Answer:
Politics are politics, but there are serious dangers in making claims about the ability to defeat terrorism in general – and ISIS in particular. One of the most critical limits to the way both Democratic and Republican Administrations have fought the “war” on terrorism is that they have treated it largely as a military struggle against individual terrorist and extremist movements, rather than as a broader campaign to deal with a range of threats that cannot be defeated without major successes against a wide range of constantly changing movements and without major efforts to reduce the causes of terrorism.
The end result to date has been that the U.S. has sometimes won major victories at a military level, but all of the foreign terrorist movements the U.S. has targeted have survived or mutated into different organizations with different names. Worse, if one goes back to “9/11,” none of the fundamental causes which keep extremist and terrorist movements alive – and generate new threats – have been reduced.
The real record of the “war” on terrorism is all too clear in the MENA region, Sub-Saharan Africa, Afghanistan, Latin America, and Asia. Even when the U.S. makes major military progress against a given movement, the group either recovers or some new form of terrorism emerges in its place. The U.S. can sometimes work with its allies and strategic partners to limit the military capabilities of a given terrorist movement and to reduce or contain its ability to spread, but this is not a lasting defeat of terrorism. Worse, if the U.S. effort to contain a given movement weakens, terrorism and extremism are all too likely to return.
Explanation:
Hope it's help pa brainllest po ty
