Jointness Research Paper

Sun Tzu’s The Art of War (Sunzi bingfa) is a remarkably lucid, compact and sometimes enigmatic treatise. Although the main purpose was to be applied in war, its philosophies can be applied in any activity involved with conflicts or competition. Written in the sixth century BCE, it emphasises the role of military force in international relations: “Warfare is the greatest affair of the state, the basis of life and death, the Way (Tao) to survival or extinction. It must be thoroughly pondered and analysed.” Several points about The Art of War are frequently noted. First, the text appears to suggest ambivalence about employing violence: “One who excels at employing the military, subjugates other people’s armies without

On the aftermath of the 9/11 Terror attacks by Al-Qaeda, The US declares "total war on the evil forces" and invades Afghanistan, but Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda remain elusive and undefeated. In this course of action, public pressure is mounting and there is a need for a concrete enemy that can be Militarily defeated. Within this pretext the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein enters into the equation as the "Axis of Evil" instead of the real enemy - Al Qaeda, and is announced as the main Military target by the US government.

Following the events of September 11th, President Bush was looked to as a leader to lead the country out of chaos. “In the weeks after the attack, Bush’s approval rating rose to 90 percent—the highest recorded job-approval rating in U.S. presidential history” ( millercenter). Nowadays however, Bush is often criticized for the actions he took during the invasions. “The Bush administration’s strategy had been to reduce the U.S. military presence as Iraq’s stability improved. Yet the goal proved unattainable, owing in part to the power vacuum left by the dismantling of the Iraqi army and the rise of sectarian violence within the two dominant strains of Islam in Iraq” (millercenter). Of course hindsight is always 20/20, but many blame the Bush Administration for the power vacuum created in the Middle East. Bush’s foreign policy typically surrounded a strong use of force and led to increase in terrorism surveillance creating a discussion that is hotly debated today Following the end of Bush’s second term, Barack Obama had won the presidency and the work in the Middle East was far from over. Obama proved to have a different ideology from Bush, wanting to remove troops from the Middle East, something he

Following defeat in 1991, where US Air Land Battle doctrine and “second offset” technological advantage were demonstrated effectively, Hamdani recommended transforming Iraqi land forces from “heavy mechanised” to “light infantry” with focus on “guerrilla war” to counter US air power dominance. However, Saddam was in denial viewing the “Mother of All Battles” a victory; this was logical to him – he remained in power when his enemy was no longer POTUS and he still had a military with the world’s largest Arab army. He regarded internal (coup, Shia) and regional (Iran, Israel) threats ahead of external (US) threats with “the possibility of … American invasion … nonsense.” Having successfully quelled in March 1991what he perceived as the greatest danger to his regime, an internal uprising, he intended to maintain the military capability proven to ensure “the internal security of the Ba’ath dictatorship” ; viewing change unnecessary. But he was wrong: the US threat was credible and his military was not fit to counter it. Nonetheless there was no transformation. The regime complied with his will, coerced by fear. Saddam’s draconian leadership created a culture of deceit. Most feared for their lives and ‘toed the Ba’ath Party line’ with lying becoming commonplace across government and the military. “The resulting personal and organizational paranoia profoundly affected how Iraq addressed its strategic and military problems.” This negatively affected Iraqi military readiness and planning. To the contrary, Hamdani, viewed as a competent officer with ‘top cover’ from

In 2003, George W. Bush invaded Iraq, believing that the country’s president Saddam Hussein was using weapons of mass destruction against the people of Iraq. This war started a larger war, named “Operation Iraqi Freedom”. The consequence of this inessential war were the lives of over 4000 Americans, over 1 trillion dollars in spending, and superfluous tension in the Middle East. Though there are many theories on why Bush invaded Iraq, the one that makes the most sense is overconfidence. Simply put, George W. Bush and his administration had faulty and ambiguous evidence, but their overconfidence and pride lead them to put the war into action anyway. This self-assuredness lead to the expiration of Bush’s tenure and the broken hearts of many

Writing about war nearly two centuries ago, Clausewitz did not attempt to derive a prescriptive theory of warfare. He sought to identify universal truths about the phenomenon of war even as he emphasized its dynamic and unpredictable nature. He understood that even as war’s character and conduct continues to evolve, the nature of war does not. Considered the chief military theorist of the western world, his theories have withstood the test of time and are still adequate for explaining warfare in the modern era.

