Humanities
Four questions, 250 word answers each regarding terrorism in history of America. - asap

Question Description

You must provide a short response (250 words +/-10%) to all four of the following four questions (word count is for total, includes in-text references, excludes bibliography).

250 word answers in each question x 4 questions= 1000 words all

  • Based on a careful viewing of The Weather Underground, explain what is meant by the phrase ‘bringing the war home’, and very briefly pinpoint what the documentary can tell us about what motivates terrorism as political action.
  • In his ‘Rule of Law and National Security’ speech, Philip Ruddock makes numerous references to the motivations of al-Qaeda, such as bin Laden details in his ‘Letter to America’. Does Ruddock provide a sufficient account of bin Laden’s reasons for why he is attacking his enemies? Respond by paying careful and critical attention to how the concepts of law and war are understood and deployed by Ruddock and bin Laden.
  • Based on a careful viewing of Dirty Wars, and with reference to course material in 1) war and 2) crime, identify why Scahill accords so much importance to the killing of Anwar Al-Awlaki and his son, and critically evaluate their fate and significance as crime.
  • Based on a careful and complete reading of ‘The Terrorism Delusion: America’s Overwrought Response to September 11’, identify what you regard as Mueller and Stewart’s single strongest contention, take a position on it, and – briefly – critically evaluate US post 9/11 responses to terrorism in light of your position on their contention.

Links are provided for all the questions. Please use references when answering questions about the readings (or if its easier, just write the page that you found the information)

The actual due date is on 10/4/17 so in 3 days from now. I am thinking of getting a doctor certificate to get a small extention since I have a wrist injury. I will know by tomorrow but please try and be as close to the due date as possible.

