The United States have its own current strategies to counter state sponsored terrorism. It is based upon Former President George W. Bush Doctrine. When he addressed the National Security Strategy in October 2002 to the nation, he made it clear that, “ America will hold to account nations that are compromised by terror, including those who harbor terrorist because the allies of terror are the enemies of the civilization. In this essay we will look at current strategies being used to repel possible terrorist attack, furthermore, we will evaluate whether such current strategies should differ when developing ways to counter state sponsored terrorism. In addition to that we will also take a look if state sponsored terrorism differs qualitatively
…show more content…
According to President Obama (2011), “Adherence to those core values—respecting human rights, fostering good governance, respecting privacy and civil liberties, committing to security and transparency, and upholding the rule of law—enables us to build broad international coalitions to act against the common threat posed by our adversaries while further delegitimizing, isolating, and weakening their efforts”, p. (4). This guideline is what we use to continue our counter terrorism efforts. One of the core value that he mention is respecting human rights, we continue our fight for terrorism for we all believe that terrorism is a violation of human rights. They do not chose what gender, age and religion the terrorist launch their attack and destroy a mass population. Part of our counter terrorism effort is protecting the human rights from any act of violence from the terrorist. In developing ways to counter state sponsored terrorism, this should not be any different in combatting a terrorist group. The state that support the terrorist should be suppressed therefore, no logistics and arms can be moved in order for the terrorist to carry out their plan of attack. For example what the United States done in Afghanistan when they launch the attack is a way to counter state-sponsored terrorism. The US led war was directed to Afghanistan where Bin Laden and other members of Al Qaeda were hiding. The Bush administration will not hesitate to do preemptive strikes against terrorist if they are treating the lives of the American
According to President Obama (2011), “Adherence to those core values—respecting human rights, fostering good governance, respecting privacy and civil liberties, committing to security and transparency, and upholding the rule of law—enables us to build broad international coalitions to act against the common threat posed by our adversaries while further delegitimizing, isolating, and weakening their efforts”, p. (4). This guideline is what we use to continue our counter terrorism efforts. One of the core value that he mention is respecting human rights, we continue our fight for terrorism for we all believe that terrorism is a violation of human rights. They do not chose what gender, age and religion the terrorist launch their attack and destroy a mass population. Part of our counter terrorism effort is protecting the human rights from any act of violence from the terrorist. In developing ways to counter state sponsored terrorism, this should not be any different in combatting a terrorist group. The state that support the terrorist should be suppressed therefore, no logistics and arms can be moved in order for the terrorist to carry out their plan of attack. For example what the United States done in Afghanistan when they launch the attack is a way to counter state-sponsored terrorism. The US led war was directed to Afghanistan where Bin Laden and other members of Al Qaeda were hiding. The Bush administration will not hesitate to do preemptive strikes against terrorist if they are treating the lives of the American