Excellent book to use as a resource. Good quality and very fast to ship.

To understand what terrorism is, you have to know how it has evolved. This book shows you! Interesting reading!

Dr. White, an international expert in the field of international terrorism has put together a great book to help the average reader who may be inundated with the "war on terrorism" put the problem in perspective. The book is presented in terms comprehensible to the average reader and is not a doomsday approach that many terrorism authors have today. This is a great read and allows a reader to fully comprehend the global problem we face without the rhetoric. Thanks Dr. White.

This book is presently being used in my college course on Terrorism. The author presents the information in a precise and readable way. The book was nothing of what I thought it would be. It presents a unbiased history of terrorism . . .from beginning to the present...with explanations about how terrorism works.

Only problem I have with the book, is the author keeps referring to other Chapters when explaining some of the points. I would have preferred to have everything together.

Definitely a book that will help you understand what is going on in the world today.

This book is presently being used in my college course on Terrorism. The author presents the information in a precise and readable way. The book was nothing of what I thought it would be. It presents a unbiased history of terrorism . . .from beginning to the present...with explanations about how terrorism works.

Only problem I have with the book, is the author keeps referring to other Chapters when explaining some of the points. I would have preferred to have everything together.

Definitely a book that will help you understand what is going on in the world today.

When local governments prove lack of temerity and live in chattering fear from terrorists in their midst, there will be no measure for panic, and experience indicate that fear breeds atrocities.
Experience also indicate that terrorists atrocities do not remain localized, they tend to spread outside the borders.

The UN should leave no stone unturned until terrorism is defined.
If the UN took, in unison, immediate actions in the past century to quash the plots for terrorist's acts, many sad events on the turn of this century would have not been speeded up so sudden and hysterical.
But the UN remained weak by the `Veto' power.
It is amazing how the `super powers' sat on heaps of weapons delicately stored in their arsenals to be on the look out against each others, tiger vis-à-vis tiger, while the bugs were brewing to bug.

Certainly the chain of events leading to 9/11 was so odd they would have been more fitting the famous James Bond - Agent 007 movies.
But the unfortunate fact is that what happened was gravely true.

The USA is to blame because by remaining so passive in the past and by sitting put and lethargic when bloody acts looked them in the eye, America delivered the `wrong' message.
It is incredible how the American public was left aloof to know if the successive Administrations had been seriously handling, or gathering intelligence, about bloody acts around the world.
It is also incredible how the USA abdicated its responsibilities to the UN waiting in profound ignorance to see how the disasters from `petty' and `localized' wars in small countries will unfold.

We can all recall Jimmy Carter's famous smile (a precursor of inaction) and his inclination towards pacifism. (Rescue attempt of American Hostages in Iran that failed).

Despite Ronald Reagan's gifted articulation, his soft actions were no match to his hard words and the same pacifist messages were again delivered.
The USA must have taken better heed of what went `wrong' in small countries on this planet (Lebanon for example), not to stoop from the slightest incident (the attack, that killed 241 marines, on their compound located at Beirut Airport on October 23, 1983, for example). Immediately after this sad event, the USA pulled their forces out of Lebanon - scuttling away from important pressing responsibilities.
As World Power, the USA should not have been deceived!!!

Georges Bush senior daring reprisals looked pale, later on, when Bill Clinton weakened them by his impulse to deal with internal matters at home mixed what they feared to believe with what they dared not to believe. Despite short periods of `hopes' during his first term, Bill Clinton occupied the media for quite sometime bringing up the image that USA house is crumbling, at its weakest point, leaving a lot to be desired.

Mr White sees the definition of terrorism very difficult to formulate, and it gets more confusing within 'Homeland Security.'
Who should decide what is a terrorist act or otherwise a resistance struggle?
Are the Palestinians terrorists? Were Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin terrorists or resistance?
Are Hizbullah terrorists and who should decide so? Were members of the French resistance terrorists?
Which signposts should support `a definition' to be recognized by all nations? Should references to certain groups in history be taken as signposts, and equated with current ones? And how soon will it be settled?
As long as there are inequities in the pending issues facing the UN there shall never be a universal definition.

Who should take the lead to define the legend `Terrorism' , the UN or the USA. This time, the UN seems to abdicate this responsibility to the USA. Our impression is one that the UN is playing the role of the Carrot and the Stick is relegated to the USA.

Perhaps this very dilemma that has been challenging the USA presidents in the last twenty years of the twentieth century until the beginning of this one, will also determine the shape of nations in our times.

When local governments prove lack of temerity and live in chattering fear from terrorists in their midst, there will be no measure for panic, and experience indicate that fear breeds atrocities.
Experience also indicate that terrorists atrocities do not remain localized, they tend to spread outside the borders.

The UN should leave no stone unturned until terrorism is defined.
If the UN took, in unison, immediate actions in the past century to quash the plots for terrorist's acts, many sad events on the turn of this century would have not been speeded up so sudden and hysterical.
But the UN remained weak by the `Veto' power.
It is amazing how the `super powers' sat on heaps of weapons delicately stored in their arsenals to be on the look out against each others, tiger vis-à-vis tiger, while the bugs were brewing to bug.

