Download PDF Irrefutable Maxims of Grand Strategy

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Irrefutable Maxims of Grand Strategy file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Irrefutable Maxims of Grand Strategy book. Happy reading Irrefutable Maxims of Grand Strategy Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Irrefutable Maxims of Grand Strategy at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Irrefutable Maxims of Grand Strategy Pocket Guide.
Irrefutable Maxims of Grand Strategy eBook: J.R. Stevenson: leondumoulin.nl: Kindle Store.
Table of contents

What has been especially remarkable in this rather unforgiving Syrian Civil War has been the prolific and successful use of POTD from all sides of the conflict including established media outlets. While the UN has not yet established exact culpability, Syrian-allies Iran and Russia pointed the fingers at the rebels, and the US and its allies have blamed the Assad regime for the attack.

Some could argue that the rebels had the motivation, the intent and plausible capability to gain the most from a POTD-related attack to mobilise favourable public opinion. However, uncertainty as to who carried out the Ghouta attacks remains. However, obtaining substantiated proof is fraught with difficulty, particularly when the issues of collection of verifiable hard evidence i. According to UN reports, nearly 93, people have been killed, though current invalidated figures put the casualties much higher,[7] while millions have been driven from their homes due to the conflict.

The onset of this is the potential to widen the conflict regionally and to some degree it already has and open up old cold war rivalries.

U.S. and Chinese Grand Strategy

Underneath the shadow of this forgotten Cold War contention,both sides have expertly utilised their patrons and have become connoisseurs in exploiting this rivalry to their distinct advantage. By inference, when the resources of the protagonists differ significantly and there is no natural institutional outlet, POTD directive action looks at balancing the odds.

The weaker of the two has attempted to use a strategy to offset deficiencies and given the lack of earlier unconvincing Superpower support i. There is still uncertainty as to which parties will be attending the UN-brokered Syrian conference scheduled for 22 January in Geneva, Switzerland. However one thing is for sure: in the run up to the conference there will be an upsurge of propaganda activity.

Indeed, we expect the representatives that do attend the conference will be actively looking to optimise their preliminary negotiating position by way of mobilising the masses with a view to boosting favourable international public opinion. This may sadly involve further terrorist actions aimed at gaining support through their preferred choice of media outlets. We would not want to overstep the mark here in terms of advocating responsibility of the use of such horrific weapons as there is yet no substantiated evidence to the fact.

However, POTD would seem to be an effective asymmetric weapon of choice for the weaker of the two and the moral boundaries in which POTD is being used may have become inauspiciously blurred. Critics have lambasted the MOD for attempting to manipulate the public to support war, evoking memories of Iraq in Anger was particularly generated by the suggestion that the profile of repatriation ceremonies should be reduced in order to reduce the casualty aversion of the British public.

Unfortunately, by focusing on this, the media have missed the point of an astute report on how Britain should conduct future wars. Much has been made in the literature on political communication of the difference between propaganda and strategic communications. Yet many experts insist that they are distinctly different. Strategic communications is supposedly based on transparency, openness and truth, and is favoured model for political communication in the information age.

Propaganda on the other hand is seen by many experts as nefarious, based on selectivity, manipulation and deceit, a relic of the time of Goebbels and inapt for the modern media environment. However, as the controversy surrounding the MOD report demonstrates, the principles of propaganda should not be forgotten.

Firstly, presenting to the public an article explaining how war is to be sold to them would make Goebbels turn in his grave. As any good propagandist or strategic communicator knows, as soon as a message is revealed as propagandistic, it will be immediately rejected. People tend not to welcome evidence that their thoughts and behaviour are being influenced by their political overseers. Strategic communicators may preach openness and transparency, but surely the information operations of the MOD would be better served by never letting such an article see the light of day?

This could have prevented a sensible report explaining how future war should be conducted being framed as a scandalous attempt to prevent the public from honouring their dead in order to maintain support for war. Critics may argue that it is wrong on principle to advocate government secrecy, propaganda and censorship. However, the point is that if the government is to conduct a communication campaign, openly telling the public how you intend to influence or manipulate them is neither sensible nor strategic.

As it is, whilst the report is insightful regarding public antipathy towards war, the profile of repatriation ceremonies is a peripheral point at best.

