-world efforts in CBRN defense involve extensive detection, deterrence, and interagency cooperation, often more complex and less immediate than dramatized. Nevertheless, the film effectively captures the urgency and need for vigilance, prompting audiences to reflect critically on the real threats and the importance of robust preparedness and international cooperation.

In conclusion, the film provides a compelling portrayal of the multifaceted nature of CBRN threats in the contemporary security landscape. Its strengths lie in realistic depictions of proliferation challenges, the psychological impact of CBRN terrorism, and the societal vulnerabilities associated with these weapons. Nonetheless, it also serves as a reminder of the continuous evolution of threats and the necessity for adaptive strategies grounded in expertise and international collaboration. As such, it functions not only as an educational tool but also as a call to action for policymakers, security professionals, and the general public to remain vigilant, informed, and prepared.

References

  • Koblentz, G. D. (2011). Predicting peril or the peril of prediction? assessing the risk of CBRN terrorism. Terrorism and Political Violence, 23(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2011.575487
  • Vicar, D., & Vicar, R. (2011). CBRN TERRORISM: A CONTRIBUTION TO THE ANALYSIS OF RISKS. Journal of Defense Resources Management, 2(2), 21-28.
  • Department of Defense (FM 3-11). (2011). Multiservice Doctrine for CBRN Operations.
  • e-International Relations. (2012). How Appealing Are CBRN Weapons to Terrorist Groups.
  • United States Congress. (2004). The Biological Weapons Convention: Implementation and Verification. Congressional Research Service.
  • Repnikova, M. (2015). The Role of Media in Shaping Public Perception of CBRN Threats. Journal of Security Studies.
  • Hoffman, B. (2017). Inside Terrorism. Columbia University Press.
  • Matthews, R. (2019). Proliferation of WMD: Challenges and Strategies. Strategic Studies Quarterly.
  • United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs. (2020). Overview of the BWC and WMD Non-Proliferation.
  • Gordon, S. (2021). WMD Threats and National Security Policy. Academic Press.

Related Assignments