I have submitted a file of the assignment, and a pdf of one of the readings that you need to answer a question on it. Any help would be much appreciated. Thank you.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Student Name: [ENTER NAME] Student Number: [ENTER STUDENT NUMBER] Assessment 1: Report (25%) Due 5pm Monday April 10th. Please review the resources this refers you to before proceeding, and ensure you have made an effort to understand the content. You’ll need to have read and thought about the course material in order to answer each of these questions. You must provide a short response (250 words +/-10%) to all four of the following four questions (word count is for total, includes in-text references, excludes bibliography). 250 word answers in each question x 4 questions= 1000 words all 1. Based on a careful viewing of The Weather Underground, explain what is meant by the phrase ‘bringing the war home’, and very briefly pinpoint what the documentary can tell us about what motivates terrorism as political action. 2. In his ‘Rule of Law and National Security’ speech, Philip Ruddock makes numerous references to the motivations of al-Qaeda, such as bin Laden details in his ‘Letter to America’. Does Ruddock provide a sufficient account of bin Laden’s reasons for why he is attacking his enemies? Respond by paying careful and critical attention to how the concepts of law and war are understood and deployed by Ruddock and bin Laden. 3. Based on a careful viewing of Dirty Wars, and with reference to course material in 1) war and 2) crime, identify why Scahill accords so much importance to the killing of Anwar Al-Awlaki and his son, and critically evaluate their fate and significance as crime. 4. Based on a careful and complete reading of ‘The Terrorism Delusion: America’s Overwrought Response to September 11’, identify what you regard as Mueller and Stewart’s single strongest contention, take a position on it, and – briefly – critically evaluate US post 9/11 responses to terrorism in light of your position on their contention. 1 Student Name: [ENTER NAME] Student Number: [ENTER STUDENT NUMBER] You must seek to demonstrate that you have done the work and paid attention to the course. All assertions and statements of fact must be substantiated using the readings and documentary material in the course. To say that a claim is substantiated means that is defensible, clear and cogent. Avoid glib generalisations, loose rhetoric, assertions without evidence, and attributions of action or causes or agents that do not actually exist (please ask for examples of this in seminars and on forums, if you wish). All referencing must be correct, complete and consistent; use Harvard style (google Deakin’s guide to Harvard citation if unsure). Be clear, concise, and specific, and consider context and complexity. Remember that what we want is engagement with course materials and the ideas they raise, and for you to demonstrate your understanding. 1) Based on a careful viewing of The Weather Underground, explain what is meant by the phrase ‘bringing the war home’, and very briefly pinpoint what the documentary can tell us about what motivates terrorism as political action. The weather underground: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg7N6lhjZeA 2 Student Name: [ENTER NAME] Student Number: [ENTER STUDENT NUMBER] 2. In his ‘Rule of Law and National Security’ speech, Philip Ruddock makes numerous references to the motivations of al-Qaeda, such as bin Laden details in his ‘Letter to America’. Does Ruddock provide a sufficient account of bin Laden’s reasons for why he is attacking his enemies? Respond by paying careful and critical attention to how the concepts of law and war are understood and deployed by Ruddock and bin Laden. Rule of law and national security: http://www.gtcentre.unsw.edu.au/sites/gtcentre.unsw.edu.au/files/ mdocs/88_PhilipRuddock.pdf Letter to America: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/nov/24/theobserver 3 Student Name: [ENTER NAME] Student Number: [ENTER STUDENT NUMBER] 3. Based on a careful viewing of Dirty Wars, and with reference to course material in 1) war and 2) crime, identify why Scahill accords so much importance to the killing of Anwar Al-Awlaki and his son, and critically evaluate their fate and significance as crime. Dirty wars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN4Sn5u_pK0 4 Student Name: [ENTER NAME] Student Number: [ENTER STUDENT NUMBER] 4. Based on a careful and complete reading of ‘The Terrorism Delusion: America’s Overwrought Response to September 11’, identify what you regard as Mueller and Stewart’s single strongest contention, take a position on it, and – briefly – critically evaluate US post 9/11 responses to terrorism in light of your position on their contention. PDF of ‘’The terrorism delusion’’ included. 5 Student Name: [ENTER NAME] Student Number: [ENTER STUDENT NUMBER] 6 The Terrorism Delusion The Terrorism Delusion John Mueller and Mark G. Stewart America’s Overwrought Response to September 11 O n November 22, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald, a deluded little man with grandiose visions of his own importance, managed, largely because of luck, to assassinate President John F. Kennedy. Since then, many people have contended that such a monumental event could not have been accomplished by such a trivial person. Some of these disbelievers have undertaken elaborate efforts to uncover a bigger conspiracy behind the deed. On September 11, 2001, a tiny group of deluded men—members of al-Qaida, a fringe group of a fringe group with grandiose visions of its own importance— managed, again largely because of luck, to pull off a risky, if clever and carefully planned, terrorist act that became by far the most destructive in history. As with the assassination of President Kennedy, there has been great reluctance to maintain that such a monumental event—however counterproductive to al-Qaida’s purpose—could have been carried out by a fundamentally trivial group, and there has been a consequent tendency to inºate al-Qaida’s importance and effectiveness. At the extreme, the remnants of this tiny group have even been held to present an “existential” threat to the very survival of the United States.1 In the wake of September 11, recalls Rudy Giuliani, mayor of New York at the time of the attacks, “[a]nybody, any one of these security experts, including myself, would have told you on September 11, 2001, we’re looking at dozens John Mueller is Senior Research Scientist at the Mershon Center for International Security Studies and Adjunct Professor in the Department of Political Science, both at Ohio State University, and Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C. Mark G. Stewart is Australian Research Council Professorial Fellow and Professor and Director at the Centre for Infrastructure Performance and Reliability at the University of Newcastle in Australia. Their book, Terror, Security, and Money: Balancing the Risks, Beneªts, and Costs of Homeland Security, was published by Oxford University Press in 2011. 