Guerilla Fights

Guerilla Fights
Finding a safe way to attack an Insurgency without killing innocent civilians is a hard task to
complete. Civilians fight the war of the nation, at random times and places. This creates a problem
for conventional armies. Who is a civilian? Who is a foe? Two different strategies can be utilized to
fight this; take out the all the citizens, or get the people to go against their own insurgents and
encompass the conventional army's ideas. I believe that the only way to beat a counterinsurgency
campaign is to utilize less collateral damage of warfare, while teaching the civilians to live for the
counter–ideal of restoring life to its normal state. This strategy will not kill many innocent people,
while securing the population, leading to a loss ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Walzer states, "The war cannot be won, because the only available strategy involves a war against
civilians; and it should not be won, because the degree of civilian support that rules out alternative
strategies also makes the guerrillas the legitimate rulers of the country... Fought by foreigners, it is a
war of aggression; if by a local regime alone, it is an act of tyranny." (Walzer 13). To win the war,
the only option, according to Walzer, is to kill civilians. He doesn't believe that this is the right was
do win a war, so he goes on to say the war cannot be won, because of the amount of civilian support.
This leads me to believe that the only conventional way he sees of winning is not by following the
Rules of Engagement, but rather by winning the civilians over through a strategic mental battle of
who is right. Once the civilians are removed from the battlefield, then the Rules of Engagement can
be put into action against the remaining guerilla
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Irregular Warfare Mindset Needed for Our Modern World Essay
Since World War II, there have been over 80 irregular conflicts, including civil and guerrilla wars,
rebellions or insurgencies. The United States has been involved in several of these conflicts, some of
which are still ongoing, such as the conflict in Somalia. The conflict in Somalia, widely seen as
unsuccessful, saw a significant change from the conventional mindset to one of irregular warfare.
While threats from conventional forces still exist in today's environment, irregular warfare has
become a mainstay across the globe.
The United States needs to adopt and maintain an irregular warfare mindset, above that of
conventional, to ensure adaptable economic, political and military capabilities in an ever evolving
global environment. In ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Backed by the international community, including the UN, the U.S. attempted to provide basic
services to the people of war–torn Somalia. Although these stability operations ultimately failed, the
U.S. has been able to capitalize on the lessons learned from Somalia. Somalia greatly changed the
way the U.S. conducted irregular warfare activities, such as stability operations and two other
significant ones.
Counterinsurgency (COIN) and Counterterrorism (CT) operations have been used extensively in
Somalia since 1992, especially since the failed use of stability operations. While neither of these
operations has had success in creating a stable Somalia, both have been instrumental in keeping
Islamic militants in check, particularly those with ties to al–Qaeda (i.e. al–Shabaab). Fighting
terrorist organizations such as al–Shabaab and al–Qaeda have been dominated by irregular warfare,
which has spawned numerous military and academic studies regarding irregular warfare. In cases
such as Somalia, Afghanistan, and other global hotbeds for terrorism, the U.S. has refined the way
irregular warfare is conducted.
The three irregular warfare activities listed above (stability operations, counterinsurgency, and
counterterrorism) have led front pages since Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan. COIN, in particular,
defines the way the U.S. approaches irregular warfare, but the U.S. is ultimately

United States Army Special Forces Essay
The United States Army Special Forces The first military establishment was formed before the
United States was officially declared a country for the purpose of meeting the needs of the colonists
during the American Revolution. The Army's mission is to fight and win the Nation's wars by
providing prompt, sustained land dominance across a full range of military operations. Although the
history of the United States Army is deeply rooted in the country's history, the implementation of the
United States Special Forces Operations Unit is fairly young having been established in May 1952
yet unannounced to the public until 1954. In an effort to uphold the Army's mission, the Special
Forces Operations Unit was initially formed to assist with ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
Gibson provided specific details with regard to training, Army Special Forces soldiers were trained
to organize and develop indigenous troops as guerrillas to harass, raid, and sabotage larger enemy
forces over time to degrade and ultimately destroy their ability to fight. The Army considered
guerilla warfare to be part of unconventional warfare ... (p. 1). While today the Special Forces
Operations Units are seen as heroes and the highest caliber of enlisted men in the Army, they were
not initially seen as an elite group. Perhaps the Special Forces did not receive the recognition they
deserved because their successes in psychological and counterinsurgency warfare strategies were
immeasurable during World War II and the Korean War. President Kennedy's administration would
lead the way for the Army's Green Berets and later the Navy SEALS. However, it wasn't until the
Vietnam War that unconventional warfare, or guerilla warfare as it became known, was utilized in a
capacity that would expand the effectiveness and duties of the Special Forces Units. As the son of an
enlisted Army soldier who served initially as a member of the 5th Specials Forces Unit and the 101st
Airborne Division followed by time of duty with the Green Berets, a Ranger unit, and Delta Force
during the Vietnam conflict, guerilla warfare was a frequent topic of conversation. Being dropped
behind enemy

Unconventional Warfare: A Case Study
The requirement and future of Army Special Forces (SF) will be determined by our ability to fully
comprehend Unconventional Warfare (UW), and capability to sell our ability as UW experts to
senior leaders and policy makers. After 14 years of combat operations, we have lost focus and
become complacent in our original and most important primary mission of Unconventional Warfare.
I would speculate the majority of SF qualified Soldiers cannot even state the definition of UW;
much less articulate the seven phases. Whom can we blame besides ourselves for not placing the
utmost importance of our primary mission in the focus of training, education, deployments, etc.?
The challenges of preserving our history and making Army Special Forces specialists ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
I have heard of direct representatives of the other Special Operations units working in Washington
D.C. at the Pentagon to 'sell' their respective units. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001
occurred, former President George W. Bush turned to his military staff and advisors and asked how
America should respond. The answer was US Army Special Forces, the Unconventional Warfare
subject matter experts. Many policy makers and conventional military General Officers have no idea
of the SF primary mission and capabilities. It is vital that an ambassador to our community is
explaining what it is that we do. It is up to us to be proficient in UW, by education and training, so
that we are called upon once again to conduct

Irregular Warfare (IW)
Intro: Though conventional and irregular warfare (IW) are both forms of warfare with the desired
objective of affecting the opposition's government, the means by which they achieve that objective
differ greatly. A major war against a near–peer competitor would likely place the Marine Corps
against another military superpower. Preparation for such a conflict would ideally focus on tactics
suited for a conventional military. Meanwhile, preparing for success against an irregular threat
would conversely focus on non–traditional and indirect means and skills intended to earn or degrade
trust and support from the target population. As state and non–state actors place more emphasis on
IW, preparation for success against irregular threats increases rather than undermines the Marine
Corps' ability to fight and win a major war against near–peer competitors. Point 1: It's the future...
because ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The expected progression of forthcoming combat operations involves a significant rise of IW as
highlighted in the Irregular Warfare Joint Operating Concept v1.0, "The future security environment
includes a mix of military and non–military challenges by state and non–state actors to US national
security, with IW as the favored form of warfare of those who would be our adversaries. The rise of
political, religious, and ethnic extremist ideologies fuels conflicts worldwide" (DoD, pg. 9). This is
not to say that irregular means are used exclusively by small, militant fringe groups, as stated in the
Irregular Warfare Joint Operating Concept v2.0 "while violent extremist organizations and other
non–state adversaries have turned to irregular forms of warfare as effective ways to counter
traditional military powers, such methods are not limited to use by non–state actors" (DoD, pg.

