Difference between revisions of "Terrorism"
GudmunudurKr (talk | contribs) (Undo revision 29236 by GudmunudurKr (Talk)) |
GudmunudurKr (talk | contribs) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
==Description:== | ==Description:== | ||
Terrorism is the premeditated use or threat of use of violence by individuals or subnational groups to obtain a political or social objective through the intimidation of a large audience, beyond that of the immediate victim. Although the motives of terrorists may differ, their actions follow a standard pattern with terrorist incidents assuming a variety of forms: airplane hijackings, kidnappings, assassinations, threats, bombings, and suicide attacks. Terrorist attacks are intended to apply sufficient pressures to a government so that it grants political concessions. If a besieged government views the anticipated costs of future terrorist actions as greater than the costs of conceding to terrorist demands, then the government will grant some accommodation. Thus, a rational terrorist organization can, in principle, obtain some of its goal quicker if it is able to augment the consequences of its campaign. These consequences can assume many forms including casualties, destroyed buildings, a heightened anxiety level, and myriad economic costs. | Terrorism is the premeditated use or threat of use of violence by individuals or subnational groups to obtain a political or social objective through the intimidation of a large audience, beyond that of the immediate victim. Although the motives of terrorists may differ, their actions follow a standard pattern with terrorist incidents assuming a variety of forms: airplane hijackings, kidnappings, assassinations, threats, bombings, and suicide attacks. Terrorist attacks are intended to apply sufficient pressures to a government so that it grants political concessions. If a besieged government views the anticipated costs of future terrorist actions as greater than the costs of conceding to terrorist demands, then the government will grant some accommodation. Thus, a rational terrorist organization can, in principle, obtain some of its goal quicker if it is able to augment the consequences of its campaign. These consequences can assume many forms including casualties, destroyed buildings, a heightened anxiety level, and myriad economic costs. | ||
==Enablers:== | ==Enablers:== | ||
| Line 28: | Line 24: | ||
*Reporters | *Reporters | ||
*United Nations | *United Nations | ||
*See [http://www.ascribe.org/Experts_Pages/exp_terrorism.html Experts Available for comment - Terrorism] | |||
==Timing:== | ==Timing:== | ||
The Madrid bombings of 2004 provide a striking example of what the timing of a terrorist event can produce. While pre-electoral polls suggested a winning margin for the incumbent party, the terrorist event, later established to have been conducted by Islamic militants, seemed to derail in a matter of days the 4% advantage of the government party. While other transnational terrorist events have been smaller in scale, when staged in electoral years they may have produced stronger reactions than if timed in non-election years. In general, have terrorists exploited the electoral calendar in deciding the timing of their events? Previous theoretical and empirical research on the strategies of terrorists and the institutional context suggest this line of inquiry merits attention. In this study I analyze country-year level data from the mid-1970s to the late 1990s to elucidate whether electoral years display differential levels of terrorist events. The analyses reveal that election years do not correspond with higher levels of transnational terrorism, and in fact among presidential democracies election years display slightly lower rates of incidents. [2] | |||
==Research Questions== | |||
# [[What has been the impact of terrorism on the EU?]] | |||
# [[How the recent rebirth of radical nationalist movements influences the EU? ]] | |||
# [[European countries are fighting against terrorism but, what about separatist groups like IRA and ETA?]] | |||
==Resources:== | ==Resources:== | ||
*[1] [http://www.cba.ua.edu/~wenders/Econ_Consequences_Revised.pdf Economic Consequences of Terrorism in Developed and Developing Countries: An Overview] | *[1] [http://www.cba.ua.edu/~wenders/Econ_Consequences_Revised.pdf Economic Consequences of Terrorism in Developed and Developing Countries: An Overview] | ||
*[2] [http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/3/6/0/5/1/p360510_index.html The Timing of Transnational Terrorism and Elections: Is There a Link?] | |||
Latest revision as of 22:02, 17 September 2009
Associated with: Future of the European Union in 2030
Description:
Terrorism is the premeditated use or threat of use of violence by individuals or subnational groups to obtain a political or social objective through the intimidation of a large audience, beyond that of the immediate victim. Although the motives of terrorists may differ, their actions follow a standard pattern with terrorist incidents assuming a variety of forms: airplane hijackings, kidnappings, assassinations, threats, bombings, and suicide attacks. Terrorist attacks are intended to apply sufficient pressures to a government so that it grants political concessions. If a besieged government views the anticipated costs of future terrorist actions as greater than the costs of conceding to terrorist demands, then the government will grant some accommodation. Thus, a rational terrorist organization can, in principle, obtain some of its goal quicker if it is able to augment the consequences of its campaign. These consequences can assume many forms including casualties, destroyed buildings, a heightened anxiety level, and myriad economic costs.
Enablers:
- The arrogance of the United States behaving as the police of the world
- The poorly distribution of wealth in the world
- America’s intention to turn any other country to their knees
- Religion Intolerance
- Violence
Inhibitors:
- A better distibution of welath around the world
- Legiticy and acceptance of different creeds
- Financial help to the Middle east intead of taking it over.
Paradigms:
Terrorism is by no means a new phenomenon. It has been with us from the dawn of recorded history. Every single country in the world, every civilisation has at one time or another in history suffered the cruelty, the agony of terrorism. But what is new today or at least what has been new over the last 30 years, is that terrorism has acquired an international dimension. It is something, this international dimension, that has brought with it new concepts of terror, new and more sophisticated methods of dealing out terror. These three decades have seen, the marriage of high technology, sophisticated banking and terror, that is new, that is sinister, that is immensely frightening, particularly to those who are presently the victims of terror. But the implications of this new dimension, are something that all of us have to take very seriously even if we are living today in secure countries. Global terrorism means quite simply terrorism which is supported in one form or another from outside the country where the terrorist act occurs.
Experts:
- Politicians
- Reporters
- United Nations
- See Experts Available for comment - Terrorism
Timing:
The Madrid bombings of 2004 provide a striking example of what the timing of a terrorist event can produce. While pre-electoral polls suggested a winning margin for the incumbent party, the terrorist event, later established to have been conducted by Islamic militants, seemed to derail in a matter of days the 4% advantage of the government party. While other transnational terrorist events have been smaller in scale, when staged in electoral years they may have produced stronger reactions than if timed in non-election years. In general, have terrorists exploited the electoral calendar in deciding the timing of their events? Previous theoretical and empirical research on the strategies of terrorists and the institutional context suggest this line of inquiry merits attention. In this study I analyze country-year level data from the mid-1970s to the late 1990s to elucidate whether electoral years display differential levels of terrorist events. The analyses reveal that election years do not correspond with higher levels of transnational terrorism, and in fact among presidential democracies election years display slightly lower rates of incidents. [2]
Research Questions
- What has been the impact of terrorism on the EU?
- How the recent rebirth of radical nationalist movements influences the EU?
- European countries are fighting against terrorism but, what about separatist groups like IRA and ETA?