1. For example, Bruce Riedel, an adviser in Barack Obama’s administration, held the al-Qaida threat to the country to be “existential” in 2009. Riedel, interview by Margaret Warner, NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, October 16, 2009. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff had previously pushed the discussion to a new level when he designated the threat from terrorism to be “a signiªcant existential” one. Quoted in Shane Harris and Stuart Taylor Jr., “Homeland Security Chief Looks Back, and Forward,” govexec.com, March 17, 2008, http://www.govexec.com/ defense/2008/03/homeland-security-chief-looks-back-and-forward/26507. For the “survival” concern, see, in particular, Michael Scheuer, Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing the War on Terror (Dulles, Va.: Brassey’s, 2004), pp. 160, 177, 226, 241, 242, 250, 252, 263. On this issue, see also Glenn L. Carle, The Interrogator: An Education (New York: Nation Books, 2011), p. 293; and John Mueller and Mark G. Stewart, “Hardly Existential: Thinking Rationally about Terrorism,” foreignaffairs.com, April 2, 2010, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/66186/john-mueller-and-mark-g-stewart/ hardly-existential/. International Security, Vol. 37, No. 1 (Summer 2012), pp. 81–110 © 2012 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 81 International Security 37:1 82 and dozens and multiyears of attacks like this.” Journalist Jane Mayer observes that “the only certainty shared by virtually the entire American intelligence community” in the months after September 11 “was that a second wave of even more devastating terrorist attacks on America was imminent.”2 Under the prevailing circumstances, this sort of alarm was understandable, but it does not excuse the experts from dismissing an alternative hypothesis— that the attacks that occurred on that day were an aberration.3 Finally, on May 1, 2012, nearly ten years after the September 2001 terrorist attacks, the most costly and determined manhunt in history culminated in Pakistan when a team of U.S. Navy Seals killed Osama bin Laden, a chief author of the attacks and one of history’s most storied and cartooned villains. Taken away with bin Laden’s bullet-shattered body were written documents and masses of information stored on ªve computers, ten hard drives, and one hundred or more thumb drives, DVDs, and CD-ROMs. This, it was promised, represented a “treasure trove” of information about al-Qaida—“the mother lode,” said one U.S. ofªcial eagerly—that might contain plans for pending attacks.4 Poring through the material with great dispatch, however, a task force soon discovered that al-Qaida’s members were primarily occupied with dodging drone missile attacks, complaining about the lack of funds, and watching a lot of pornography.5 Although bin Laden has been exposed mostly as a thing of smoke and mirrors, and although there has been no terrorist destruction that remotely rivals that inºicted on September 11, the terrorism/counterterrorism saga persists determinedly, doggedly, and anticlimactically onward, and the initial alarmed perspective has been internalized. In the process, suggests Glenn Carle, a twenty-three-year veteran of the Central Intelligence Agency where he was deputy national intelligence ofªcer for transnational threats, Americans have become “victims of delusion,” displaying a quality deªned as “a persistent false belief in the face of strong contradictory evidence.”6 This condition shows 2. Miles O’Brien and Carol Costello, interview with New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, “Giuliani: ‘Have to Be Relentlessly Prepared,’” CNN, July 22, 2005; and Jane Mayer, The Dark Side: The Inside Story on How the War on Terror Turned into a War on American Ideals (New York: Doubleday, 2008), p. 3. 3. On this issue, see John Mueller, “Harbinger or Aberration? A 9/11 Provocation,” National Interest, Fall 2002, pp. 45–50. 4. Alison Gendar and Helen Kennedy, “U.S. Commandos Find ‘Mother Lode’ of Material on Al Qaeda inside Osama Bin Laden’s Compound,” New York Daily News, May 4, 2011. 5. Greg Miller, “Bin Laden Documents Reveal Strain, Struggle in al-Qaida,” Washington Post, July 1, 2011; and Scott Shane, “Pornography Is Found in bin Laden Compound Files, U.S. Ofªcials Say,” New York Times, May 13, 2011. See also David Ignatius, “The bin Laden Plot to Kill President Obama,” Washington Post, March 16, 2012. 6. Carle, The Interrogator, pp. 269, 293, 298–299. The Terrorism Delusion 83 no sign of abating as trillions of dollars have been expended and tens of thousands of lives have been snuffed out in distant wars in a frantic, ill-conceived effort to react to an event that, however tragic and dramatic in the ªrst instance, should have been seen, at least after a few years had passed, to be of limited signiªcance. This article is a set of ruminations on the post–September 11 years of delusion. It reºects, ªrst, on the exaggerations of the threat presented by terrorism and then on the distortions of perspective these exaggerations have inspired— distortions that have in turn inspired a determined and expensive quest to ferret out, and even to create, the nearly nonexistent. It also supplies a quantitative assessment of the costs of the terrorism delusion and concludes with a discussion of how anxieties about terrorism persist despite exceedingly limited evidence that much fear is justiªed. Delusions about the Terrorist “Adversary” People such as Giuliani and a whole raft of “security experts” have massively exaggerated the capacities and the dangers presented by what they have often called “the universal adversary” both in its domestic and in its international form. the domestic adversary To assess the danger presented by terrorists seeking to attack the United States, we examined the ªfty cases of Islamist extremist terrorism that have come to light since the September 11 attacks, whether based in the United States or abroad, in which the United States was, or apparently was, targeted. These cases make up (or generate) the chief terrorism fear for Americans. Table 1 presents a capsule summary of each case, and the case numbers given throughout this article refer to this table and to the free web book from which it derives.7 In 2009, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a lengthy report on protecting the homeland. Key to achieving such an objective should be a careful assessment of the character, capacities, and desires of potential terrorists targeting that homeland. Although the report contains a section dealing with what its authors call “the nature of the terrorist adversary,” the section devotes only two sentences to assessing that nature: “The number and high proªle of international and domestic terrorist attacks and disrupted plots dur7. John Mueller, ed., Terrorism since 9/11: The American Cases (Columbus: Mershon Center, Ohio State University, 2012), http://polisci.