Please Read The Details Carefully, Then Send Me Handshakes

Please Read The Details Carefully Then Send Me Handshakes If You Are W

Please read the details carefully then send me handshakes if you are willing. Thanks requirements: due limit: 5-6 hours instructions to follow for this assignment: to complete this assignment successfully, review the instructions for the final paper in week five. the intent of this assignment is to assist you in organizing and evaluating potential scholarly sources for the final paper. a. name of the article, including the complete bibliographic citation, using apa format. b. summary/abstract of the article – annotation (sometimes it is helpful to ask yourself the following questions in synthesizing the information: · who? (author) · what was done? (for example, an experimental study investigating the interaction of short term memory and attention) · how? (was it done) · what were the findings? (identify the major ones) · contributions? (new findings, applications, etc.) · how will this article support or dispute my thesis? to conduct accurate research, you need to do research in peer-reviewed journals or other sources that are considered to have reliable information. in addition to your required course text, you need at least six professional scholarly sources, three of which must be peer reviewed journal articles found in the asfhford university library. the paper must be formatted according to apa style and include a title page. instructions for the final paper in week five: since the september 11 attacks, the future complexion of terrorism has become quite ambiguous. subsequently, counter terrorism strategies have evolved to address terrorist attacks of any form against the united states. for your final paper, you must address the following points: a. decide whether international or domestic terrorism currently constitutes the greatest threat to the united states. (use historic, cultural, and diversity aspects to support your conclusion). b. summarize some of the strategies the united states can utilize to prevent future terrorist attacks. c. assess whether socio-economic strategies can be utilized to eliminate the motivation of terrorist groups or if military action is the only viable response to terrorists. (use historic, cultural, and diversity aspects of the terrorist populations to support your conclusion). d. evaluate if future legislation or constitutional amendments could be utilized to hinder possible terrorist attacks. e. analyze if additional powers are needed by the federal government to protect the country from terrorist attacks. f. evaluate if the increasing of governmental powers is worth the potential erosion of civil liberties. g. infer what the future of terrorism is and whether the frequency of attacks will increase or decrease over time. support your conclusion.

Paper For Above instruction

The ongoing threat of terrorism remains a complex and dynamic challenge for the United States, shaped by evolving ideological, political, and socio-economic factors. Since September 11, 2001, the U.S. has adapted its counterterrorism strategies, yet debates persist regarding whether international or domestic terrorism poses the greatest threat. This paper aims to analyze these issues comprehensively, considering historical, cultural, and diversity aspects, and evaluating potential measures to mitigate terrorism while balancing civil liberties.

International vs. Domestic Terrorism as the Greatest Threat

Determining whether international or domestic terrorism poses the greatest threat requires understanding their distinct characteristics and historical contexts. International terrorism involves foreign actors or groups operating across borders, often motivated by ideological or political goals. Conversely, domestic terrorism is carried out within the country by individuals or groups inspired by various motives, including political, religious, or violent extremist ideologies.

Historically, international terrorism, exemplified by groups like al-Qaeda, has garnered significant attention due to its global reach and the devastating attacks on U.S. targets. The September 11 attacks exemplify international terrorism’s capacity to cause mass casualties and economic disruption. However, recent trends indicate a rise in domestic terrorism, driven by radicalization within U.S. borders, notably through white supremacist, anti-government, and religious extremism.

From a cultural and diversity perspective, domestic terrorism often stems from societal divisions and marginalization, which may be exacerbated by economic disparities and political polarization. Consequently, domestic threats can be more unpredictable and varied, making them arguably a more immediate threat in recent years. Nonetheless, the global reach of international terrorism and its potential to strike at the heart of U.S. interests suggest that both pose significant risks, but domestic terrorism’s increasing prevalence warrants particular concern.

Counterterrorism Strategies to Prevent Attacks

The U.S. employs a multifaceted approach to prevent terrorist activities, including intelligence sharing, security enhancements, community engagement, and foreign policy measures. Intelligence agencies, such as the CIA and FBI, conduct surveillance and disrupt plots. Homeland Security initiatives focus on screening, border security, and information sharing among agencies. Community engagement programs aim to counter radicalization by fostering trust and resilience within vulnerable populations.

Technological advancements, such as data analytics and cyber intelligence, have enhanced ability to detect threats preemptively. Furthermore, diplomatic efforts and international cooperation, including counter-radicalization programs abroad, challenge terrorist networks globally.