Should Nuclear Weapons Necessary?
There can be no universal answer to this question; nation states have differing security concerns and
strategies of response, therefore we need to consider 'for whom are nuclear weapons necessary? And
for what purpose?' This essay will assess how effective a nuclear deterrence truly is against a variety
of threats, including its weaknesses against unconventional threats such as terrorism, but also how
nuclear weapons reduce the likelihood of major inter–state warfare. It is important to contemplate
moral arguments, including how nuclear weapons struggle to fit with the concept of just war, and the
simple fact that countries utilise them demonstrates their necessity. Although countries may strive to
make decisions based on morality, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
John Yoder argues that just war cannot simply act as a checklist to determine what decisions should
be made in war – more prudential factors need to be considered. Oliver O'Donovan further
elaborates on this argument by introducing the argument that, although the design of nuclear
weapons seems to provide immediate evidence of indiscriminate intention, it is actually "the
exercising party that is morally governing" as any weapon can be used indiscriminately. These
arguments show that from a purely moral standpoint it is difficult to justify nuclear weapons;
although nuclear weapons do not fit with the concept of just war, the fact that states are willing to
adopt them shows either that these states do not value the concept of just war, or that the necessity to
possess these weapons overpowers the ideals of just war. This shows that nuclear weapons provide
an effect for which countries are willing to put aside their moral preferences; highlighting that there
must be an underlying necessity for nuclear weapons in the 21st century. It is essential to now
explore what that effect is.
The consequentialist argument for nuclear deterrence shows it to be morally required, whereas the
deontological argument shows it to be morally prohibited. Due to this moral dilemma, one must
consider prudential arguments for the use of nuclear weapons. The main factor for governments to
consider is whether or not nuclear deterrence provides significant

The Security of the Unnited States
Any discussion relating to future conflict and the implications toward the security of the United
States must factor in the complexity of numerous multi–dimensional threats, that undermine global
stability. The definition of IW as stated in the Multi–Service Concept for Irregular Warfare follows,
"A form of warfare that has as its objective the credibility of and/or the legitimacy of the relevant
political authority with the goal of undermining or supporting that authority. Irregular warfare favors
indirect approaches, though it may employ the full range of military operations and other
capabilities to seek asymmetric advantages, in order to erode and adversary's power, influence and
will." This definition for irregular warfare (IW) suggests anything other than conventional warfare
in broad terms which perpetuates confusion in the relationship between counter–insurgency (COIN)
and IW. Some governmental agencies view COIN as an entirely separate entity and not a sub–
component of IW, or they view COIN and IW as the same. This confusion complicates efforts to
develop a comprehensive strategy to defeat irregular threats. To facilitate understanding of the
similarities and inherent differences between COIN and IW, military professionals must recognize
first and foremost that COIN occupies a component within IW and is not a separate type of warfare.
The definition of IW requires rewording to change the context relating to how the U.S. views and
employs IW in order to

US Military Preparte Both Conventional And Irregular Warfare?
To paraphrase the quote attributed to Trotsky, "We may not be interested in insurgency but
insurgency is interested in us." The United States faces this dilemma. The question remains how to
prepare for this amidst competing interests and threats. The U.S. military should prepare for both
conventional and irregular warfare, while prioritizing conventional warfare, recognizing irregular
warfare as the most significant short term threat to national interests and conventional warfare the
most threatening in the long term. This paper will compare and contrast the considerations for these
types of warfare, explain why the U.S. should prioritize conventional operations while preparing for
both, and describe the short and long term ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Given the context of current strategic guidance, it is important to ask if the U.S. can be prepared to
conduct both conventional and irregular warfare successfully. The answer is yes. However,
preparation for conventional operations should always be the priority. Preparation for irregular
warfare should not come at the expense of conventional warfare preparation. This is necessary
because of the reasons discussed below: the strategic limitations of irregular warfare, the enduring
nature of conventional war, resource constraints, and prioritization of operations and training.
Irregular Warfare is not a strategy. It is better defined as a military capability. Thomas Hammes
articulates this point, "This conflation of counterinsurgency techniques and strategy by participants
in the discussion is not helpful. The very phrase 'counterinsurgency strategy' confuses a method or
way of fighting with a complete strategy." Thus, while the U.S. military can be prepared for
operations and capabilities dealing with irregular warfare, it should not overtake the primary
strategic objectives and purpose of the military – conventional operations. Hammes further states,
"The extraordinary cost and low payoff or outright defeat the United States has experienced when
conducting direct, population–centric counterinsurgency

Essay about The Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTF)
Conventional warfare follows the single battle concept, where two or more well defined forces using
weapons that target the opposing force. The contiguous battle–space is well defined with a deep,
close and rear area allowing the force commander to array forces that can be visually displayed in a
linear graphic. This does not hold true in an unconventional warfare, where the rear area may also be
the close and deep fight and forces may target the civilian population either through direct, indirect
or propaganda attacks. The will of the people play an important part in unconventional warfare and
their support to either force is equally important. The Marine Air–Ground Task Force (MAGTF), the
Marine Corps force in readiness is capable ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Conventional operations target the enemy's forces directly or indirectly by targeting the enemy force
and war material producing factories.
The MAGTF is the primary task organized unit designed and organized to conduct all missions
across the warfare spectrum. It combines the command element (CE), the ground combat element
(GCE), the air combat element (ACE) and the logistics combat element (LCE) balancing the needs
of the mission. "The Marine Corps task–organizes for operations consistent with its statutory tasking
to ... provide forces of combine arms, including aviation ... by forming MAGTFs. The MAGTF is a
balanced, air–ground combine arms task organization of Marine Corps forces under a single
commander, structured to accomplish a specific mission."
The MAGTF has been an effective modular fighting force capable and task organized to fight a
conventional force when the Marine Corps needs to conduct forcible entry into a hostile
environment or any other array of full spectrum operations. The MAGTF's combine arms are
capable of delivering lethal doses of kinetic fires into the deep area with the use of the air combat
element, engage enemy units in the close area with the use of the ground combat element, and
logistically support the forces at the same

Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI) Bus Arbiter
PCI Bus Arbiter 1. Introduction Peripheral component Interconnect shortened to just PCI, is an
external bus used to connect external hardware bus to computer. The PCI bus does support the
functions performed by a processor bus. However, PCI bus's standardized working format is not
dependent on any particular processor's inbuilt bus. Devices which are connected to the PCI bus are
assigned corresponding addresses as per the processor's address space. Also for a bus master, they
appear to be connected directly to its own bus. PCI supports a 64–bit bus, and it is clocked at up to
66 MHz for version 2.1. Read and write operations can be performed at a maximum data transfer
rate of 132 MBPS using 32–bit data at 33 MHz. It supports transfer rates up to 524 MBPS on a 66
MHz PGI bus. These data transfer rates allow systems to perform up to the requirements the today's
high tech multimedia and teleconferencing applications which deal mainly with high quality
graphics and video. The PCI host logic acts as a connecting medium between the processor and
remaining part of the system. This design allows the PCI bus architecture to be independent of
processor. To interface a different microprocessor, the designer should only change the interface
logic in the PCI host logic so as to match with the new processor. Moreover, the PCI host logic
allows bus concurrency. The microprocessor can continue with its tasks while a PCI bus master is
accessing the bus. Two PCI devices can still communicate

There is a general discord among stakeholders on the...
There is a general discord among stakeholders on the definition of irregular warfare and where the
term and concept fits within the joint and the individual services' doctrine. The 2010 Quadrennial
Defense Review report uses the term "irregular" only once in its one hundred and five pages and
only in terms of a focus on building the joint force's capability and capacity to deal with irregular
warfare while maintaining a clear conventional and nuclear global superiority. Currently, the
definition is ambiguous and results in conflict or duplication of efforts across Department of
Defense stakeholders. For the purposes of this paper, the stakeholders discussed are the Army and
the Marine Corps. Stakeholders must reach a consensus and clearly ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
These threats are a combination of regular forces that are governed by the law of land warfare,
military custom, tradition, and unfettered forces that act with no limitations on violence or their
targets to reach their objective. Further, the players may involve state actors that employing
protracted forms of warfare through proxy non–state forces using operational models and
technological capabilities usually associated with formal states. Such diverse elements allows hybrid
threats to exploit vulnerabilities with the exact capability to make them particularly effective. U.S.
Army Doctrinal Publication (ADP) 3–0, Unified Land Operations, provides the basis for Army
support of unified action by governmental and non–governmental entities through land operations.
Army forces wage regular and irregular warfare against both conventional and hybrid threats via
synchronized offensive, defensive, and stability operations, or defense support of civil authorities.
Through Decisive Action, the Army the Army conducts warfare against conventional and/or hybrid
threats, regardless of any joint doctrinal definition of irregular warfare.
GEN Charles Krulak provides the best example of how the Marine Corps conceptualizes irregular
warfare as fused together with traditional warfare. In the 3 Block War

Conventional and Irregular Warfare
Giulio Douhet, in his seminal treatise on air power titled The Command of the Air, argued, "A man
who wants to make a good instrument must first have a precise understanding of what the
instrument is to be used for; and he who intends to build a good instrument of war must first ask
himself what the next war will be like." The United States (US) military establishment has been
asking itself this exact question for hundreds of years, in an attempt to be better postured for the
future. From the Civil War, through the American Indian Wars, and up until World War II (WWII)
the American military's way of war consisted of fighting traditional, or conventional, wars focused
on total annihilation of an enemy. Since that time, there has been a gradual shift from the traditional
framework towards one that can properly address non–traditional, or irregular wars. While the US
maintains a capability to conduct conventional warfare, the preponderance of operations where the
US military has been engaged since WWII have been irregular wars. Therefore, this question
articulated by Douhet, as to understanding the character of the next war in order to properly plan,
train, and equip, is certainly germane to the current discussion of regular war versus irregular war. In
today's fiscally constrained environment, the questions remains, which will dominate the future and
therefore, garner further funding and priority. Based on the current threats and the US role as a
superpower, the US

John Kenneth Galbraith : Written Profile
Jillian Baggao
Marsha
Economics
John Kenneth Galbraith – Written Profile
John Kenneth Galbraith known as the most influential economists in the 20th century who wrote
many bestselling books regarding economics, but also wrote books about art history, memoirs and
novels. Galbraith was born in Canada and moved to the United States in the 1930s. He earned his
Ph.D. in Agricultural Economics at the University of California in Berkeley
One of his major bestselling economic books, "The Affluent Society" written in 1958 deconstructs,
and conveys how World War II affected the private and public sector and presses on the
unacceptable gap between them. Gallibrath examines many economic topics throughout "The
Affluent Society" including production, consumption, inflation, social balance and introduces many
new theories and ideas to audience in the past. Firstly, a key phrase John Galbraith uses frequently is
"conventional wisdom" which is now used for a variety things (unrelated to economics), defined as
a set of ideas familiar to all, widely accepted and is no longer relevant. Galbraith explains that the
conventional wisdom is based on nineteenth century, outdated, economic conditions in regards to a
time of poverty where the production of goods was necessary and therefore is not applicable to the
20th century economy in America. His approach guides us through changing conditions and
identifies the need to change our ideas to accommodate new situations. For example, phrases such

An Example Of Conventional Warfare In The 21st Century
Conventional warfare is increasingly ill–suited to fighting and winning wars in the 21st Century.
Critically evaluate that claim. You should refer in your answer to examples of contemporary
conflicts.
Throughout Human history Mankind have fought against each other, wagging war against their
neighbours for territory, resources, ideology and a myriad of other reasons. Over the ages the way
we wage war has changed, leaps forward in technology and tactics where made frequently, each
Nation trying to earn an edge over their neighbours. For example the introduction of Steel, the
Musket, The Machine Gun, Aircraft and Tanks are just a few of the factors that have dramatically
changed the way we have historically fought wars. The Machine gun was ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This essay will suggest a hybrid approach to the conflicts of the 21st century utilising a broad range
of tactics.
The Global political sphere of the 21st century is dominated by the US, while China is on the rise
and Russia is still relevant. "Few states, if any, are capable of matching America's overwhelming
conventional military combat power. Because of our conventional superiority, adversaries will seek
more indirect forms of conflict." Most of the forms of conflict are considered unconventional wars.
Those who are ideologically opposed to US such as Al–Qaida and Daesh have used Terrorism to
strike out at the US. Over the last century with the introduction of nuclear weapons. "The threat of
state–on–state warfare featuring the destructive capabilities of major powers has declined, however
it remains a distinct possibility." There has been an increase in identity based intrastate wars,
"However in the world today, polarized as it is between the East and West, no revolutionary war can
remain a purely internal affair." Most interstate conflicts between major powers are fought through
proxy wars rather than direct confrontation. Proxy wars being major countries backing various
internal faction within an intra state conflict, an example being the US backing the Syrian rebels,
while Russia backs the Assad regime. While this may be true, it is

