Terrorism affects individuals in different ways. In Boston, there was a large cast with many characters, including perpetrators, victims, bystanders, first responders, media & leaders.
The deliberate killing of innocent people isn’t, after all, what makes terrorism distinctively morally wrong, and much, much worse than the kind of war that allows for extensive ‘collateral damage’.
Since religious repression can contribute to extremist ideology and violence then religious freedom can be vital in addressing religiously inspired civil wars and terrorism.
This edited collection draws on valuable case studies of criminal and terrorist activities of specific groups. Yet, its true value is via its theoretical contribution to emerging scholarship.
Swansea University has recently undertaken a survey of academic cyberterrorism research. The findings might seem counter-intuitive to students and researchers familiar with academic debates on terrorism.
Designating and even vilifying actors with the label of ‘terrorist’ is a highly subjective matter. So how do we address the issue of negotiating with ‘terrorists’ without drowning in a quagmire of subjectivity?
Hybrid warfare is yielding much academic discourse. Yet as the concept currently stands, it is too unbounded conceptually to drive foreign policy or effective military practice.
Icons of War and Terror examines the ways in which the media construct iconic images of lethal violence, particularly within the context of American global hegemony.
Keeping insurgent groups at bay after transition increases the chances of Taliban exhaustion and eventual acceleration of reconciliation – a political solution that will be decisive for Afghanistan’s future.
The dominant theme in the literature on the War on Terror is the assumption that the war and its discourses originated with the Bush administration. However, the War on Terror can actually be traced to earlier administrations, specifically those of Reagan and Clinton.
