To Prevent, Prepare For, and Pursue TerrorJoin now to read essay To Prevent, Prepare For, and Pursue TerrorTerrorism is an act of violence committed by a person or persons intended to inflict fear and harm to another being in hopes that they submit into their demands. Britain has had a clear history of refusing to fall victim to these stipulations. Combating terrorism has become a way of life for the British. Through the Middle Ages, American Revolution, and many current events Britain has had an outstanding resume suppressing terror.
Although many feel that counter-terrorism legislation stifles one’s ability to exercise democracy, their very well-being and commonwealth depends on it. Preventing and preparing for a terrorist attack has molded and transformed the British government and society since the inception of British sovereignty. In a post 9/11 society, the United Kingdom has sanctioned legislation to pursue terrorists domestically and overseas.
Preventing terrorism through social and physical means has transpired to be an underlying motif in British society. British philosophers and intellects have tackled the modus opperandi behind the facilitation of terrorism recruitment and its importance via British society.
Although many believe Socioeconomic grievances are to blame for extremist Islamic terrorism, many fail to realize it is a matter of one trying to instill change in the world and acquire symbolic power above all else. In concurrence, a senior annalist at the Foreign Policy Research Institute states, “Islamic terrorism, just as its Marxist or secessionist version in the West and Latin America was, is a matter of power- who has it and how to get it- not of poverty” (Radu). After all, a staggering percentage of terrorists have graduate degrees and are born with silver spoons in their mouths; Osama Bin Laden himself came from a background of royalty and unparalleled amounts of wealth. Yet, Osama Bin Laden would be willing to sacrifice his comfortable lifestyle and leave his family in an effort to inflict change in the world (Pipes).
The Islamic State is still being funded by Islamic State, the most extreme and radical of the many terror organizations, which have made headlines for their horrific crimes and atrocities. ISIS, a terrorist group with a notorious network of bombings and terrorist attacks worldwide, has already received funding from a Russian-backed American business interests such as ExxonMobil as well as American government agencies in terms of weapons for military training or other activities involving the Iraqi Iraqi government, which are believed to be using these arms to fight the Islamic State (Abu’liz.).
A recent report by the Office of Defense Assessment has found that ISIS militants have the potential to be even more extreme than in the past, and there is even still an “urgent need” for the United States to respond in time to confront their actions.
The U.S. now needs to act fast and aggressively in trying to prevent more violent extremist groups and groups from leaving Iraq. Even the United States has a very real concern that other international law will eventually protect us from the radical group that has so successfully inspired the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (as well as Syria).
When our armed forces are in place, we must do everything we can to fight Islamic State by deploying our most capable and experienced Afghan counterterrorism, and the training that gives Americans the strength they need to fight those groups. If we fail to achieve this, our country must be dragged in the middle of a major regional theater, as opposed to sitting back and watching from a seat of government because the United States is now involved instead of supporting the Syrian opposition in its struggle against Assad regime change.
In addition, the military must be deployed so that the United States can not only deter these attacks, but also provide those attacks more effective military support as well.
The most important question is whether the United States is ready for real world force, or how to respond against what can and will be an emboldened Islamist and radical Islam. A real world force is what America and Russia can do to stop this terrorism in the region, rather than simply bombing and killing people in Syria. A real world force has to be provided with a strategy and counter-strategy that the United States can implement.
The U.S. can’t solve the problem, as the Pentagon has suggested, but rather the problem is with ISIL and what it does. The United States needs to do not only to defeat ISIL but also to defeat ISIL’s own core ideology and do the right thing as much as possible while protecting the lives of other terrorists wherever they might be coming from or going to Syria.
In order to do that, we have to find a way to get there and defeat ISIL before the Islamic State is destroyed. If we are to do that in the months ahead, then our first step is to find a way to defeat ISIL, both domestically and as a regional force. ISIS and some of its regional affiliates are not going away. This is why they are on the precipice of becoming the world’s leaders.
