A decade after 9/11, it is increasingly difficult to deny that terror has prevailed - not as a specific enemy, but as a way of life. This book examines the social, cultural, and political drivers of the war on terror through the framework of a 'political moral panic'.

Presenting the reader with provocative articles that critically examine the morality of the war on terrorism as it has evolved over the past eight years, this book consists of articles that effectively address specific aspects of the war on terrorism that are missing or underrepresented in ethical discourse since 9/11

This book examines the language of the war on terrorism and is essential reading for anyone wanting to understand how the Bush administration's approach to counter-terrorism became the dominant policy paradigm in American politics today.

The war on terror is a lost cause. As the war heads towards its second decade, American security policy is in disarray – the Iraq War is a disaster, Afghanistan is deeply insecure and the al-Qaida movement remains as potent as ever with new generations of leaders coming to the fore. Well over 100,000 civilians have died in Iraq and Afghanistan, many tens of thousands have been detained without trial, and torture, prisoner abuse and rendition have sullied the reputation of the United States and its coalition partners. Why We’re Losing the War on Terror examines the reasons for the failure, focusing on American political and military attitudes, the impact of 9/11, the fallacy of a New American Century, the role of oil and, above all, the consummate failure to go beyond a narrow western view of the world. More significantly, it argues that the disaster of the war may have a huge if unexpected bonus. Its very failure will make it possible to completely re-think western attitudes to global security, moving towards a sustainable policy that will be much more effective in addressing the real threats to global security – the widening socio-economic divide and climate change.

Terrorism kills far fewer Americans annually than automobile accidents, firearms, or even lightning strikes. Given this minimal risk, why does the U.S. continue expending lives and treasure to fight the global war on terror? In Monsters to Destroy, Navin A. Bapat argues that the war on terror provides the U.S. a cover for its efforts to expand and preserve American control over global energy markets. To gain dominance over these markets, the U.S. offered protection to states critical in the extraction, sale, and transportation of energy from their "terrorist" internal and external enemies. However, since the U.S. was willing to protect these states in perpetuity, the leaders of these regimes had no incentive to disarm their terrorists. This inaction allowed terrorists to transition into more powerful and virulent insurgencies, leading the protected states to chart their own courses and ultimately break with U.S. foreign policy objectives. Bapat provides a sweeping look at how the loss of influence over these states has accelerated the decline of U.S. economic and military power, locking it into a permanent war for its own economic security.

This book responds to the Bush Administration position on the "war on terror." It examines preemption within the context of "just war"; justification for the United States-led invasion of Iraq, with some authors charging that its tactics serve to increase terror; global terrorism; and concepts such as reconciliation, Islamic identity, nationalism, and intervention.

This fascinating reference chronicles the individuals, operations, and events of the War on Terror around the world, exploring its causes and consequences through the lens of policy, doctrine, and tactics of combat. The War on Terror is more than a political movement to identify and prosecute terrorists ... it has become a cornerstone of economic and military importance. This campaign has shaped policy in the Middle East, prompted uprisings of Islamic fundamentalists against the West, and redefined the ideology of warfare. This single-volume encyclopedia provides readers with more than 200 engaging entries on the myriad events, key individuals, and organizations that have played a major role in the War on Terror. The A–Z entries define the policies and doctrines; describe the armies, battlefields, and weapons employed; and profile the figures whose actions and decisions set the course of history. The expert contributors decode military jargon for non-specialist readers and explain the unconventional tactics used in the War on Terror, shedding light on the reason behind the attacks, the political maneuvering of the leaders involved, and the internal conflicts and external clashes that drove terrorists to settle all over the world. The book also includes detailed essays on the impact of the September 11 attacks on U.S. foreign policy, presidential powers, and public opinion.

The military side of the war on terrorism, says Adam Garfinkle, is a necessary but not sufficient aspect of the solution. Weapons of mass destruction are activated by ideas of mass destruction, and these ideas arise from complex historical and social factors. A Practical Guide to Winning the War on Terrorism offers concrete steps for undermining the very notion that terrorism is a legitimate method of political struggle—and for changing the conditions that lead people to embrace it.

This volume offers a comprehensive overview of international political violence by bringing together foreign policy experts on several regions who examine conflicts in the Fertile Crescent, the Balkans, the Post-Soviet Region, the Himalayas, Southeast Asia, and sub-Saharan Africa. With cogent assessments of civil conflicts that threaten to be part of a ‘global jihad’, each chapter both dissects the historical roots and socio-economic causes that catalyze terrorism in those areas, as well as posits ways for the United States to meet the myriad of foreign policy challenges posed by the growing threat of contemporary international terrorism.

What are the initial implications of the war of terror for the U.S. Army?