Discuss the similarities and differences between ?new terrorism? and th

Pantha rei as it was stated by the Greek philosopher, Heraclites of Ephesus (sixth and 5th centuries B.C.) everything flows, everything changes. Change in the contemporary world is an extremely fast process. zero remains the same as it was in the overageen. In governmental science especially, some notions (e.g. sovereignty) demand redefinition. The changing nature of all things also includes the political concept of terrorism. The official approach to this changing terrorism is rather complicated. The terrorist of yesterday is the hero of today, and the hero of yesterday becomes the terrorist of today . There is then a great need to roll in the hay what contemporary terrorism is and what it is not. Terrorism is a calculated use of power to achieve a political change, consequently violence or equally important, the threat of violence is used and enjoin in pursuit of, or in service of a political aim . Terrorism is an expression of political strategy, a willful natural se lection made by an organization for political and strategic reasons (efficacy) rather than as the unintended outcome of psychological or social factors . However, terrorism is severe to define because the meaning of the term has changed so frequently over the past 200 years. It has morphed from positive connotation during the French Revolution (closely associated with the subjectls of virtue and state ), through the revolutionary movement and finally to a apparitionally move act as it is mainly perceived today. Nevertheless, we boast to ask ourselves whether old and raw terrorism really exists, or maybe the phenomenon we ar face up today reminds us an old wine in a saucy bottle.Two questions frame the discussed issue 1.What is the nature of new terrorism?2.What is the order of magnitude of threat of new terrorism? gray-haired and new terrorism are distinguishable in five points, as the table below shows .Old TerrorismNew TerrorismIdeologicalVague or religious motivationsHie rarchicalUnorganized (l ace wolf, ad hoc) therefore to a greater extent difficult to flickPropaganda by deed (bringing issue to the table)More violent (killing for the sake of killing)Sub-national multinational and International (global... ...uld be considered more dangerous. The new rules of an old game afford it more lethal and unpredictable. Let us examine only one example Nearly every terrorist group in Iraq has recently captured a foreigner but additionally, they have produced an accompanying video, where a list of demands is outlined, a deadline is set, hostages plea for their lives, and in several instances, they are killed by beheading. Then these kidnappings join a technique of old terrorism in service of new style terrorism. Furthermore, now more than ever, the media are a tool of war. These dramas were broadcasted by the media all over the world. This is how the media helps to evolve terrorism they send the terrorist a go although unspoken message to maintain access to the airwaves, you need to devise plain more outrageous tactics. Thus, the new global terrorist, caught into the trap of globalization, will have to break more rules, cross more psychological borders, and crack more taboos in order to exist. This can be considered the most dangerous bluster of the new terrorism not only do we not know when the next attack will strike, we either have no idea what actually is going to happen .