Example collocations logo

Terrorism in sentence

1692 examples of Terrorism in a sentence

Slow income growth, unemployment, inequality, immigration, and terrorism are supposedly not being tackled decisively enough.
Even when non-Muslim white men launch explicitly terrorist attacks – for example, Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, who murdered 168 people in 1995, or the “Unabomber” Theodore Kaczynski – their offenses are typically regarded as isolated law-enforcement issues, not as terrorism.
By contrast, darker-skinned terrorism suspects, especially Muslims, are considered agents of larger conspiracies that require military involvement and justify human-rights violations.
In 2002, it launched its first-ever “partnership action plan against terrorism,” which was re-branded in 2015 as “counter-terrorism policy guidelines.”
For example, the Alliance should develop a terrorism risk-assessment model, with a special focus on its southern flank, and upgrade the amount of actionable intelligence collected by and from partner and member countries.
It can also promote extremism, even terrorism.
Another aspect of America’s domestic practice of liberal democracy that is currently being debated is how the country deals with the threat of terrorism.
But the problem of how to deal with terrorism is not just a question of the past.
Public outrage – potentially fueled by inflammatory media coverage – can push for a harsher sentence, especially in cases relating to terrorism or crimes against women.
Given these factors, in Western Europe, the rise of radical ethnic nationalism as a response to fears of terrorism and mass migration represents a more fundamentally transformative crisis.
The Bush Administration believes that US military power buys security, even though terrorism has increased since the Iraq War.
Under this framework, multilateral cooperation in combating terrorism and the spread of weapons of mass destruction was offered to the region’s main actors.
Israel recently became the first country to conclude an Individual Cooperation Program with NATO, through which it conducts an ongoing strategic dialogue with the Alliance covering a wide array of areas, including terrorism, intelligence sharing, nuclear proliferation, procurementand logistics, and rescue operations.
Even if the US had achieved stability in Iraq, this would not have assured victory in the “war on terrorism,” let alone success in achieving broader strategic objectives.
NATO is in Afghanistan largely owing to shared concerns about terrorism.
It also has obligations to its neighbors, to the world community (not to support terrorism, for example), and to its citizens.
But whoever is elected will confront difficult choices if a nuclear-armed Pakistan remains unable or unwilling to act as an American partner and meet its responsibilities in the effort against terrorism.
There is also widespread acknowledgement that the US must do more both at home and diplomatically to address global climate change; that the US must work with its European allies to prevent Afghanistan from slipping back into anarchy; and that the US must take the strongest possible stand against terrorism and those who would support it in any way.
Much has been done to improve security at nuclear facilities in recent years, but governments must do more to protect their citizens from the risks of catastrophic nuclear terrorism.
It is important that we learn the lessons of Fukushima and incorporate them into our strategy to combat nuclear terrorism.
Bitter congressional testimony by former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen about Pakistani perfidy in supporting terrorism deepened suspicion on both sides, which a high-profile visit to Islamabad by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did little to ameliorate.
Security is a key area of concern today in e-governance – both physical security, in an age of terrorism, and cyber security.
Unless the Bush administration is vindicated in its actions--for example, if Saddam Hussein launches weapons of mass destruction that unite the world against him, or if the US discovers hidden nuclear weapons in the Iraqi desert--anti-American sentiments, and terrorism, unleashed by war, are likely to be massive.
Today, there are growing concerns about third parties accessing and manipulating Facebook user data; and before that, there was a raging debate about whether the government should be able to unlock devices belonging to suspects of terrorism or other crimes.
It is still an open question whether Hamas in government will become more pragmatic and less committed to terrorism: it certainly is a possibility, and one should not prejudge the outcome.
In all of these cases, economic failure and a lack of opportunities and hope for the poor and young are fueling political and religious extremism, resentment of the West and, in some cases, outright terrorism.
The problem, of course, is that such a strategy takes time to show results, and time is something that Western democracies lack when it comes to terrorism.
But the war against Islamist terrorism is far from over.
Islamist terrorism can either undermine or strengthen this effort.
A decisive victory in the fight against Islamist terrorism is possible only if that fight serves as a source of unity in Europe, one that reinforces our deep-rooted connections and our shared democratic ideals.
BackNext