Search results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 95 items for :

  • "Terrorism" x
  • Manchester Digital Textbooks x
  • Refine by access: All content x
Clear All
Abstract only
Reflections on harming the innocent
Thomas Pogge

, including 88 Australians, have been killed in Kuta on the Indonesian island of Bali on 12 October 2002; 191 people were killed in the Madrid bombing of 11 March 2004; and the terrorist attack of 7 July 2005 in London killed 52 people. Why wage war against these terrorists? Offhand, one might think that such a grand response to terrorism is undeserved. This thought is supported by comparisons with other threats to our life and well-being – cardiovascular disease and cancer, for instance, annually kill some 250,000 and 150,000 people, respectively, in the U.K. alone

in ‘War on terror’
Michael Byers

international law dependent on the practice of states, and treaty negotiations replete with political, economic and military pressures, it comes as no surprise that powerful countries can exercise disproportionate influence on the making and changing of international rules. And because they can, countries such as the United States deliberately seek to modify international law in accordance with their changing interests, for instance, by pushing for a right of self-defence against terrorism, or more flexible rules concerning the treatment of detainees. Yet the fact that

in ‘War on terror’
Jeff McMahan

What terrorism is Most of us agree that terrorism is always, or almost always, wrong, which is hardly surprising, since the word is generally used to express disapproval. If an act of which we approve has features characteristic of terrorism, we will be careful to deny that it is in fact an act of terrorism. For example, those who believe that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were morally justified tend to deny that they were instances of terrorism. So while we agree that terrorism is almost always wrong, we sometimes disagree about what it

in ‘War on terror’
Conor Gearty

Terror and terrorism For many years I worried with all the other so-called ‘terrorism experts’ about the fact that there was no proper, objective definition of terrorism. I even abandoned a law textbook I planned on the subject on account of the inadequacy of my introductory chapter. In the end I wrote a book on terrorism that was more about language and the power of labels than it was about killing and kidnapping. 1 This was because it had eventually dawned on me that the whole point of the subject of terrorism was that there was no definition

in ‘War on terror’
Jack Holland

president to use America’s military might because, ultimately, ‘It’s what our fathers taught us’? 6 These shows make powerful, resonant, and consequential discursive interventions into policy debates, as is demonstrated by the fact it was to these shows that these three giants of American politics turned in explaining their lives and the challenges facing the US and its government. This chapter traces the interventions and impact of Homeland, 24 , and The West Wing on America’s world politics, with a particular focus on how Americans think and feel about counter-terrorism

in Fictional television and American Politics
Abstract only
The Oxford Amnesty Lectures 2006
Editor: Chris Miller

'Terror' is a diffuse notion that takes no account of local particularities and 'war on terror' is a contradiction in terms. This book is based on the lectures that were given on the subject in Oxford in 2006. Amnesty has described 'war on terror' as a war on human rights. It is also a contest of narratives: stories that the protagonists tell about themselves, about their enemies, and about what is happening now. The book considers how the recent actions of the United States have stressed and stretched two areas of international law: the right of self-defence, and the rules of international humanitarian law. State terrorism, with a bit of careful spin, can be reclassified as counter-terrorism, in other words as inherently good in the same way that terrorism is inherently bad. The book engages with the politico-conceptual difficulties of distinguishing between war and terrorism. The interface and tensions between the human rights tradition and the Islamic tradition, particularly Islamic law, is discussed. The intensification of Western repression against Islamic thinkers or activists has at times been coupled with policies that seemed designed to change the religious trajectory of society. The sexualization of torture is only one way in which the 'war on terror' has delineated who is (and who is not) human. Religion, human rights, and trauma narratives are three other mechanisms for rationalizing suffering. The book also discusses the subject of censuring reckless killing of innocent civilians by the issue of fatwas by Muslim teachers.

Abstract only
Bat-Ami Bar On

The initial context for this essay included the war in Afghanistan (2001–), the war in Iraq (2003–) and terrorist attacks such as those of 11 September 2001, 11 March 2004, and 7 July 2005. These events have been discursively connected by talk about ‘international terrorism’ and ‘the war on terror’, a connection hotly contested ever since it surfaced in speeches by U.S. president George W. Bush (and members of his administration) following 11 September 2001. 1 I do not here intend to contribute to the multifaceted debate about the ‘war on terror’, though

in ‘War on terror’
Abstract only
Some notes on ‘terror’
Chris Miller

Terrorism is a form of human sacrifice. It treats humans not as ends in themselves but as means to a political goal. It asks no permissions of those whose lives it takes or mars; they are sacrificed to a cause that they may never have heard of. Ritual human sacrifice is found in societies that have an erroneous notion of the instrumentality of this procedure and suppose that the gods or other influential entities are appeased or sated by slaughter. For a society afflicted by terrorism, the easy choice is to suppose that the deaths and traumas inflicted by

in ‘War on terror’
Strategy and mobilisation
Series: Pocket Politics
Author: Andrew Monaghan

Under Vladimir Putin, the Russian leadership has consistently sought to shape a strategic agenda. This book discusses the strategy planning process and the legislative and policy architecture that has taken shape. It explores the nature of the agenda itself, particularly Putin's May Edicts of 2012, which set out Moscow's core strategic agenda. The book examines the questions raised by the numerous problems in planning and the extent to which they undermine the idea of Russian grand strategy. It explores what the Russian leadership means by a 'unified action programme', its emphasis on military modernisation, problems that Russian observers emphasise, strategy undermining, and the relation of mobilisation with the Russian grand strategy. The book argues that Russian strategy is less to be found in Moscow's plans, and more in the so-called vertical of power. The broader picture of Russian grand strategy, and the leadership's ability to implement those plans, is examined. The book discusses patriotic mass mobilisation often referred to as the 'Crimea effect', and the role of the All Russian Popular Front in the implementation of the leadership's plans, especially the May Edicts. It talks about the ongoing debate in the Russian armed forces. Finally, some points regarding Russian grand strategy are discussed.

From 9/11 to Donald Trump
Author: Jack Holland

American television was about to be revolutionised by the advent of video on demand in 2007, when Netflix, having delivered over one billion DVDs, introduced streaming. This book explores the role that fictional television has played in the world politics of the US in the twenty-first century. It focuses on the second golden age of television, which has coincided with the presidencies of George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald J. Trump. The book is structured in three parts. Part I considers what is at stake in rethinking the act of watching television as a political and academic enterprise. Part II considers fictional television shows dealing explicitly with the subject matter of formal politics. It explores discourses of realpolitik in House of Cards and Game of Thrones, arguing that the shows reinforce dominant assumptions that power and strategy inevitably trump ethical considerations. It also analyses constructions of counterterrorism in Homeland, The West Wing, and 24, exploring the ways in which dominant narratives have been contested and reinforced since the onset of the War on Terror. Part III considers television shows dealing only implicitly with political themes, exploring three shows that make profound interventions into the political underpinnings of American life: The Wire, The Walking Dead and Breaking Bad. Finally, the book explores the legacies of The Sopranos and Mad Men, as well as the theme of resistance in The Handmaid's Tale.