However, these measures must constantly evolve to address emerging threats, including cyberterrorism, lone-wolf actors, and homegrown extremism. Enhanced coordination between federal, state, and local agencies remains vital in implementing effective preventative strategies.

Socio-economic Versus Military Responses

The debate over whether socio-economic strategies can eliminate terrorist motivations or if military force is necessary hinges on understanding the roots of extremism. Socio-economic approaches, such as development aid, education, and community empowerment, aim to address grievances that terrorist groups exploit, such as poverty, political disenfranchisement, and social marginalization.

Historical examples demonstrate that socio-economic initiatives can be effective in reducing the appeal of extremism, particularly in regions where economic hardship fuels recruitment. Programs like the U.S.-backed democratization efforts in the Middle East sought to create stable political environments, reducing susceptibility to radical ideologies.

Nonetheless, some terrorist threats are deeply rooted in ideological and religious beliefs that transcend economic conditions. Military action remains necessary in cases where preventive measures fail or where immediate threats require kinetic responses. The use of targeted strikes, law enforcement interventions, and military operations has disrupted and dismantled terrorist networks but also engenders controversy regarding civilian casualties and civil liberties.

Legislation and Constitutional Amendments

Future legislation could enhance intelligence gathering and legal frameworks to prevent terrorism. For example, amendments expanding surveillance powers or detainment authorities might improve responsiveness but raise civil liberties concerns.

Historically, legislation such as the USA PATRIOT Act expanded government powers post-9/11, enabling increased surveillance and detention capabilities. However, this has prompted debates about potential overreach and erosion of constitutional rights.

Implementing new legislation must balance national security interests with safeguarding civil liberties. Measures such as judicial oversight and clear legal standards can mitigate abuse while enhancing security.

Federal Powers and Civil Liberties

Additional powers for the federal government might be necessary to effectively counteract sophisticated terrorist threats. These could include enhanced intelligence capabilities, cybersecurity measures, and coordination authority.

Yet, expanding governmental powers risks eroding civil liberties, such as privacy rights and due process. The trade-off between security and freedom remains a central concern. Historical precedents show that unchecked governmental powers can lead to abuses, emphasizing the importance of oversight and accountability.

Future policies should aim for a careful balance, employing targeted, transparent measures that protect both national security and individual rights.

The Future of Terrorism

Predicting the future trajectory of terrorism involves considering technological developments, geopolitical shifts, and societal factors. Experts suggest that terrorism may become more decentralized, with lone-wolf attacks and cyber-terrorism increasing in frequency and sophistication.

Conversely, effective countermeasures, international cooperation, and socio-economic development could reduce the incidence of attacks. The rise of extremism on online platforms and advancements in technology pose ongoing challenges requiring adaptive strategies.

Overall, terrorism’s future likely involves a complex interplay of increased resilience and emerging threats, with ongoing debate about whether attack frequency will rise or fall, contingent upon policy effectiveness and societal resilience.

Conclusion

Addressing the evolving threat of terrorism necessitates a comprehensive approach that balances security with civil liberties. Both international and domestic terrorism present significant risks, with recent trends indicating a rising domestic threat. Effective prevention relies on a combination of intelligence, socio-economic initiatives, and judicious legislation, all underpinned by respect for constitutional rights. The future of terrorism remains uncertain, but proactive, balanced strategies can mitigate risks while protecting the core values of liberty and justice.

References

• Borum, R. (2015). Radicalization into Violent Extremism I: A Review of Social Science Theories. Journal of Strategic Security, 8(4), 7–36.
• Kydd, A. H., & Walter, B. F. (2006). The Strategies of Terrorism. International Security, 31(1), 49–80.
• Lutz, D., & Lutz, K. (2017). Understanding Terrorism Strategies, Patterns, and Policies. Routledge.
• Pearson, F. S. (2014). Counterterrorism Strategies: Successes and Failures. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 11(2), 127–150.
• Sageman, M. (2004). Understanding Terrorist Networks. University of Pennsylvania Press.
• Schmid, A. P., & Jongman, A. J. (Eds.). (2005). Political Terrorism: A New Guide to Actors, Authors, Concepts, Data Bases, Theories, and Literature. Transaction Publishers.
• Silke, A. (2012). Rationality and the Psychology of Terrorism: Critical Issues and New Perspectives. Routledge.
• Williams, P. D. (2011). Understanding International Terrorism: Psychosocial Dynamics. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Enders, W., & Sandler, T. (2016). The Political Economy of Terrorism. Cambridge University Press.
• Weimann, G. (2019). Homegrown Terrorism and Islamist Radicalization on the Internet. Routledge.