Strategic Studies After The First World War

Stuart states, “Pearl Harbor convinced most Americans of the need for fundamental reform of the agencies responsible for foreign and defense affairs.” Though, through the years there were many other incidents causing debate over the nations national security, the memory of Pearl Harbor was a driving factor for the National Security Act of 1947. Ultimately, the National Security Act of 1947 was meant to strengthen and unify all the armed forces but it didn’t really do either. Although the nation’s national security has strengthened, it didn’t combine or unify the armed forces in the way it was designed. (Stuart 2003)

The development of the allied military strategy in World War II (WWII) presented challenges for the U.S. and Great Britain as they worked together to defeat the Axis powers. First, this paper will review the environment at the time of WWII when Admiral Stark penned the “Plan Dog” memorandum and MAJ Wedemeyer’s War Defense Team put together the “Victory Plan”. Next, it will look at the advantages and disadvantages of coalition operations with supporting examples. Then, a review of two major meetings between U.S. and Great Britain will identify what strategic decisions were made and the effects they have on the war. Finally, this paper will explore the foundations of strategy (Clausewitz and Sun Tzu) by which the allied forces used and

Other than Louis's own fault other political factors were also responsible. In the 18th century, known as the Age of the Enlightenment, some philosophers spoke of the new ideas of how the government should rule the country. Philosophers such as John Locke, Baron de Montesquieu, and Jean Jacques Rousseau, their ideas influenced the people in France during that time. John Locke's main theory stated that the government should provide protective services to its citizens, mainly on life, liverty and property. The only reason why the government had the power was because the people entrusted their rights to the

National security can be defined as a country's need to maintain its survival by use of military, political and economic power for diplomacy. Civil liberty are freedoms

The United States (US) is constantly looking for ways to improve relations with other countries and to follow their National Security Strategy (NSS). To aid the US in analyzing different countries, the PMESII-PT is used as a formula to keep everyone on the same page. The PMESII-PT contains eight different variables which help the United States analyze how different countries can affect their National Security Strategy. These variables include: political, military, economic, social, information, infrastructure, physical terrain, and time. These variables can be used to help better understand the situation and most important aspects of any country. Japan is a major country that can have a large impact on US relations and build on the current NSS. Throughout this paper, the PMESII-PT variables are examined to help educate and show how Japan can affect the United States’ NSS. After reading this paper, one can gain knowledge on how Japan can have a large influence on US interests in the Pacific/ Asian Command (PACOM) region.

Times were different before WW2 and the Pearl Harbor Attacks. Before the Pearl Harbor attacks our nation did not think much of National Security. After the attacks during WW2 the nation as a collective viewed the Nation’s security as a much higher priority and with a sense of examination. One major result was the National Security Act of 1947. The National Security Act created legal basis to the intelligence community also making the intelligence function permanent. “An Act: To promote the national security by providing for a Secretary of Defense, for a National Military Establishment for a Department of the Army, A Department of Navy, A Department of Air Force: And for the coordination of the activities of the National Military Establishment

Richard Ullman defines a national security threat as actions that can degrade the quality of life for the inhabitants of a

The containment of the Soviet Union in the aftermath of the World War II was a main American policy (261). The Western European and North America allies saw the Soviet domination in the regions as a threat to their democracy. European countries struggled for the need for economic reconstruction, and during containment it became useful in the effort to aid recovery (260). Postwar Germany was a special problem (261) . There had been a division into U.S, Soviet Union, British, and French zones of occupation, with the former German capital of Berlin (itself divided into four zones), near the center of the Soviet zone (261). When consolidated federal state was created from their zones by the western powers, Stalin responded by Blockade of Berlin

The final chapter analyzed in the course discusses the decision to use the bomb to initiate Japanese surrender and whether or not it was a necessary action. Problems in The History of World War II: Chapter 11 presents various documents ranging from a letter penned by Albert Einstein that indicates the power that can come from Uranium which initiated the Manhattan Project, all the way to discussion on how to handle the secrecy of America’s new found weapon. The chapter includes three essays from historians Gar Alperovitz, Robert P. Newman, and Barton J. Bernstein. The three men offer their takes on the necessity to deploy the atomic bomb to cause Japanese surrender.

A. Attention step: the change in the context and trend of war in terms of ferocity of the weapons and the increase in human/nations participation was occasioned by the industrial revolution and the French revolution.

Barry Buzan offers five explanations for what he terms as ‘the persistent underdevelopment of thinking about security’. The first possible explanation is that the idea has proved too complex to attract analysts, and has therefore been neglected in favour of more tractable concepts. The domain and contradictions of security have not been adequately explored. A second explanation lies in the real

Post-Cold War Period Causes of Conflict The end of the Cold War meant that the ideological conflict of dominance between East (Soviet Union and Eastern Europe) and West (USA and Western Europe) was over. Contrary to the expectations that world would be much safer in the post-Cold War, United States and Soviet Union were faced with new security issues that they did not know how to deal with. The objective of this essay is to show that with all these changes that occurred with the end of the Cold War, causes of the conflict indeed altered from the classic ones.

The traditional security paradigm is focused on physical and external security threats to states. It promotes that security should be state centred and national security is primary over other securities, such as human security. States must defend their territory and authority from external, foreign threats, by physical means, such as increasing the military or

The establishment of the European Union (EU) solidified a united political, economic, and defensive front creating a Supranational Organization (Lucas, 1999, no page). With the assistance of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the United States, the EU has developed a comprehensive security strategy responsible for leading the coalition’s objectives for mutual solidarity, global stabilization, and defense. To address security threats both regionally and globally set forth by the European Security Strategy (ESS), considerations were developed which encompass both cultural domains of geography and development.

For the latter half of the Twentieth Century, the dominant school of thought related to security was neo-realism. Stemming from works produced by Hobbes, Thucydides, and Machiavelli, followers of the neo-realists paradigm sought to see the world for what it was, rather than what they wished (Crawford 1991; Terrif et al., 1991). Established in 1979