Importance Of Domestic Commitment

God created marriage as a union between man and woman. A woman, while still having a mind of her own and control over her own life, is under the authority of her husband. This frightens some women, who fear oppression at the hands of their husbands. While it is true that some men abuse the system that God set up for man and woman, not all men act as such. The Bible states monogamy is what God laid down as a foundational law of marriage,

In his essay “The Moral Equivalent of War”, William James discusses the presence of war and militarism in society. It argues that in order for military feelings to be abdicated, a substitute must be introduced. The author supports this central point through historical evidence and reasoning.

Background - Historical Context: Some people believed that wars are worth the cost but is the

War is eminent in the world we live in; it is inevitable that in war comes peace on one side or the other, but never for all. When it comes to war, many issues arise with money, stability, and mainly man power. There is not much a country can do in a war without men supporting and protecting it. It is necessary to have a powerful and legitimate army, navy, coast guard, national guard, and other branches of military in order to have an effective and protected country. What comes with war comes with sacrifice, but what is it that we sacrifice? Life. In current times men have a choice of whether they want to serve the United States, or to pursue a different future of their choice. However, what happens when there is no longer a choice? Or rather,

Although many people assume the motivations for war are determined by a territorial protection, a number of scholars have added other motivations for understanding why war occurs, among these historians one is a conspicuous example his name is Howard Zinn. Zinn has exposed that many countries go to war in order to bring economic prosperity to their region this need for gain in turn causes many of the upper class of that region to acquire fantastic levels of wealth, many of these powerful figures have denied these claims, Zinn,in reaction to these claims uses paradigm example, WW1, as a means for discrediting the upper class who incessantly deny profits during war.

The American soldiers fighting in foreign lands create a high cost of war. The multiple factors related to the high cost of maintaining America’s vast military bases in foreign lands is not sustainable, but the human cost of families coping with injuries suffered in war by home coming vets from foreign wars is not acceptable either. The foreign and political sides are the cost of maintaining a large military presence here and abroad is not feasible. Whereas, the concerns of war over domestic issues must be a balance between military spending and infrastructure was in America’s best interest. The main focus on key issues like causalities, political, foreign, and lobbyist and much more topics

Ever since World War II, the last war that garnered full American support, the percentage of American citizens enrolling in the U.S. Army has diminished significantly. The U.S. is a major military power in the present world; American soldiers are engaged in many multi-theater positions, consequently dispersing troops over various regions worldwide. As only one in ten citizens has served in the US Army, American knowledge of military conditions is rapidly lessening along with the national harmony that complements such knowledge. Therefore, the comprehension that American security is closely associated with a formidable military never resonated within the greater part of modern American citizens. Although antiwar activists may decry

The protection of citizens’ lives, foreign or domestic, is a critical necessity. As a result, the military is the most important organization in a country. In America, for instance, $598 billion is spent each year on the military (“Federal”). Because this is such an expensive, important, and dangerous topic, it is often debated. One of the most common arguments is whether or not America’s military presence is necessary overseas. Due to its foreign benefits, positive domestic effects, and overall creation of World Peace, the negative side of the argument is outweighed. America’s military presence in foreign countries is necessary.

Are you willing to make sacrifices to ensure the future of freedoms and prosperity provided within the United States of America’s borders? Some individuals would argue that it is every able bodied American’s duty to protect our way of life. One method capable of achieving this lofty goal that has been and is used by governments worldwide is conscription. Conscription is mandatory enrollment in a government service or program, typically the armed forces. Additionally, conscription was used by the two greatest pillars of western civilization the Greek and Roman empires respectively. The United States, considered by many to be the modern superpower of western civilization, used to exercise conscription however, the practice was abolished by the United States’ government in 1973. Since then, there has been a continuous dilemma regarding whether the revival of conscription is necessary to provide the military with a sufficient amount of soldiers to safeguard the United States’ military supremacy over the rest of the world. Without a doubt, conscription must be reinstated to assure that every American does their duty to the nation and that we make the most efficient use of the military to safeguard the American way of life.

United States of America and Sweden, two countries that possess vastly different approaches to war and conflict. Each having a set of benefits and downfalls. To examine the two counties properly, one must note the defining differences between the two, such as their preparation for war, government views, and responses to war. After the examination of the two, only then can one see that there are substantial advantages and quite a few disadvantages to both systems. This essay is a focalized comparison of America and Sweden’s government stances on war, not individual citizens.

For many recent years, facing the terrorism context happening in a few countries, people have lost too many things, such as lives, relatives, land, and houses after any attack. To build a powerful country and protect it from the attacks, a country needs to have available powerful military forces. Thus, a few countries require young people to serve their country two years of military service. By that way, some people think that the United States should adopt a similar policy of mandatory conscription for all young people who should serve a two-year period of national service. However, some others assume that serving in the military should be each individual’s choice. It means that the U.S forces would be unreliable and less powerful if unmotivated

Hiring PMCs: the role of public opinion Domestic public opinion often has a significant role in determining the extent of a state’s military actions , some would argue that public opinion can constrain a state leader in their decision to go to war or not (O’Keefe 2009: 5). Yet, some of the pressure of public opinion can be alleviated when

In any country, war is a matter of great distress and fear, but with the help of its people the country survives. How the citizens of a country at war do this is by supporting the war and ensuring that fellow citizens join the war effort. However, it is not as easy as it seems to get the citizens to support the war effort, so it is up to the government to persuade them. The government incorporates several techniques like propaganda posters and a sense of patriotic duty to implore citizens to volunteer, but the actualities of war are vastly different to why the war is being fought.

The comprehension of the term ‘total war’ has had great significance towards the understanding as to how wars are fought, affect society and differ from other conflicts. The main issue that arises is conclusively defining total war and is continually differing between both historians and military combatants alike. Roger Chickering defines states “total war is distinguished by its intensity and extent. Theatres of operation span the globe; the scale of the battle is practically limitless” all the while adding “total war requires the mobilisation not only of armed forced but also of whole populations” This definition, while not quintessential is a good starting point for a definition due to its broadness and acceptance of the idea of the incapability to fully mobilise a society’s entire resource. David A. Bell states that it is often defined as ‘a war involving the complete mobilization of a society’s resources to achieve the absolute destruction of an enemy, with all distinction erased between combatants and non-combatants’ . However, he notes the limitations of such an idea including the inability for societies to meet such criterion, in particular, the ability for a society to completely utilise its resources towards the war effort. Ultimately, Jeremey black, while not giving a conclusive definition for the term, total war, does acknowledge different definitions by various individuals distilling many of their arguments and consequently outlining main characteristics of

The book “The Sociology of War and Violence”, gives an insight of how war can be understood from different perspectives. While war is believed by some that people come together in solidarity, the chapters on nationalism and war as well as propaganda and war, analyzed important factors such as the understanding of war and its impact on societies culture at a macro level. It is easy to argue that we can easily assume war brings the best in individuals when society is facing mutual concerns and worries. When society comes together as one it brings a sense of solidarity and strength giving us a sense of power. This is a common feeling, for instance, lets consider us when it comes down to support our military; above all things, despite our differences in religion, socio-economic status, ages, gender, etc.… majority support their actions because they make sense and they are in the