Certainly the chain of events leading to 9/11 was so odd they would have been more fitting the famous James Bond - Agent 007 movies.
But the unfortunate fact is that what happened was gravely true.

The USA is to blame because by remaining so passive in the past and by sitting put and lethargic when bloody acts looked them in the eye, America delivered the `wrong' message.
It is incredible how the American public was left aloof to know if the successive Administrations had been seriously handling, or gathering intelligence, about bloody acts around the world.
It is also incredible how the USA abdicated its responsibilities to the UN waiting in profound ignorance to see how the disasters from `petty' and `localized' wars in small countries will unfold.

We can all recall Jimmy Carter's famous smile (a precursor of inaction) and his inclination towards pacifism. (Rescue attempt of American Hostages in Iran that failed).

Despite Ronald Reagan's gifted articulation, his soft actions were no match to his hard words and the same pacifist messages were again delivered.
The USA must have taken better heed of what went `wrong' in small countries on this planet (Lebanon for example), not to stoop from the slightest incident (the attack, that killed 241 marines, on their compound located at Beirut Airport on October 23, 1983, for example). Immediately after this sad event, the USA pulled their forces out of Lebanon - scuttling away from important pressing responsibilities.
As World Power, the USA should not have been deceived!!!

Georges Bush senior daring reprisals looked pale, later on, when Bill Clinton weakened them by his impulse to deal with internal matters at home mixed what they feared to believe with what they dared not to believe. Despite short periods of `hopes' during his first term, Bill Clinton occupied the media for quite sometime bringing up the image that USA house is crumbling, at its weakest point, leaving a lot to be desired.

Mr White sees the definition of terrorism very difficult to formulate, and it gets more confusing within 'Homeland Security.'
Who should decide what is a terrorist act or otherwise a resistance struggle?
Are the Palestinians terrorists? Were Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin terrorists or resistance?
Are Hizbullah terrorists and who should decide so? Were members of the French resistance terrorists?
Which signposts should support `a definition' to be recognized by all nations? Should references to certain groups in history be taken as signposts, and equated with current ones? And how soon will it be settled?
As long as there are inequities in the pending issues facing the UN there shall never be a universal definition.

Who should take the lead to define the legend `Terrorism' , the UN or the USA. This time, the UN seems to abdicate this responsibility to the USA. Our impression is one that the UN is playing the role of the Carrot and the Stick is relegated to the USA.

Perhaps this very dilemma that has been challenging the USA presidents in the last twenty years of the twentieth century until the beginning of this one, will also determine the shape of nations in our times.

This is the best terrorism book on the market. It covers the basics from beginning to end. I would recommend it to anyone interested in the subject. Simply outstanding!

This is the best terrorism book on the market. It covers the basics from beginning to end. I would recommend it to anyone interested in the subject. Simply outstanding!

This author lacks credibility as he cites the Gun Owners of America ... as a terrorist group - right next to Hamas (page 285, in the appendix)...such an allegation, without more to back it up borderlines on defamation. This test is used by Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, Virginia) in a counter-terrorism course. The instructor advised me that he's giving up the text in future classes because of this one erroneous allegation in the book.

This author lacks credibility as he cites the Gun Owners of America ... as a terrorist group - right next to Hamas (page 285, in the appendix)...such an allegation, without more to back it up borderlines on defamation. This test is used by Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, Virginia) in a counter-terrorism course. The instructor advised me that he's giving up the text in future classes because of this one erroneous allegation in the book.

Dr. White is direct and to the point. I recommend this book to all of my friends.

This is an introductory book. As such, it is designed for an audience with little or no background in this topic. Despite this limitation, I have found many people who are well read in this topic, prefer this book over others. I use this book in classes I teach on terrorism because it is, hands down, the best overview of terrorism on the market.

This is an introductory book. As such, it is designed for an audience with little or no background in this topic. Despite this limitation, I have found many people who are well read in this topic, prefer this book over others. I use this book in classes I teach on terrorism because it is, hands down, the best overview of terrorism on the market.

Terrorism by White is superficial and will only appeal to people who watch "bad boys, bad boys, whatca goin do when they come for you." It does have some promise though when it attempts to reach the underlying sources of terror such as those poignantly revealed by Oliverio in her research.

Terrorism: An Introduction is one of the most comprehensive and informative works in print today. A must read for those in the business of combating terrorism.

This book is an excellent primer for those studying the various disciplines of terrorism. Professors are well advised to consider use of this book in their required reading list. It is well organized, well documented, and uses just about the right amount of examples, most of them from actual events. I especially appreciated the way each chapter gives you an idea of what you should take away from it.

The only real drawback is a minor one. It tends to read a little heavy sometimes. Give yourself some time to digest each piece before moving on and you will be OK.

Bottom Line: When you finish this book, you will have a clearer understanding of the concepts, motivations, and philosophies of not only terrorism, but also counter- and anti- terrorism, and some of the contemporary issues surrounding modern terrorism. Well Done!!