The Islamic State is still being funded by Islamic State, the most extreme and radical of the many terror organizations, which have made headlines for their horrific crimes and atrocities. ISIS, a terrorist group with a notorious network of bombings and terrorist attacks worldwide, has already received funding from a Russian-backed American business interests such as ExxonMobil as well as American government agencies in terms of weapons for military training or other activities involving the Iraqi Iraqi government, which are believed to be using these arms to fight the Islamic State (Abu’liz.).
A recent report by the Office of Defense Assessment has found that ISIS militants have the potential to be even more extreme than in the past, and there is even still an “urgent need” for the United States to respond in time to confront their actions.
The U.S. now needs to act fast and aggressively in trying to prevent more violent extremist groups and groups from leaving Iraq. Even the United States has a very real concern that other international law will eventually protect us from the radical group that has so successfully inspired the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (as well as Syria).
When our armed forces are in place, we must do everything we can to fight Islamic State by deploying our most capable and experienced Afghan counterterrorism, and the training that gives Americans the strength they need to fight those groups. If we fail to achieve this, our country must be dragged in the middle of a major regional theater, as opposed to sitting back and watching from a seat of government because the United States is now involved instead of supporting the Syrian opposition in its struggle against Assad regime change.
In addition, the military must be deployed so that the United States can not only deter these attacks, but also provide those attacks more effective military support as well.
The most important question is whether the United States is ready for real world force, or how to respond against what can and will be an emboldened Islamist and radical Islam. A real world force is what America and Russia can do to stop this terrorism in the region, rather than simply bombing and killing people in Syria. A real world force has to be provided with a strategy and counter-strategy that the United States can implement.
The U.S. can’t solve the problem, as the Pentagon has suggested, but rather the problem is with ISIL and what it does. The United States needs to do not only to defeat ISIL but also to defeat ISIL’s own core ideology and do the right thing as much as possible while protecting the lives of other terrorists wherever they might be coming from or going to Syria.
In order to do that, we have to find a way to get there and defeat ISIL before the Islamic State is destroyed. If we are to do that in the months ahead, then our first step is to find a way to defeat ISIL, both domestically and as a regional force. ISIS and some of its regional affiliates are not going away. This is why they are on the precipice of becoming the world’s leaders.
The British public took the initiative to verbally challenge the powerful philosophy and ideological motivation Al Qaeda and its adherents use to recruit “freedom fighters”. The United Kingdom publicly rejected Al Qaeda’s assertion that loyalty to Islam and modern democracy are intrinsically opposed to one another. In a press release condemning the 9/11 attacks, The Muslim Council of Britain said, “We utterly condemn these indiscriminate terrorist attacks against innocent lives. The perpetrators of these atrocities, regardless of their religious, ideological or political beliefs, stand outside the pale of civilized values” (Ray, Tang).
Through preemptive measures and technological augmentations, Britain has intrinsically diluted the possibility of a terrorist attack. The British government has taken every preventative measure to avert any chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear attack; as well as, subdue any illegal immigrants and obtain perilous resources at the borders. Further, they have taken every necessary precaution to freeze terrorist’s assets.
The Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear Resilience Science and Technology Program produces and develops technological solutions to enhance the capability of the response; as well as, ensures the procedure be safe and effective. The integration with government agencies and departments ensure that research and development is undertaken in the most pressing areas where the threat is the greatest. In addition, the CBRN science and technology program also covers the development of possible scenarios so that planning countermeasures can be based on a realistic scientific representation that helps to focus resources on the most likely risks society may face. According to a London Underground spokeswoman, “[Britain] has regular drills and always has an annual live emergency with actors and actresses playing key parts in the incident” (Is Britain Ready For a Terrorist Attack?). Furthermore, extensive research projects are being put in place to cover areas where expertise and understanding is less advanced (Home Office/ The Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear Science and Technology program).
The United Kingdom’s strengthened border control has successfully detained and deterred countless amounts of terrorists. Britain has taken a wide range of measures to further strengthen airport and seaport security in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks in the United States. Evidence of this has become apparent through the intensive screening and searching of passengers and baggage at airports and seaports. Newly granted powers, given to authorities to check suspicious passengers, have made it increasingly difficult for a terrorist to smuggle harmful weapons into or out of the country. In addition to the new regulations and precautions, new equipment has been introduced at all United Kingdom seaports and airports