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller/since.html. International Security 37:1 84 Table 1. The American Cases (by number, title, type, year of arrest, and description) This table contains cases of Islamist extremist terrorism that have come to light since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, whether based in the United States or abroad, in which the United States was, or apparently was, targeted. 1 The shoe bomber 4 2001 British man tries to blow up a U.S.-bound airliner with explosives in his shoes but is subdued by passengers and crew 2 Padilla 1 2002 American connected to al-Qaida who had discussed a dirty bomb attack returns to the United States and is arrested 3 Mount Rushmore 3 2002 Crucially aided by an informant, two men in Florida, one of them possibly connected to an al-Qaida operative, plot to bomb local targets as well as Mount Rushmore before September 11, and are arrested and tried the next year 4 El Al at LAX 4 2002 His business and marriage failing dismally, a depressed anti-Israel Egyptian national shoots and kills two at the El Al ticket counter at Los Angeles airport before being killed himself in an act later considered to be one of terrorism 5 Lackawanna 1 2002 Seven Americans in Lackawanna, New York, are induced to travel to an al-Qaida training camp, but six return disillusioned—all before the terrorist attacks of September 11—and are arrested the next year 6 Paracha 2 2003 A young Pakistani seeks to help an al-Qaida operative enter the country to attack underground storage tanks and gas stations 7 Ali 2 2003 A U.S. citizen joins a terrorist cell in Saudi Arabia and plots to hijack a plane in the United States and to assassinate President George W. Bush when he is arrested by the Saudis and extradited to the United States for trial 8 Columbus and the Brooklyn Bridge 2 2003 American connected to al-Qaida discusses shooting up a shopping mall in Columbus, Ohio, with two friends, then scouts taking down the Brooklyn Bridge for al-Qaida but decides it is too difªcult 9 Barot and the ªnancial buildings 2 2004 Group in London tied to al-Qaida scouts out ªnancial buildings in the United States with an eye to bombing them, but never gets to the issue of explosives 10 Albany 3 2004 Two men in Albany, New York, effectively help fund an informant’s terror plot 11 Nettles 3 2004 Under the nickname of “Ben Laden,” an American with a long history of criminal and mental problems plots to blow up a federal courthouse in Chicago and reaches out for help to a Middle Eastern terrorist group, but gets the FBI 12 Herald Square 3 2004 Loud-mouthed jihadist in New York and a schizophrenic friend attract informant who helps them lay plans to bomb Herald Square subway station 13 Grecula 3 2005 An American with visions of being an modern-day Spartacus agrees to build a bomb to be exploded in the United States for undercover agents claiming to be al-Qaida 14 Lodi 1 2005 American in Lodi, California, who may have attended a training camp in Pakistan but with no apparent plan to commit violence is arrested with the aid of an informant 15 JIS 2 2005 American in jail masterminds a plot by three others to shoot up military recruitment centers, synagogues, and a nonexistent military base in the Los Angeles area but, although close to their ªrst attack, the plot is disrupted when they leave a cellphone behind at a funds-raising robbery 16 The pipeline bomber and the terrorism hunter 3 2005 An American offers on the internet to blow up pipelines in Canada as an aid to al-Qaida and attracts the attention of a freelance informant The Terrorism Delusion 85 Table 1. (Continued) 17 University of North Carolina 4 2006 To punish the U.S. government for actions around the world, a former student, after failing to go abroad to ªght or to join the air force so he could drop a nuclear bomb on Washington, D.C., drives a rented SUV onto campus to run over as many Americans as possible and manages to injure nine 18 Hudson River tunnels 2 2006 Angered by the U.S. invasion of Iraq, several men based in Lebanon plot to ºood railway tunnels under the Hudson River, but are arrested overseas before acquiring bomb materials or setting foot in the United States 19 Sears Tower 3 2006 Seven men in Miami plot with an informant, whom they claim they were trying to con, to take down the Sears Tower in Chicago, then focus on closer buildings 20 Transatlantic airliner bombings 2 2006 Small group in London, under intense police surveillance from the beginning, plots to explode liquid bombs on U.S.-bound airliners 21 Rockford 3 2006 Loud-mouthed jihadist attracts attention of an informant and together they plot to explode grenades at a shopping mall in Rockford, Illinois 22 Fort Dix 3 2007 Small group target practices, buys guns, and plots to attack Fort Dix, New Jersey, with the aid of an informant who joins the group when the FBI is told they took a jihadist video into a shop to be duplicated 23 JFK airport 3 2007 Small group, with informant, plots to blow up fuel lines serving John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York 24 Vinas 2 2008 New York man travels to Pakistan, is accepted into al-Qaida, and plots to plant a bomb in the United States, but is being watched and talks after being arrested 25 Bronx synagogues 3 2009 Four men, with crucial aid from an informant, plot to bomb synagogues in Bronx, New York, and shoot down a plane at a military base 26 Little Rock 4 2009 American man travels to Middle East to get training, but fails, and on return, working as a lone wolf, eventually shoots and kills one soldier at a military recruitment center in Little Rock, Arkansas 27 Boyd and Quantico 2 2009 Complicated conspiracy in North Carolina, including an informant, gathers weapons and may have targeted Quantico Marine Base 28 Zazi 2 2009 Afghan-American and two friends travel to Pakistan to join the Taliban, but are recruited by al-Qaida to plant bombs on ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Final Answer

