'Counterterrorism vs Civil Liberties\r'

'The f each(prenominal) of Hussein’s governance marked the dawn of the advocacy to domain of wards counter act of terrorist act. The war between the United States and the condition Iraki government had re solelyy yuckyd the descent of the two put ups (Davis, 2002). The war ended with the US as the victor. Yet the true fight has non been started yet. There argon sedate potential forces that be re onlyy adapted of destroying the world enounce again. Osama Bin moneyed and his Al Qaeda group argon not yet captured. Hence, there be reasons for US not to take its eyeball off on the possibility of an opposite(prenominal) outbreak may be it in the Middle East or either place in the globe.What Counterterrorism Is? Counterterrorism pertains to the techniques and strategies that are pitch against terrorism (Howard & angstrom unit; Sawyer, 2005). Counterterrorism does not pay back itself from solely cosmos formed and sedulous by a incident government. It includes all groups and sectors of the society. It is impossible to make the advocacy towards counterterrorism without needing the divine service of other agencies such the business sector. Certainly, the citizens of the state must be come up-informed virtually the scope and limitations of such tug so as to get their perspectives regarding it.The c angstrom unitaign for counterterrorism starts with a aim. In the formulation of the plan, various strategies, tactics, and techniques are also developed to respond to terrorist attacks. The plan normally includes â€Å"special forces” and teams that are forthwith responsible for the implementation of particular strategies against the terrorists (Howard & international ampere; Sawyer, 2005). In this contemporary period, campaigns for counterterrorism are fitting prevalent not only in the Western regions but also in the Eastern and Southern regions.The United States has started to tapdance support form its allied countries to take p lace its plan of combating terrorism. US Policy on Counterterrorism As mentioned in the introduction, the bulky efforts of the US to strengthen its position against terrorism started later on the September 11 bombing which beat the whole of US in jumbo indignity. The US drafted a national as well as international constitution against terrorism. The US Counterterrorism Policy states that it strongly espouses a war against terrorism and all other forms of it.The insurance constitution stressed that the US shall smartly act so as to buck terrorist attacks against the state and the citizens (Naftali, 2005). According to the constitution, the US government including all its major departments and agencies shall put great effort so in order to reduce the vulnerabilities of the US on terrorism (Naftali, 2005). All the departments and agencies mentioned in the policy shall come over to it that the counterterrorism campaign of the state is given the highest priority. such(prenomina l) that it shall unattackable that all of their areas of responsibility are protected from terrorist attacks (Davis, 2002).In addition, the policy states that its implementation shall be appropriately and effectively employed by all US departments and agencies by shouldering all the costs of its implementation as well as developing efficient and multipurpose technologies that can really contribute in countering terrorism (Naftali, 2005). The US Counterterrorism Policy is not only limited in the state’s national territory. In fact, its policy extends even outside US. It requires that countries who house particular terrorist groups shall be able to cooperate with them.It is clear stated in the policy that the US government will be exploitation all means to get terrorist groups from their force country no matter if the latter(prenominal) agrees or not. And those countries that refuse to do so would be labeled as advocates of terrorism thus they shall be treated as enemies o f the state. Such is the scope of the US policy on counterterrorism (Howard & Sawyer, 2005). Counterterrorism vs. Civil Liberties The former or the traditional surveillance in the US has been developed into something that which is superior in terms of its strict implementation. Yet, as we all know, everything that exceeds the normal is evil.In US, muckle are state to be more(prenominal) secured and protected against all forms of violence particularly by terrorism (Darmer & Baird, 2004). This is due to the fact that the US government gives priority to the enforcement of the anti-terrorism or counterterrorism policy. As consequences, people are confident adequate of their safety wherever they are in the globe. However, such strictness in the counterterrorism policy implies the curtailment of certain civil liberties of its citizens. As mentioned earlier, all US departments and agencies have been instructed to do their very best and to prioritize the campaign against terrori sm.By doing so, people would not really be able do their thing as how they do it before. This means that they have to hand their some of their freedom (i. e. privacy) just to turn back that the policy on counterterrorism is not being obstructed by anyone or anything (Darmer & Baird, 2004). This seems to be problematic especially for those advocates of adult male rights. By implementing the policy, the government has given a direct authority over the citizen’s life so as to secure that there are no threats of terrorism. It may seem beneficial to all because they are being protected by the state.Yet people may also experience severe interference and intervention from the government (Howard & Sawyer, 2005). And these things are not really nigh(a) for the government inflicts pointless suffering on its citizens. As reported, there are increase numbers of human rights victims in the US whose grievances are caused by the policy on counterterrorism. Furthermore, it underm ines the welfare of the people in the experience that it gives more priority (i. e. higher indemnity for military) to the campaign against terrorism than giving more funds for education, and social and heath operate (Darmer & Baird, 2004).References: Darmer, M. K. , & Baird, R. M. (2004). Civil Liberties Vs. field Security In A set 9/11 World . Prometheus Books . Davis, P. K. (2002). determent and Influence in Counterterrorism: A fate in the War on Al Qaeda. RAND Corporation . Howard, R. D. , & Sawyer, R. L. (2005). Terrorism and Counterterrorism: soul the New Security Environment, Readings and Interpretations (2nd ed. ). McGraw Hill/Dushkin. Naftali, T. (2005). unsighted Spot: The Secret History of American Counterterrorism . Amazon Remainders Account .\r\n'