Prior to the terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001, I had no meaning of the word “terrorist.” It wasn’t until my college years when I began to truly understand what motivates a group of people to partake in such actions. After viewing the interesting video, A Legacy of Violence: 100 Years of Terror (Setton, Mudd, & Carroll, 2000), I discovered one aspect that could drive people to engage in these violent behaviors. Though I don’t agree with terrorism, I now understand how colonialism can prompt such responses and generate such evil. Colonialism, a term used to describe when one nation has rule over another, can be one condition culpable of producing terrorism. Observing the video (Setton et al., 2000) one can draw
…show more content…
For example, in the movie (Setton et al., 2000) we once again witnessed Britain controlling a nation, more specifically, Palestine, which resulted in two adverse religions colliding (Setton et al., 2000). However, Britain is not the only union to blame. Actually, The United States uses colonialism to advance democracy around the world, such the case as Hawaii. Fortunately, the Hawaii natives were supportive of The United States and no terrorist groups formulated. However, this was not the case in recent years. To elaborate, once the United States conquered Iraq in the early 2000’s, terrorist organizations, such as ISIS, began planning their regime as a reign of terror. With that being said, how can we place absolute blame on the individuals who make up ISIS? In America, we do not place absolute blame on people who commit second degree murder, even though they have taken the life of another. How can’t we understand that these people may hold some justification for their actions? Again, I don’t condone the actions terrorists must use, but I believe the supreme powers are what create these militia groups. When a dog bites a human, we not only accuse the dog for being violent, we often place blame on the dog owner for the way it was raised. This sort of reasoning should also be considered when combating
For example, in the movie (Setton et al., 2000) we once again witnessed Britain controlling a nation, more specifically, Palestine, which resulted in two adverse religions colliding (Setton et al., 2000). However, Britain is not the only union to blame. Actually, The United States uses colonialism to advance democracy around the world, such the case as Hawaii. Fortunately, the Hawaii natives were supportive of The United States and no terrorist groups formulated. However, this was not the case in recent years. To elaborate, once the United States conquered Iraq in the early 2000’s, terrorist organizations, such as ISIS, began planning their regime as a reign of terror. With that being said, how can we place absolute blame on the individuals who make up ISIS? In America, we do not place absolute blame on people who commit second degree murder, even though they have taken the life of another. How can’t we understand that these people may hold some justification for their actions? Again, I don’t condone the actions terrorists must use, but I believe the supreme powers are what create these militia groups. When a dog bites a human, we not only accuse the dog for being violent, we often place blame on the dog owner for the way it was raised. This sort of reasoning should also be considered when combating