Psychological readers have used a very interesting approach in articles titled "Talk about Terrorism" to evaluate the ongoing efforts of the world to fight terrorism and terrorism. What I am interested in is the systematic method that the author uses for explaining why Westerners see terrorism and how to do it. Furthermore, there are trade-offs between how to cope with terrorism and how to deal with the strengths and weaknesses of law enforcement agencies and military affairs. Furthermore, they analyzed the grounds of terrorism, which is prejudice against others, primarily for ignorance to other people.
In this article I will clarify the meaning of "root causes" and try to examine whether those analyzes will help explain and explain where and why terrorism will occur. Although not an explicit attempt to explore these issues, this article attempts to divide the "root cause" into qualitative and quantitative variables that can be verified empirically against modern terrorist activities. In doing so, it takes into account the relative merits of different approaches to dealing with "root causes". This article concludes that the causes of indirect and potential conflicts are important in understanding the specific events of terrorism and the terrorism of certain categories. The reason is only analytical use when used in combination with precipitation
In the first part of this article, we will rhetorically analyze the word "war" in order to judge the main meaning of this term in dealing with terrorism. Use rhetorical analysis. It is itself a classification of war theory, which in turn enables a structural review of several key interpretations of international legal norms governing the use of force transnational. Later in this article, I will explore these explanations in detail to clarify how the words of war intersect legal reasons of the US government or criticism of Taliban and its use of force. Ongoing terrorist war
War: Florida International University Tahi Aviation Doctor Faculty of Law, Tanza @ fiu.edu