The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, produced a response among American Officials, the media, and the

public that is probably matched only by the Attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. Since it is the very nature of terrorism not only to cause immediate damage but also to strike fear in the hearts of the population under attack, one might say that the terrorists were extraordinarily successful, not just as a result of their own efforts but also in consequence of the American reaction. In this essay, I shall argue that this reaction was irrational to a great extent and that to that extent Americans unwittingly cooperated with the terrorists in achieving a major goal: spreading fear and thus disrupting lives. In other words, we could have reacted more rationally and as a result produced less disruption in the lives of our citizens. The argument in this statement is that the terrorists were extremely successful. The conclusion is the terrorist achieved their goal of striking fear and disrupting the lives of American citizens. There are three premises that support the conclusion. The first is it is the goal of terrorism to cause damage and strike fear in the population under attack. The second premise is the American population reacted with fear and helped terrorist achieve their goal. The third premise is the terrorist did cause a lot of damage. The conclusion is sufficiently supported by the premises. They all support the fact that the attacks of 9/11 caused a great amount of fear and damage. The resulting fear lead to the creation of the Homeland Security Department, and implemented a whole new screening process at the airports. This argument is deductively valid, the premises all support and prove the conclusion. The premises are true, it is easy to find information about all the damage and fear caused by the 9/11 attacks.

One might say that it was the malice of the perpetrators that makes the 9/11 deaths so noteworthy, but surely there is plenty of malice present in the 15,000 homicides that occur every year in the United States. And while we have passed strict laws favoring prosecution of murderers, we do not see the huge and expensive shift in priorities that has followed the 9/11 attacks. The argument is this paragraph is that it was the malice of the perpetrators that makes the 9/11 deaths noteworthy. The conclusion is the expensive shift in priorities that followed. The premise is comparing the deaths of 9/11 to the 15,000 murders that happen annually in the United States. The argument is inductively strong, the statement are not valid, but maybe able to be proven true. The premise is plausibly true because there have been stricter laws and regulations passed.