He had blamed Iraq for starting the war. He had told Americans that “we had not asked for this present challenge, but we accept it. And like other generations of Americans, we will meet the responsibility of defending human liberty against violence and aggression”. President Bush had blamed Saddam Hussein to be a dictator. He had blamed Iraq to be holding terrorists, he had made America believe that Iraq had been under Saddam Hussein’s clutches and that whatever he had to say was law.
The people that Shelton killed are considered combatants because they support they governmental system and work with it. Based on Just War Theory, the proportionality of killing these people is that their deaths are outweighed by the justice that will bring to the judicial system. Shelton believes the system to be corrupt, focusing instead on conviction rates rather than making sure the right person is placed behind bars. By killing these people Shelton can put a new mindset into the “system” because those affected by the killings will want the right man punished rather since they now know how it feels to be wronged. All the killings made by Shelton were to people who were directly showed how flawed the system was.
If we are to deal effectively with terrorists across the globe, we must develop a sense of empathy—I don't mean "sympathy," but rather "understanding"—to counter their attacks on us and the Western World. 10. One of the greatest dangers we face today is the risk that terrorists will obtain access to weapons of mass destruction as a result of the breakdown of the Non-Proliferation Regime. We in the U.S. are contributing to that
This was as Hall rightly says in C, a “Rude awakening to the realities of the war that prompted a re-evaluation of the nation’s commitment.” This is similar to Source A in the way that it refuses to focus on the statistics of the offensive, but look at the consequences of the assault, with the privilege of hindsight. This is what defines this source, what makes it right, that it does not take into account solitary and meaningless numbers but looks at the opinion of the people affected, be it in the public or government officials. It clearly presents the Tet for what it was, a larger reverse for the USA. It contradicts D as well, but C is right, the Americans had been exposed and this decreased the credibility of themselves, the South Vietnamese government and made people question the capitalist system. General Giap sums it up best when he states
It has hurt our credibility across the world and caused a loss of faith in government by its citizens. Although the necessity of the war is argued by many, it is only done in an analysis of its occurrence. Had it not happened and the world possibly fell under Communism, then we would be arguing the exact opposite. The United States did what it felt it had to do at the time, given the information it had. To go to war in Vietnam was a risk the US felt it had to take in order to contain Communism, thus securing its economic prosperity and worldwide dominance.
During times of war, it is understandable that the Government will be more apt to protect its people. In the United States, terrorism has become a major concern. This has come to light more recently after the 9/11 attack in 2004. Americans have been told that terrorism is their biggest enemy. Though in the attempts to obtain security, the people of the United States are giving up their freedoms and others are having those same freedoms taken away from them.
Japan had made clear overtures to peace, but cultural differences made this nearly impossible (the shame of unconditional surrender goes against their code of honour). The determination to use an expensive bomb instead of letting it rust away; the desire to find out how devastating it was and the opportunity to use the bomb as a strong showcase of US supremacy, made Japan the ideal target. Obviously, the USSR would eventually succeed in creating the a-bomb. Therefore, making Hiroshima & Nagasaki the example of the tremendous power of the bombs would make it clear to the USSR that they too needed such weapons to defend themselves. Moreover, other countries claimed the right of nuclear weapons to defend their citizens.
Some would argue that by killing our enemies without due process, that we are no worse than our enemies in our barbarism. While such a statement is targeted at an audience's pathos, and is devoid of substance, it nevertheless points to the slippery sloped involved in targeted extra-judicial killing. Once powers contravening the Constitution have been put into the hands of government, this power is not easily removed. With this, in dealing with the dangers of terrorism, at home and abroad, America's policies do threaten its democracy. With this, it is of the utmost imperative that independent reviews of governmental policy, regardless of secrecy and classification, take place so as to ensure that extra-judicial governmental actions fall within the national interest, rather the whims of a given
Like genocide, terrorism has been used in warfare since warfare was first instituted. As the name states it is used to create a state of terror in the society that it is used against. This tactic is not only used against military targets, but also against civilian targets, in order to pressure the public against any retribution towards the group. Terrorism is very efficient and cost effective, as has been seen in recent years. As with genocide, terrorism does not create any moral dilemma to the society that implements it, yet the one that it is being used against is of the opinion that it is one of the worst things that can be used.
While other educated officials felt that the fundamentals of Islam are timeless, but the interpretations had to be reevaluated in order to apply in daily life. Therefore, an examination of the Islamic Revolution in Iran advocates a great truth with a myriad of implications: Religion can be a very potent catalyst of mass political action, and is a key foundation to the Islamic empires. As Karl Marx famously stated, “Religion is the opiate of the masses.” Therefore, the need for reform was because of changing times, along with the mistakes and corruption of the former political forces. The 1979 Iranian Revolution consequently came to be one of the most important occurrences in modern history. The relation between outside influences effecting society and already established structures was at the heart of the reform.