Carl Von Clausewitz
Carl von Clausewitz is acknowledged to be one of the most influential writer on the topic of war and
strategy. Despite the fact that Carl von Clausewitz wrote around 200 years ago his thoughts about
the war remain relevant. This essay will explore to what extent the thoughts of Carl von Clausewitz
can be adequate for explaining warfare in the modern era. The paper will introduce Clausewitz's
very systematic approach to the subject of war and will prove how useful it remains for formulating
a definition of war that is able to conceptualize the many different forms of modern war. To achieve
this task, the definitions "war is more than a chameleon" and "the wondrous trinity", come to
demonstrate that the theories of Carl Von Clausewitz are still adequate for explaining warfare in the
modern era. Apart from that, Clausewitz's tactical thought on defense and offence can help to
explain why powerful states are not always able to win "small wars".
Clausewitz said that war is more than a chameleon, that simply changes its appearance as its
environment changes. War being is more than a true chameleon; it is actually a paradoxical trinity
that, in short, is made up of primordial violence, chance, and reason with these three variables
constantly in tension with each other. The example of the Iran–Iraq war underlines that war has
some consequences on domestic policy. Indeed, this war allowed to the Islamic Republic to increase
its hold on the Iranian society by legitimating the

Essay about The Nature of War: Clausewitz
Clausewitz defines war as an "act of force to compel our enemy to do our will." The nature of war is
enduring yet the character of war changes over time. Current US strategic guidance is advancing the
point of view that since the character of war has changed to focus on irregular wars then the US
military should prepare for a future of irregular wars. This shift in focus forgets that the nature of
war is enduring and in order to be successful, we must prepare for all types of conflict. This paper
will define the types of conflict and the likelihood of each followed by a discussion of US strategic
guidance and ending with an analysis of the training resources and force structure requirements
needed to achieve success for all types of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The US strategic guidance places an emphasis on focusing on irregular warfare threats but does not
dismiss the possibility of conventional threats. The National Security Strategy states:
"We are strengthening our military to ensure that it can prevail in today's wars; to prevent and deter
threats against the United States, its interests, and our allies and partners; and prepare to defend the
United States in a wide range of contingencies against state and nonstate actors. We will continue to
rebalance our military capabilities to excel at counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, stability
operations, and meeting increasingly sophisticated security threats, while ensuring our force is ready
to address the full range of military operations."
The 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review is in line with the National Security Strategy when it states,
"U.S. ground forces will remain capable of full–spectrum operations, with continued focus on
capabilities to conduct effective and sustained counterinsurgency, stability, and counterterrorist
operations alone and in concert with partners." Irregular threats are therefore the focus of US
strategic guidance and are in line with global trends for the most likely type of military action.
Even though the focus of US strategic guidance is

The Nature of Warfare
Throughout history the nature of warfare has remained the same, it is "a violent clash of interests
between or among organized groups characterized by the use of military force," however, the
character of war is constantly changing. The means by which wars are fought are no longer limited
to easily identifiable conventional forces, nor do non–traditional actors abide by the same set of
international standards and rules of law. The United States can no longer expect to face a purely
conventional threat. As a result, the U.S. military must be prepared to conduct both regular and
irregular warfare successfully, although irregular warfare is more challenging and poses a greater
threat to U.S. strategic objectives. All conflicts contain elements of both regular and irregular
warfare and the nature of the conflict can easily shift between them. As a result, the U.S. military
must maintain the ability to be prepared to do both successfully and one must not come at the
expense of the other. The 2012 Defense Strategic Guidance asserts the "Wholesale divestment of the
capability to conduct any mission would be unwise, based on historical and projected uses of U.S.
military forces and our inability to predict the future." Traditional and non–traditional warfare are
not mutually exclusive and one form of warfare should not take priority over the other, so it is
critical that the U.S. military balance the capabilities necessary to succeed across a wide spectrum of
operations.

Unconventional Warfare: A Summary
The challenges of fully understanding Unconventional Warfare fall into two categories. First, the
socioeconomic factors that drive a society are incredibly complicated, much more so than any
military campaign, conventional or otherwise, is prepared to address. Second, self–imposed
restrictions within our military, government and society have hampered attempts at sincere UW
campaigns. In COL(R) Maxwell's article, he suggests that there is a lack of understanding due to a
dearth of intellectual study of UW. I tend to disagree, I believe that there is an adequate
understanding of UW, however there is a lack of political will to engage in it.
In the article Do We Really Understand UW? COL(R) Maxwell suggests that there is a lack of
comprehensive study on Unconventional Warfare. To that argument, I believe he is ... Show more
COL(R) Maxwell also taps into the fact that our US Special Forces doctrine focuses heavily on
guerilla warfare, and lighter on underground and auxiliary elements. This continues to frame the
problem in terms of SF doctrine, and does not address the reality that the socioeconomic and
sociopolitical status of a target country should be UW's focus. In order to effectively engage a
population, study should be focused on that country's true centers of power. Whether that power
rests in political leaders, economic moguls, or religious and cultural figures, those individuals hold
influence throughout societal structure. Building a

People's War Legitimacy
Legitimacy: The American Revolution and the People's War
The Marine Corp's doctrinal publication Insurgencies and Countering Insurgencies has over 60
references to legitimacy and describes irregular warfare, of which a People's War would constitute,
as "a violent struggle between state and non–state actors for legitimacy and influence over the
relevant population." While there are many aspect of the American Revolution that can be analyzed
as to their importance to victory, none are as important as the struggle for legitimacy. Legitimacy is
at the heart of a revolution and is the key to victory. By categorizing the American Revolution as a
People's War, we can utilize the three phases, as proposed by Mao Tse–Tung, to discern importance
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This bridge is where the irregular forces, for this essay the militia, build space for a conventional
force to be fielded and provide momentum for the movement. One of the first scenes of the
traditional guerrilla attack came after the opening shots in Lexington and subsequent march to
Concord. Once word spread, the militia was called out and took to the hills and trees and harassed
the British all the way back to Lexington resulting in 273 British casualties. When the British fired
on the militia in Lexington, they showed that they were not legitimate and galvanized the support of
the local populace resulting in a "moral victory for the insurgents." Militia service was viewed as a
requirement for all patriots and served as an extra–legal military arm of the larger political struggle
for legitimacy. If an individual failed to turn out for muster he would suffer the consequences of a
mob or militia visit that served to "sway" them to the revolutionary view. In John Shy's words "the
mechanism of their political conversion was the militia." While the militia was continuing small
attacks and harassing the British Army and posts, George Washington and the Continental Army
were fighting a more conventional battle and standing up a regular

The Role Of Autonomy In The Military
counterproductive to the mission of our war fighters and disastrous to the mental health and stability
of our warfighters. One of the components of conventional warfare is sustained assault, and with the
application of this ideal to our special warfare troopers comes unnecessary fatigue. In conventional
combat, troopers normally expect light to medium level engagements, all the while being supported
by a platoon or more and having an excellent supply chain. Currently a special operator is expected
to go into medium to extreme grade conflict normally with just a squad worth of men with high
quality but limited equipment. While this is going on the operators are also required to constantly
make morally and ethically difficult decisions at a ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
"..you need a massive intelligence and logistics infrastructure to accomplish complicated and
technical Special Operations missions, but it also leads to a bloated bureaucracy filled with staff
officers who have no real job other than to interject white noise into the decision making process.
However, I see the real problem in SOCOM being careerism and CYA risk aversion before the real
obstacle and not a simple matter of the numbers involved. SOCOM is still way too top–heavy with
officers, though. It is so bad that it is to the point that entire new bureaucracies were created
overseas just so that officers could have jobs. One is the CJSOTF which is not a doctrinal part of
Special Forces operations. ODAs do JCETs all over the world without a CJSOTF and seem to do
just fine. The CJSOTF may be required for some logistical resupply operations and unit
deconfliction, but it has grown into a monster over time which has created this inverse relationship
in which Officers now see the CJSOTF as the maneuver element, and ODAs as the supporting
mechanism for this bureaucracy." –Former Special Forces/75th Ranger Jack

Asymmetric Warfare Is An Inherently Relational Concept
The "asymmetry" in asymmetric warfare is an inherently relational concept. It refers to a relative
dissimilarity between opponents' in battle, derived from a difference in relational strength amid
warring sides. This asymmetry has tended to be in terms of status and organization; means and
resources, goals and objectives; and strategies and tactics. The relationship between the belligerents
in today's conflicts varies in many tactical, strategic and operational levels, which has come to be
perceived as changing warfare. This popular perception is that with the rise of asymmetric warfare,
conventional warfare had transformed from a customary and symmetric exercise into an irregular,
avant–garde, asymmetric experience. In contrast to this perspective, the main argument here is that
asymmetric warfare is not a new genus of war that has "risen" in the twentieth century as a distinct
revolution in military affairs, but rather, asymmetric warfare is a perennial characteristic of warfare,
or set of distinct conflict dynamics in warfare that occasionally surface out of asymmetric strength
between opponents in war.
At the foundation of this essay is a question calling for the analysis of "the rise of asymmetric
warfare". However, after analyzing the history of asymmetric warfare and the changes and behaviors
that have taken place through this time – as this essay will do – my perspective is critical of the
assumption in the question that asymmetric warfare has 'risen'. Warfare, in

Conventional Warfare : An Integral Part Of The Human...
War is an integral part of the human experience. As far back as the records go, humans have been
fighting each other for personal gain. Over the centuries, warfare has changed, the style and
intensity of it varying with each successive era in human history. Conventional warfare has always
been different depending on what point in history you looked, and so can be seen as obsolete and
crucial at the same time. In the 21st Century, conventional warfare is becoming increasingly
outmoded, and the use of it is becoming less and less likely to bring victory. However, just like in
the past the definition of conventional warfare is always changing. While attempting to use this style
of warfare will not incite any triumphs now, the changing nature of it will soon make it relevant
again in modern warfare. During the early 20th Century, conventional warfare was the most
prevalent form of fighting. Armed opposing state forces would send troops to fight in organised
military uniforms, with official weapons and equipment (Piddock 2–4). Most warfare at the time
could be considered conventional, as the use of unconventional tactics such as nuclear, chemical, or
biological weapons was very rare. This type of fighting worked, as most conflicts were between
states. The December 1941 attack on Pearl harbour perfectly illustrates how conventional warfare
works when both sides adhere to the system. An attack on an obvious enemy military force that
aimed to cripple their naval power is

American Culture Influence On Somalia
States have fought wars for a multitude of reasons in the past few centuries. Today, smaller amounts
of wars are being fought between states, and more are fought within states. Many states and areas of
land are extensively packed with many different people, all possessing specific cultures and
ethnicities. Currently, Iraq is plagued by resentment from Sunni Arabs, under control of the Islamic
State, while a Shiite Iraqi Army tries to fight back. Boko Haram is also present in Northeastern
Nigeria, and is clashing with the Sufi, Shiite, and Izala sects of Islam due to differences in culture
preferences regarding Islam. These are only a few of the examples that incessantly plague the world
and represent the importance of culture in war. Conflicts are not simply about territory or
jurisdiction issues, they also encompass affirmation, authorization, and acceptance of ... Show more
To comprehend how culture influences war, Somalia is a perfect example. The culture of Somalia
created the perfect environment for the tactics of an irregular war to be utilized. Geography, clan
lineage, social contract, and Islam define this culture. Most inhabitants in Somalia are ethnic
Somalis, who belong to a specific lineage or ancestral group of bloodline descendants. These
inhabitants do not only belong to a lineage, but also a clan, which is a group of closely connected
families. I.M. Lewis, an anthropologist who studied Somali culture, commented, "The (Somalis),
indeed, regard fighting... as essentially the proper pursuit of men." The culture of Somalia, passed
down from their ancestors, is to fight. The state has no official army or battleground. The people
simply fight because it is a way of life. This tradition of a culture of violence has been passed down
from generation to generation. They do not know anything else, and resort to it to settle disputes
between cultures in the

The Nature Of Warfare By Martin E. Dempsey
Introduction
The nature of warfare is ever evolving. Due to various factors such as globalization and
technological advances, twenty–first century warfare is different from previous conflicts. The
United States participated in two large, protracted conflicts since the start of the century – Operation
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. These wars demonstrated the hybrid nature of
warfare where the United States faced both conventional and then irregular forces. Today another
type of threat is emerging in the cyber domain. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Martin E.
Dempsey, stressed the changing nature of warfare in the forward of the 2015 National Military
Strategy, explaining that the United States faced not only ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
Policy and Balancing of People, Military, and Government
Clausewitz's theories demonstrate how politics, military, and people interact in current warfare. A
recent example is no less current than Operation Iraqi Freedom. Clausewitz clearly asserts that
policymakers should not think about starting a war "without first being clear in his mind what he
intends to achieve by that war and how he intends to conduct it." For Operation Iraqi Freedom, this
was the first divergence from Clausewitzian principles the policymakers missed. Instead of going
into the war with clear objectives and a clear exit strategy, the United States found itself in a
situation after the invasion and capitulation of the Hussein regime, trying to stabilize Iraq while
fighting an insurgency. Another key point in Clausewitzian theory is the political aims of the
government need to balance with the passions in the people and the character of the military. He
defines the paradoxical trinity as violence, hatred, and enmity. The first concerns the people, the
second relates to the military, and the third pertains to the government. These three must balance in
order for a nation to effectively wage war. During Operation Iraqi Freedom, the military effort was
inadequate to support the objective of stabilizing Iraq. When members of congress asked Chief of
Staff, General Shinseki, how many soldiers would the United States need to

The Wars At The End Of The Cold War
The wars at the end of the Cold War and the beginning of the new century are entirely different from
the other ones, mainly since September 11th, 2011. The nature of the strategic environment of the
warfare has undergone a series of transformations because of the globalization, technology,
economic relationships, and cultural changes. They influence the war and create an environment
characterized as volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA). This new environment has
shifted the conventional use of arms, likewise, the strategies and the genius of the participants.
This paper tries to explain which of the strategic theories from two classical strategists, Jomini and
Clausewitz, have relevance and remain valid in this new century characterized by a VUCA
environment. Also, I analyze the principles from the Chinese General Sun Tzu in unconventional
warfare.
In this regard, it is necessary to understand the future of the wars. Then, I will analyze Jomini's
principles. After that, I will consider the core concepts of Clausewitz about his Trinity, the character
of the war, and the genius of the leaders. Also, I will explain some similar definitions between
Clausewitz and Sun Tzu. Finally, I will analyze Sun Tzu theories and its relevance nowadays.
The nature of the war remain unchanged after thousands of years; however, its character changed
and it will continue mutable in the future according of the new technological environment and new
threats. These changes have had

U.s. Military 's Security
The 21st century came accompanied by different worldwide security's challenges. In this complex
environment the U.S. must be able to use efficiently all instruments of power to defend the national
interests. Now than ever the U.S. military power must be prepared to defeat the enemy using air,
land, and sea. Thus, the transition of troops from the sea to the shore will remain an essential way to
achieve a position of advantage over the forces hostile to U.S. interests. Frequent concerns of other
countries related to improvement of anti–amphibious and amphibious operations highlight the
importance of these kind of warfare in the future conflicts. Today's concern is not about the
possession of amphibious capabilities, but about the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Finally, the Marines Corps effort to improve amphibious capabilities instead to be seen as a way to
develop the U.S. ability to project power, it is seen as another method to preserve the service 's
relevance.
At the same time, the request of American citizens for "zero casualties" is playing its separate role in
the detriment of amphibious warfare. The history of 20th century showed that amphibious assault is
typically a very difficult and risky operation, it is governed by a violent character that bring a high
casualties rate. Moreover, in our day, when achievement of surprise during landing is almost
impossible due to enemy 's intelligence capabilities, and when enemy has sophisticated weapon
systems, to go ashore became much more dangerous. The fear of commanders for potential
personnel and equipment loses conditions the exclusion of amphibious operations from the list of
preferable options.
Another factor that has affected the development of amphibious operations is the reduction of
defense budget. The Marine Corps along with other services has managed the reduction in funding
by cutting capacities. Many procurement programs, capabilities, and force structures were under
severe examination. The fiscally restrained environment associated with the questioned relevance of
amphibious operations hit severely amphibious forces that are

The Rise Of Asymmetric Warfare
Question: Analyze the rise of asymmetric warfare. Provide illustrations and assess how it has
reshaped behaviors and outcomes.
The "asymmetry" in asymmetric warfare is an inherently relational concept. It refers to an irregular
conflict that is distinct by the relative dissimilarity between opponents' in battle. The asymmetry is
derived from the character of warfare and dictated by the difference in relational power amid
warring sides. This asymmetry has tended to be in terms of status and organization; means and
resources, goals and objectives; and strategies and tactics. The relationship between the belligerents
in almost all conflicts has varied in many tactical, strategic and operational levels.
A popular perception of today claims that there has been a relatively recent rise in asymmetric
warfare, or conventional irregular warfare that has transformed war from a customary and
symmetric exercise into an irregular, avant–garde, asymmetric experience. This perception is
inherently at the foundation of the question in which this essay attempts to respond. In contrast with
this perspective, the main argument of this essay is that asymmetric warfare, although definitely a
characteristic of the times is not a new genus of warfare that has "risen" in the twentieth century as a
distinct revolution in military affairs. Furthermore, asymmetric warfare cannot be used as a
description to describe deviation from Western norms – in this case conflict. Rather, asymmetric
warfare

Was The Atomic Bombing Of Hiroshima And Hiroshima Justified?
Was the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki justified? Discuss. The atomic bombing of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki ushered the world into a new era of warfare. Never before in the history of
man had such destruction been wrought in the power of a single bomb. Thousands of civilians were
incinerated and Japan's war capitals were demolished. The horror and terror was unimaginable; yet
the bomb had a purpose; to swiftly end the war. In today's society, it is questionable whether the
bomb should have been used. Some believe Japan would have voluntarily surrendered; yet others
believe conventional warfare methods should have been used. However, if the bomb had not been
deployed, there is the question of overcoming the near fanatical Japanese resistance, the toll of the
casualties from the projected Invasion of Japan and the need to educate the world in the horror of
Nuclear Weaponry. The Japanese nation was ready to surrender. Japans war machine was crippled,
constant fire–bombing of Japanese cities and the Seabees Island hopping campaign was wearing
down the civilian morale. The Japanese nation was beaten, its war machine was crushed and its
factory's functionless. The warlords and ministers were open to surrender, the people were crying
out for an end to a fruitless war. The whole country was on its needs the atomic bombs were
needless. "Japan was ready to surrender, it was only waiting for terms." The nation had capitulated,
its people waited for a word. No bombs were

Following over a decade of irregular war in Iraq and...
Following over a decade of irregular war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military is attempting to
reset towards a conventional, regular type of warfare. The 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review
describes a U.S. military shift to the Pacific and the supremacy of capability against near peer
nations rather than support irregular of and counterinsurgency operations. As the QDR points out the
U.S. military must "be prepared to battle increasingly sophisticated adversaries who could employ
advanced warfighting capabilities while simultaneously attempting to deny U.S. forces the
advantages they currently enjoy in space and cyberspace." This is balanced against the reality that
"our forces will no longer be sized to conduct large–scale prolonged ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Any military operation calls on these capabilities. As distinctive as these definitions seem to be, the
reality is that many military units are at least "dual use" if not multi–use or multi–role. This is true
from numerous perspectives. First, as dedicated irregular units are normally small, conventional
forces become the mass behind counterinsurgency operations. Second, capabilities and capacities
designed for conventional combined arms operations have great value in irregular warfare. Army
attack helicopters and Air Force close in support aircraft designed for operations in Europe during
the Cold War have proven adept during operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. If we drop to military
operations other than war, we can see how amphibious and rotary wing lift to support a Marine
amphibious assault becomes essential parts of U.S. military efforts during a humanitarian
assistance/disaster relief scenario. Taking away nuclear deterrence from the argument, it is the
conventional forces that provide the U.S. military to protect the homeland, deter aggression, and
project power abroad – the direct aims of the 2014 QDR and 2012 Defense Strategic Guidance.
Legitimate deterrence requires credible capability. The 2014 QDR seeks to reset the military, not to
whitewash the past decade or the likelihood of continued irregular conflict, but rather to reset and
reinvest the conventional capabilities for conflict with a peer competitor. To do so requires

How to Build a Computer
How to build a computer
The Computer this day and age is coming to its peak as the module for the super information high
way. I have noticed rising prices for the personal computer as sold from the common dealers such as
Dell, Gateway and Macintosh. These overly priced computers are a rip, ranging anywhere from
999.99 to 1,300.00 dollars. This is outrageous; the pieces needed to build a computer are so
inexpensive these days it would be idiotic not to build it yourself. The increased demand for
computers has inflated the price of a tailor made computer that large companies make nearly 50
percent profits from each computer they make. I understand that the only thing stopping people from
making their own computer is ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Hard Drive is a little more expensive, running about $80.00. The Hard Drive is what stores all
the information on your computer as opposed to the Mother Board which runs the computer. The
hard drive stores and organizes everything the Mother Board needs to carry out its operations. The
last piece of hardware you have to buy is a CPU also known as a Processor; the Processor is the
piece of hardware that allows communication between the Hard Drive and the Mother Board. The
CPU is simple and cheap and attaches right onto the Mother Board, cost is roughly $32.99– $52.99.
You will also need to buy "software" which are the programs that your computer runs and you view
on your monitor. Your operating system is the only software program you absolutely need. It is the
interface you view on the computer screen that you access files on your hard drive with. I
recommend Microsoft Windows XP (home edition) this is by far the easiest most user friendly
operating system I have ever used. It will cost you around $90.00 for the purchase of this software.
You will need three more items that are by far the cheapest items to buy this day and age which is
RAM, an Ethernet PCI card and a keyboard/mouse combo kit. RAM is very cheap, extra memory
for your hard drive that can increase the speed of your machine and improves overall storage space,
for the low price of $15.00 it is worth purchasing at least one stick of 256 MB ram. The Ethernet
PCI Card is your easiest connection to the

Cyber Warfare Is Not Fully Understood
Cyber–warfare is a relatively new concept to the imagination, but its novelty should not belie its
importance to be understood at all echelons of a command structure. It is an emerging reality, and its
relevance is proportionate to the continuous global expansion and convergence of digital networks.
The capabilities of cyber–warfighting strategies and tactics are extensive, and a need for a common
language and understanding is necessary for cyber–warfighting capabilities. Within any culture,
language is developed through a symbolic evolution, and military science has largely built its own
unique vocabulary and terminology to describe conventional and unconventional warfare. Whether
this language can be applied to cyber–warfare is not fully ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
The essence of Glad's essay is that descriptions of war are largely reflective of the culture and
political environment of their time. This applies just as easily to our modern era, when cyber–
warfare presents an unknown frontier through which it must be described in intelligible terms.
Beyond the cultural context through which we understand warfare is the biological context. The
vocabulary of kinetic warfare derives from our five senses, similar to how classical physics started
with an exploration of objects and phenomena that were readily available to our senses. Our senses
initially limited how science was conducted. The smallest object that an unaided eye can see is about
0.1 mm in diameter (). The farthest a 6 feet tall standing human can see is about 3 miles because of
the curvature of the earth. Unlike other organisms, such as sharks, humans cannot sense electrical
stimuli and locate objects based off of changes in electric currents (). For the majority of humans,
vision is the primary sense for navigating the world. Other organisms, such as ants, rely on smell as
their primary sense for navigation (). Vision makes the world appear as having sharp boundaries,
whereas navigating the world via

Military Technology And Technological Advancements
Since the evolution of mankind, the art of warfare has witnessed numerous changes. Over the years,
military technology kept on changing and has advanced from rifles to the nuclear weapons. The 20th
century saw a drastic change in the military technology and military thinkers adapted to this change
and took it as a way to totally transform the war. These technological advancements added new
dimensions to warfare through a combination of firepower, mobility, and maneuver. Warfare has
now transitioned to become the battle of wits, nerves, technology and tactics. Military thinkers
developed new theories to integrate these technological advancements into the existing military
setup. General Swinston and Colonel Fuller developed theories that influenced development of the
armored warfare. Early airpower theorists, Giulio Douhet, Billy Mitchel and Hugh Trenchard
evolved different concepts for effective employment of the airpower (AP). Admiral William Moffett,
the architect of naval aviation, formulated tactics for the naval aviation and the development of the
aircraft carriers. This essay aims to analyze how the modern military thinkers formulated new
theories to grapple with the technological advancements and strategic environment. Introduction of
mechanized warfare, aircraft, aircraft carriers, Nuclear weapons and asymmetric warfare are a few
additions that necessitated a doctrine change.
Mechanized warfare was a direct outcome of trench warfare, because the initial moves in

C200 Exam Essay
1. In President Obama's speech at West Point, he announced that 30,000 additional troops would be
sent to Afghanistan. He made this decision because he said it was vital to the United States' national
interest. The vital national interest at risk in President Obama's address is the security and safety of
the American people as well as the "security of our allies and the common security of the world." By
involving the military and increasing the troop strength, President Obama can achieve the objectives
of his strategy. His objectives are to keep the Taliban from becoming powerful, prevent them from
government rule, improve Afghanistan security forces and government so they can manage their
own country and prevent Al Qaeda from ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In order to advance the vital interests of the United States, we need a military that is equipped with
best of everything and the backing of a nation to use them to defend our national interests and goals
when needed.
2. The National Defense Strategy (NDS) counterbalances the Defense Departments tendency to
focus on winning conventional conflicts rather than irregular wars by empowering those small
nations to improve the security of their countries to prevent conflicts from happening. The NDS
focuses on the different irregular warfare tactics that can be used by our enemies in the strategic
environment. It gives us guidance on what we need to do to prevent the use of these irregular
warfare tactics. It was not until the last decade that the U.S. military started fighting the irregular
wars; our Special Forces units were the ones that were fighting the unconventional wars. The U.S.
military has had a difficult time changing its focus on fighting conventional wars to fighting
irregular wars. During the Vietnam War, the U.S. military became very experienced in guerrilla
warfare tactics. However, when that war ended the focus shifted back to fighting the conventional
wars and that experience was lost. Now, because of the lack of experience, the U.S. military is
having a difficult time fighting the unconventional wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The 2008 NDS
attempts to counterbalance the focus on conventional wars by emphasizing

The Warfare During The World War II Essay
Hybrid Warfare
Since the very first war on record, each belligerent has attempted to find more advanced ways to
defeat the other. Usually wars have been fought traditionally: "In terms of conventional, classic war,
definitions are almost identical around the world: type of war where weapons of mass destruction
are not used, only classical combat means, the fight is fought only by regular armed forces"
(Frunzet), called conventional warfare. As populations around the globe grew, another type of
warfare came about. This other warfare can be classified as, "activities taken to enable a resistance
movement or insurgency to coerce, undermine or overthrow a government or occupying power by
operations conducted through or with illegal auxiliary or guerrilla power, in a restricted area"
(Frunzet), this is known as unconventional warfare. Most adversaries that the United States has
faced can be classified as either a conventional or unconventional force. Since moving into the
information revolution, there is another type of battle tactic that has come into existence: cyber
warfare. This involves attacking enemies via the Internet, targeting anything that requires Internet
access, such as power plants. Recently, U.S. forces and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
allies have noticed a new type of war and given a name to this different style of war: hybrid warfare.
Hybrid warfare is not new; it has been around for some time, but it was not until recently that it has
been studied.

The Amazing Sessna throught the Years
The Cessna 180 is a light general aviation aircraft, first ever flown in the late 1952, produce between
1953 to 1981, Even though the model is no longer in production nowadays, many of these aircraft
are still in use as personal aircraft and in utility roles.
Cessna introduced the heavier and the greater power performer; the 180 as a updated version to the
Cessna 170. The 180 is an outstanding prime bush plane, it has an unretractable conventional and
adjustable–incidence tricycle tail wheel undercarriage, can be replacing by the float and skis,
normally fitted with 4 seats, additionally 2 extra seats can be added (According to the series).
Geraldine Mock is the first woman who achieved the solo flight around the world back in 1964, the
trip started on 19/03/1965 from Columbus, Ohio, United State. The flight spent 29 days to travel
more than 22000 miles, the chosen aircraft that she flew with is the brilliant Cessna 180, and she
named it as the "Spirit of Columbus" (Charlie). The flight is conducted with a refit fuel tank to
improve the endurance and range, the installation of two extra fuel tanks in place of passenger seats
that added 180 gallons of extra fuel onboard, boosting the little Cessna's range to 3,500 miles. When
it carried full fuel, the Cessna weighed nearly 900 pounds out of the envelope; however, the FAA
allowed with a ferry permission, Geraldine was also a first female student of aeronautical
engineering from Ohio State University. After few years of

Camp X: The Importance Of The Spy
Camp X: The Importance of the Spy
When asked about spies, most people instinctively think of James Bond, a member of the British
Secret Service. Most people don't know however that this classical character was inspired by the
true events, of places like Camp X, where 007's creator, Ian Fleming, was trained as an intelligence
officer. Most stories of the Second World War revolve around the great battles, such as the Battle of
Normandy. While these battles were remarkable, the critical victories of the Second World War may
not have been possible without the vigorous and fearless effort of spies and operatives, who can
influence the result of crucial operations for the betterment of their own objectives. Training camps
were vital for producing ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The United States was not yet participating in the Second World War when Camp X was opened.
The Camp opened on December 6, 1941, which was a day before the Unites States was forced to
join as a result of the Pearl Harbour Bombings. If the Japanese had implemented the attack six
months earlier, there never would have been a Camp X. Until the direct attack on Pearl Harbour, the
United States were prohibited by Congress to get involved with the war. Because of their inability to
become involved, Colonel William "Wild Bill" Donavan, head of Office of Strategic Services
(OSS), which is a predecessor of the CIA, and President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Coordinator of
Information, was interested in developing a group of secret agents, Camp X was designed to help.
Sir William Stephenson, a Canadian living in Britain, was the main facilitator of the project. After
using his contacts in Canada to purchase a suitable site in 1940, the camp was opened shortly after
in 1941. Over the next few months, the camp trained operatives in the art of secret warfare. Along
with Canadian trainees, agents from the FBI and the OSS secretly attended the camp. Included in the
recipients of Camp X's training were five future heads of the CIA. The entry of the United States
granted them the ability to establish their own camps. Colonel Donavan depended on the resources
of Camp X to

Naval Academy: The United States Naval School
Naval Academy
Naval Academy is a great college to go to. The United States Naval Academy is a prestigious school
and a great deal to offer its students. 1. Naval Academy has a four year college freshman through
seniors except the freshman are called plebes and have no ability to do anything. The plebe year is
always the hardest otherwise everything get easier year by year. They break up the classes by
semesters and have two semesters per year. You are required for the whole year to take
Mathematics, Chemistry, and English. For only one semester you would take either government,
Naval History, Cyber Security, Leadership and Seaman.
After your Plebe year you would take Engineering and Weapons, Mathematics and Science,
Humanities and Social ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
223 went into the Surface Warfare which breaks into two groups and 191 went to Conventional and
32 went into Nuclear, and there was 268 who went into the Marine Corps, 11 in Medical Corps, 28
into Special Warfare (seals), and 14 into Special Operations.
4. So after understanding all of this great information about the Naval Academy you now have the
proof that the Naval Academy is a prestigious school and a great deal to offer its students. Its got
leadership from seniors training your freshman, a great athletic program that every game will come
from the heart and that we dominate army. Also after the academy the leadership and the ability to
serve our nation in such many ways.
Everybody knows that when you go to the Naval Academy you go into the military but not everyone
realizes the different things that happen at the Academy and the different things you do

The Warfare Of The Soviet Union
The United States utilizing its networks to destabilize the Soviet Union as a regional hegemon, it
supported a an Islamic fundamentalist group named the Taliban, and along with weapon support and
logistics. As well as discussing the various guerilla tactics utilized and discussed by the class
through the readings such as Mao Zedong. I will also elaborate on the success and the dependency
of the various guerilla tactics used and how fundamental it was in their victory against a
conventional army (Soviet Union), and the outcome would not have. As well as the success of the
conflict only through its reliance on foreign aid, as well as the major influence of external actors
from the United States, and other gulf countries, this in fact was colossal in the success of the
conflict. The examination of these primitive as well as effective asymmetrical forms of warfare were
pivotal to the success.
Through the use of my resources I will use the book "On Guerilla Warfare" as well as to explain the
successful tactics of the Taliban, and how important the tactics explained in this book were
monumental to the movements success. Also I will use a story dubbed, resources which describe the
methods that other sovereign countries used to utilize support and ultimately proved affective in
ending the conflict.
I will examine the progress and elements from its beginning and how it was able to be successful in
the following years. And what proved fundamental to its success as non–conventional

Guerrilla Warfare: The Vietnam War
No 7. The guerrilla wins if he does not lose, and the conventional army loses if it does not win.
'We Fought a military war; Opponents our Fought a political one. We sought physical attrition,
Opponents Aimed for our psychological exhaustion. In the process, we lost sight of one of the
cardinal maxims of guerilla war. The guerilla wins if he does not lose, the conventional army loses if
it does not win. The North Vietnamese used their forces the way a bullfighter uses its cape – to keep
us lunging into areas of marginal political importance. ' (Kissinger, 1969, 214)
When I first read the statement above, actually a bit confusing for personnel and soldiers who does
not understand the tactics and strategy of guerrilla and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
1 . Meaning of Victory in War of words ...... 261
War is a way to achieve political goals of a country . Where the decision for war was not in the
hands of politicians dtangan military commander . But the tactics and strategy used is certainly a
decision of the military commander . Here, the role of a commander to determine what strategy or
tactics to use in order to win the battle so that the war can be won by his party .
The definition of the word win and a victory in guerrilla warfare and conventional war means
different things both literally and under the conditions and situation of late . As said by Kissinger in
his book ' ...... ' that 'the guerilla wins if he does not lose ; The conventional army loses if it does not
win ' ( Kissinger 1969 , 214 ) . based on my understanding of the book , Kissinger tried to convey
his opinion that the guerrilla war if the parties can continue to launch guerrilla operations / battles
that they have implemented to erode and destroy the morale of enemy troops on an ongoing basis or
until the opponent gave up or lost the will to fight , then this is where the guerrillas declared victory
in the battle .
In contrast to the definition of the word win in a conventional war although the goal in every battle
it has the same goal , but different definition of victory itself . This is because the unconventional
warfare tactics and strategy that takes precedence is conquering the real

Guerilla Fights

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Lori Gilbert

More from Lori Gilbert (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Guerilla Fights