Lone wolf terror attacks are caused by private individuals; therefore, lone wolf terror attacks cannot be fully prevented without invading civil rights. In the case of Anders Breivik, a Norwegian lone wolf terrorist, caught the entire country off guard with the most merciless terrorist attack in Norway’s history, killing 77 people. He was a man who was considered a normal, and a happy person; however, when he was captured, his laptop was searched and on it, the police found his plans and manifesto of how who and why he was going to kill. The police realised if they had searched his home prior to the attack (violating civil rights) they could have prevented it, however, because Andres had not committed a crime prior to the attack the police could not have searched his house. The evidence suggests that lone wolf terror attacks cannot be fully prevented without invading civil rights.
Is democracy a cure for terrorism?
Democracy, like any other type of government system, cannot cure terrorism because terrorism is a relative term and not something that can be cured. Terrorism is a verb, it is an act to forward political aims whilst generating fear to the outer populous, however, to the inner populous (terrorist group or state), views the act as morally correct. An example of this is Nelson Mandela, he was a man who fought against a white demographic government for black civil rights. Nelson Mandela ordered attacks against the US, generating fear to the outer population, and by all accounts a terrorist, however, the African community perceived him as a hero. Therefore, democracy cannot cure terrorism, because there is not a universal definition for terrorism. The evidence suggests that democracy cannot cure terrorism because terrorism does not have the same meaning for everyone. How effective was the international communities response to 9/11? The response from international communities to 9/11 has been reasonably effective. After the events of 9/11 multiple countries tightened the security at airports by communicating information about their who was on their watch list, and that if those people arrive at an airport the necessary countries can help identify potential threats before the terrorists can act out their plans. An example of this was noted in the documentary the rise of ISIS; the US government learned about a potential terrorist from an informant and sent out the names to multiple government watch lists. Several days later, at a Pakistan airport, two passengers arrived at the airport to charter a plane to the America, the watch list identified the passengers as potential terrorists and they were arrested, preventing a terrorist attack. The evidence suggests that the responses to 9/11 have been largely effective in preventing more attacks. What are some of the key causes of radicalisation in youth? The key causes of radicalisation in the youth populous originate from the desire for meaning and purpose to an otherwise meaningless life. The youth population has been targeted by certain terrorist’s like Anwar al-Awlaki to generate radical ideology because people like Anwar al-Awlaki are aware that a large portion of the youth population is seeking meaning and purpose. In his internet posts, he offers them guidance and a higher purpose and a meaning for their life, and because they are desperately seeking meaning and purposefulness they adopt the radical ideology, incorporating it into their own self-identity. The evidence suggests that the uncertain times of youth can increase the risk of radicalisation. Is the case of Anders Breivik a crime or a terrorist attack and why? The attacks from Andres Breivik was one of terrorism, because he was forwarding political ideology and inciting fear to …show more content…
The ethnic views that the Palestinian population are largely different from the Israeli population, it is what motivated the formation of the PLO. The PLO was created because the culture clash resulted in the Israeli government repressing and belittling the Palestinian community. Yasser Arafat, chairman of the PLO refused to accept Israel as a legitimate state, therefore, the PLO began using terrorism as a tool to gain attention and recognition as a noteworthy organisation. The evidence suggests that when differences in cultural beliefs can motivate people to engage in terrorist