The war on terrorism led the United States to intervene and play a vital part in world history. The United States administration decided to send our troops to help destroy weapons of mass destruction under Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq. This project discusses the impact, perception and results of United States involvement in the Iraq war. Initially, there was a lot of controversy and questions on why we were involved, why we attacked Iraq and what

The case of the two Gulf Wars presents a clear example for your administration of how conflicts involving similar countries and battlegrounds could result in different outcomes based on how they are carried out. The First Gulf War proved to be a quick, well-conducted war with a decisive mission plan and considerable support from the United Nations. However, just a decade later, in a drastically different political climate, the Second Gulf War, has concluded to be a drawn out failure for the United States. This memo will contrast these two wars, giving lessons that highlight the successes of the first conflict and the problems that were present during the second. The goal of these lessons are to provide insight to other wars that the United

The Iraq war is a highly polarizing topic in the United States and abroad alike. After the attacks of September 11, 2001, there were a lot of discussions on terrorism, but former U.S. President George Bush (in office 2001-2009) addressed things differently. In the new globalized world, as we know, you need consensus amongst constituent nations to gain support for a war. However, the Iraq war did not have the support that was needed to build a successful coalition amongst nations. Bush rationalized that the United States of America should invade Iraq on the grounds of "weapons of mass destruction.” According to a 2003 Bush speech, the coalition mission was "to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein 's support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people.” This paper will clarify the real reasons and agenda behind the American invasion of Iraq, along with the war’s negative results, and will offer a discussion of the change of public opinion towards it.

if you are currently suffering from joint pains, osteoporosis and other joint-related illnesses, then you are a part of the 140-million records in the U.S..

The Iraq war of 2003 is a blueprint of tyranny, which is full of controversial ideas, and works of individuals who believe that the United States of America is a crusader of freedom and democracy. And killing or unintentional homicide of substantial amount of civilians alongside with the targets of the U.S marines (Saddam’s armed forces) was a successful mission in the Middle East. An operation that was to be executed in a time limit, transformed into a war, which began in March 19th 2003 Invasion of Iraq dubbed Operation Iraqi Freedom, which got rid of Saddam Hussein’s Baathist government. And ended in May 1st 2003.

The Iraq war of 2003 is a blueprint of tyranny which is full of controversial ideas and works of individuals who believe that the United States of America is a crusader of freedom and democracy and killing or unintentional homicide of substantial amount of civilians alongside with the targets of the U.S marines (Saddam’s armed forces) was a successful mission in the Middle East. An operation that was to be executed in a time limit, transformed into a war, which began in March 19th 2003 Invasion of Iraq dubbed Operation Iraqi Freedom, which got rid of Saddam Hussein’s Baathist government. And ended in May 1st 2003.

In the days following September 11, 2001, Americans faced an onslaught of headlines designed to generate fear and outrage regarding the terrorist group Al-Qaeda and Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein. These fears were only heightened when President George W. Bush declared war on Iraq on March 20, 2003, with the intentions of “helping Iraqis achieve a united, stable, and free country” despite the tyrannical rule imposed by Saddam Hussein (“George W. Bush: Announcement”). For the next eight years, Americans lived in an era of anger and confusion regarding the intentions behind the war that dramatically changed life in the United States. The Iraq War greatly affected American domestic policies, causing conflict between the Executive and Legislative

Contrary to popular belief the origin of The Art of War is unknown. Written in the age of knights and gentleman Sun Tzu has written a timeless classic in the basic roots of military strategy and war. The thirteen chapters of knowledge can relate to anything from modern warfare to personal development.

Art of War is one military tactical text that has survived for centuries. The author of the text, Sun Tzu left the world with knowledge to carry on for generations. Art of War is a compilation of Tzu’s military strategies, various principles passed down his ancestral clan, and Taoism for the world to study and understand (Galvin and Giles). The military strategist specializes in the manners in which a “small force can overcome a powerful enemy” (Galvin and Giles 15). These tactics have been demonstrated throughout history by various “underdogs;” during the Revolutionary War, WWI, and even today in the Global War on Terror (Galvin and Giles 21). This is why Tzu remains an important piece of literature for all to read. Tzu’s principles on