Would you like to merge this question into it? MERGE already exists as an alternate of this question.
The Vietnam War ensured that discussions of the justness of war and the legitimacy of conscription and civil disobedience were prominent in early writings in applied ethics.
There was considerable support for civil disobedience against unjust aggression and against unjust laws even… Evolution of theories of war Reflecting changes in the international system, theories of war have passed through several phases in the course of the past three centuries.
After the ending of the wars of religion, about the middle of the 17th century, wars were fought for the interests of individual sovereigns and were limited both in their objectives and in their scope.
The art of maneuver became decisive, and analysis of war was couched accordingly in terms of strategies. The situation changed fundamentally with the outbreak of the French Revolutionwhich increased the size of forces from small professional to large conscript armies and broadened the objectives of war to the ideals of the revolution, ideals that appealed to the masses who were subject to conscription.
In the relative order of post-Napoleonic Europethe mainstream of theory returned to the idea of war as a rational, limited instrument of national policy. This approach was best articulated by the Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz in his famous classic On War — Battle of WaterlooBritish army resisting a charge by the French cavalry, Battle of Waterloo,19th-century aquatint, after a painting by William Heath.
These no longer regarded war as a rational instrument of state policy.
The theorists held that war, in its modern, total form, if still conceived as a national state instrument, should be undertaken only if the most vital interests of the state, touching upon its very survival, are concerned.
Otherwise, warfare serves broad ideologies and not the more narrowly defined interests of a sovereign or a nation. Some theoreticians have gone even further, denying war any rational character whatsoever.
To them war is a calamity and a social disaster, whether it is afflicted by one nation upon another or conceived of as afflicting humanity as a whole. The idea is not new—in the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars it was articulated, for example, by Tolstoy in the concluding chapter of War and Peace — In the second half of the 20th century it gained new currency in peace research, a contemporary form of theorizing that combines analysis of the origins of warfare with a strong normative element aiming at its prevention.
Peace research concentrates on two areas: World War II and the subsequent evolution of weapons of mass destruction made the task of understanding the nature of war even more urgent. On the one hand, war had become an intractable social phenomenon, the elimination of which seemed to be an essential precondition for the survival of mankind.
On the other hand, the use of war as an instrument of policy was calculated in an unprecedented manner by the nuclear superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union. War also remained a stark but rational instrumentality in certain more limited conflicts, such as those between Israel and the Arab nations.
Thinking about war, consequently, became increasingly more differentiated because it had to answer questions related to very different types of conflict.
National Archives and Records Administration Clausewitz cogently defines war as a rational instrument of foreign policy:Relations between the Soviet Union and the United States were driven by a complex interplay of ideological, political, and economic factors, which led to shifts between cautious cooperation and often bitter superpower rivalry over the years.
The United states and the Soviet union both thought that their political systems were superior and that the other countries political system was inferior. 1 Another cause of tension was that the Soviet Union was trying to spread communism. May 21, · The Cold War was a period of East-West competition, tension, and conflict short of full-scale war, characterized by mutual perceptions of hostile intention between military-political alliances or Status: Resolved.
The Cold War was a state of geopolitical tension between the Soviet Union with its satellite states (the Eastern Bloc), and the United States with its allies (the Western Bloc) after World War II.A common historiography of the conflict begins with , the year U.S. diplomat George F.
Kennan's "Long Telegram" from Moscow cemented a U.S. foreign policy of containment of Soviet expansionism. War: War, in the popular sense, a conflict among political groups involving hostilities of considerable duration and magnitude.
In the usage of social science, certain qualifications are added. Sociologists usually apply the term to such conflicts only if they are initiated and conducted in accordance.
Nov 09, · The United States was involved in the reunification of Germany in because it was the most powerful nation in the world at that time and because it was one of the four (along with Britain.