Understanding the Nature of Homeland Security in the United States

Our nation has historically possessed a proactive approach to defending itself and our people. Prior to 9/11 the
most significant attack against the homeland of the United States was the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing.
Unfortunately, this attack did not have a significant impact on American perceptions of safety or the political
landscape. However, as a result of the horrific attacks on 9/11/2001, a complete transformation of our nation’s
security measures occurred. This transformation included the creation of an entirely new federal agency, the
Department of Homeland Security, whose sole task is to prevent future attacks against the homeland.
Instructions
1. Read the following from your textbook, Homeland Security and Terrorism, 2nd ed.:
a. Chapter 1 “Introduction to Homeland Security”
b. Chapter 2 “The Homeland Security Apparatus”
2. In a minimum 250-word initial post, respond to the following discussion questions:
a. Describe the mission and goals of homeland security in the United States.
b. Explain the scope of homeland security.
c. Discuss the impact of the National Strategy for Homeland Security report on homeland security strategies
and tactics.

Sample Solution

Understanding the nature of homeland security in the United States

Homeland security is officially defined by the National Strategy for Homeland Security as “a concerted national effort to prevent terrorist attacks within United States, reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur. The department of Homeland Security has a vital mission: to secure the nation from the many threats we face. This requires the dedication of more than 240,000 employees in jobs that range from aviation and border security to emergency response, from cyber security analyst to chemical facility inspector. Its duties are wide-ranging, but its goal is clear, keeping America safe. The National Strategy for Homeland Security report on homeland security strategies and tactics continue to strengthen the foundation to ensure its long-term success.

he Marshall plan was a US program introduced to recover the Western European countries after WW2. The motives behind the plan come down to three broad strands that are economic, political and humanitarian. Each interpretation focuses on one or more of these aspects. In the Kolko’s argument they outline that the Americans economy and prosperity was the most important motive behind the introduction of the Marshall plan. That it was introduced as the US relied on the European countries trade to expand. A varied argument comes from David Rees, he claims that the plan was simply to defend Europe from communism and to rehabilitate the countries. Finally, Daniel Yergins key argument is one where economics and politics were motives. He argues that the plan was to consolidate the Western sphere by rebuilding the economy, which at the same time would keep the communists out. The motives each have different impacts on the Marshall plans introduction.

Kolko’s analysis and explanation

Joyce and Gabriel Kolko, writing in ‘The limits of power’, make it clear that they had a straightforward view on the motives behind the introduction of the Marshall plan. They openly imply the main factor behind it was that the US wanted to re-establish the American economy by which they would “subsidize United States exports” and “permanently influence and shape Western Europe’s internal economic policy”.

The most significant argument that the Kolkos present is that of economic self-interest and expansion in Europe. A point that they make early on in the work is the plan was the “outcome of real alarm with which Washington viewed the direction of the world economy”. The Kolkos argue that the USAs prosperity was dependant on the plan. They claim the US is “a powerful nation rebuilding its potential economic competitors from the ruins of war”. This aim, the Kolkos say, was key as they saw it is an attempt by the US “to expand their market to avoid internal crisis” and also “secure their own immediate gains” by introducing the Marshall plan. This internal crisis they believe was the dollar gap and export surplus, as after the war there wasn’t enough dollars in Europe to purchase American goods, therefore their exports were building up with no one to buy them. Henry G Aubrey, a US economist noted “dollars were so scarce that the economists were talking about a permanent dollar shortage”. Kolko saw this as an immediate motive as without the dollars in Europe it would “further isolate” the US economy. Therefore, the Kolkos claim the motive behind the plan is to “re-establish normal trading patterns through which the entire world would realise prosperity and peace”. The Kolkos further expand this point of internal crisis by saying that a prominent danger to the US was th

This question has been answered.

Get Answer