Attached.

Bringing the war home is basically a fascinating account of why violence develops within the
context of social movement. It is also an illustration of how states as well as government can
respond to radical dissent and other forms of terrorism. Moreover it is a culmination of how the
rational and irrational combine within the framework of political movements at the same time it
is a portrayal of how moral outrage and militancy can conduct and play both constructive an
destructive roles within the context of social change. In the context of this documentary, key
players including Bill Ayes, Mark Rudd and David Gilbert openly speaks their mind on the idea
of idealist passion and trajectories that basically malformed them to the FIB’s most wanted from
collage activists. It should be note that the documentary chronicles motivates of the Student’s
Democratic Society SDS’s actions and also outline the various motive of terrorism activities as
well as terrorists in general. An exploration of the weatherman or the weather underground
provides the social context of social movement of 1960s and 1970s. The documentary also
features interviews with former SDS members as well as the black panthers who give an account
of the various occurrences during that time.
In line with what motivates terrorism, weather underground presents straight forward and
balanced of the various motives of terrorists and militants during 1960s. Within this context, the
motives of terrorism are terrorists are basically similar with what it currently. In this case, what
motivates the action of terrorism and terrorists include the wrong political ideology, secular and
non-religious goals. In general the key motivator of terrorism and terrorist activities is the wrong
political and religious ideologies.
Discussion 2
In reference to the rule of law, Phillip Ruddock outlines that terrorists are shameless murderers
and are devoid of morals. In this case, they hijack and use Islamic religion to permeate their
immoral actions and reinforce their immoral activities. Terrorists use the Islamic faith to justify
and promote their unjust and terrible deeds. He proceeds to say that there is no religious, moral
or legal or political justification of terrorism within any given context. Terrorism is an act which
basically violates the rule of law and is not justified within any given scenario or context. In this
case, it is important for individuals to recognize that terrorism is an evil act and does not contend
within any legal framework. In letter to America by bin-laden, he says that Allah has given them
permission to fight against disbelievers and he continue to say that those who believe fight in the
course of Allah and those who disbelieve fight in the course of Taghut which is anything that is
worshiped other than God. In this case, Bin-laden uses religion to justify his terrorism activities
against the American people. Bin-Laden justifies his attack on U.S citing that he revenging on
what he calls counter attack on U.S because U.S attacked them and continues to attack them in
Palestine. Bin-laden continues to claim in the latter to America that U.S supports the
government of Palestine that continues to launch attack on them. The government of these
nations continues to act as agents to the U.S government and Bin-laden justifies h...

RyanTopTutor (21953)
UCLA

Anonymous
Thanks for the help.

Anonymous
Outstanding. Studypool always delivers quality work.

Anonymous
Tutor was very helpful and took the time to explain concepts to me. Very responsive, managed to get replies within the hour.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors