If you are strong and fighting the weak, then if you kill your opponent then you are a scoundrel... if you let him kill you, then you are an idiot.
From Martin Van Creveld
'Never' is too much of a word. Nothing lasts forever.
If you are strong and fighting the weak, then if you kill your opponent, then you are a scoundrel... if you let him kill you, then you are an idiot. So here is a dilemma which others have suffered before us, and for which as far as I can see, there is simply no escape.
The fate of Syria hangs in the balance, but it is entirely possible that the fall of the Assad regime will result in anarchy and cause Syria to turn into a second Afghanistan, a base for anti-Israel terrorism.
Except when war is waged in a desert, noncombatants, also known as civilians or 'the people,' constitute the great majority of those affected.
The enemy resembles us. Therefore, he needs to be approached not as an assembly of 'targets' to be destroyed one by one; but as a living, intelligent entity capable of acting and reacting.
It is simply not true that war is solely a means to an end, nor do people necessarily fight in order to obtain this objective or that. In fact, the opposite is true: people very often take up one objective or another precisely in order that they may fight.
The problem is that you cannot prove yourself against someone who is much weaker than yourself.
In the future as in the past, both Clausewitz and Sun Tzu will undoubtedly have a lot to offer.
Assuming China does not become destabilized and continues to grow, it will no doubt develop a military program in proportion to its resources.
4 perspectives
2 perspectives
1 perspectives