Casualty aversion in liberal democratic states is not primarily determined by the sight of the dead. Liberal democracies have had no problem accepting mass casualties when the cause has been seen as sufficiently important, be it the defeat of fascism, communism or the explicit threat of terrorism.

Air & space power journal

Casualty aversion originates before a conflict even begins, based on whether the reasons for military action are sufficiently strong. Minimising casualties during a conflict will sustain public opinion, but that is nothing new. By far the greatest problem the MOD faces is convincing people that military action is worthwhile in the first place. The almost sole focus on reducing casualty aversion also represents incomplete analysis of the public reluctance to go to war. Mercenaries, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Special Forces are intelligent ways to depersonalise future warfare, reducing the body count and thereby mollifying public opinion.

However, casualty aversion is not the sole source of public opposition to war. This strategic narrative should explain the political and economic reasons for intervention in ways that relate to the lives of the British public. However, the government needs to be prepared to adopt the principles of propaganda in order to preserve the efficacy of these operations.

One thing is certain; telling people how you intend to sell war to them is not a good start. You can follow her Tallydeorellana Notes: [1] Propaganda multi-functional trains equipped with exhibition carriages, classrooms and even cinemas. By Malyuta Skuratov: Putin riding a horse. Photo: Jedimentat44 CC 2.

The 7 Irrefutable Rules of Small Business Growth

By Thomas Colley: Why do so many political leaders seem incapable of analogising undesirable behaviour to anyone other than Hitler and the Nazis? Japanese Politics and the Shifting Nature of the U.


  • Top Tips for Asperger Students: How to Get the Most Out of University and College.
  • A Study of Military and Political Ideas.
  • On Clausewitz.
  • leondumoulin.nl | Homeland Security Digital Library at NPS.

Search this website. Stanley and William D. Their page book has much to say about the wealthiest people in our country. The quick, one-line synopsis most people remember from this book is that most millionaires work in unassuming, everyday endeavors. In other words, they are, on the whole, welding contractors and pest controllers, not investment bankers and trust fund recipients.

To many, including me, this was a fascinating revelation. It also helped fuel an ever-growing fire of enthusiasm for entrepreneurship. It is true that more than two-thirds of the millionaires in this country can be described as self-employed.

Table of contents

However, it does not follow to say that the self-employed are most likely millionaires; far from it. While this book was written several years ago, the misconceptions some people took away from it still permeate public consciousness. Once the tech boom busted, the firms and money flows went with it. Even though the funds were flush with cash, they were still being very picky about where they put it. What happens to the lucky souls who do manage to score venture capital funding?

Owners, who have staked their life savings and reputation on a business, often end up giving up majority ownership and control.

Search the HSDL

In some cases, they get pushed out of their own company. There is a commonly held legend of the company that gets outside funding and makes its founders rich. The team then takes the company public in an initial public offering IPO , and everyone gets even richer. Sure, it has happened now and then, especially during the height of the dot-com bubble, but those fairy tale endings represent a small sliver of the entrepreneurial world. Among the Inc , only 12 percent had received any venture capital funding since start-up. Only 17 percent had raised private equity at any point since they began.

If you are running a company yourself, you probably know: maxing out credit cards, arm-twisting friends and relatives, draining the nest egg, leveraging the house, or, in many cases, all of the preceding. For most small business owners, financing is far less romantic than the magazine cover stories would have us believe.

Even companies that are successful today generally started out with relatively little capital. If your dreams have been spurred by the dot-com era stories of a venture-funded Ferrari, decadent parties, and company outings to Tahiti, let them go. Most private companies are funded by whatever the owners can scrape together.

Bad statistics get thrown out in some publication and, after being repeated enough times, become unquestioned facts. One of the best examples is the idea that small businesses create almost all the new jobs in America. Politicians have done more than their part to perpetuate this myth. When big businesses are struggling and laying off workers, new small businesses have started up while established small firms have grown. We read daily of large corporations handing out thousands of pink slips, but small business entrepreneurs continue to combine their time and talent with capital and guts—and the result is jobs.

They create 75 percent of the new jobs in this country. Chao, Large corporations shed jobs and wreak havoc during times of recession.

On the other hand, small businesses are the backbone of our economy; they create 75 percent of all new jobs. They create 75 percent of all new jobs —JohnKerry. I have tried very hard to understand the core arguments made by both sides. To better understand, I have read and listened to and e-mailed many people on the subject. After months of dedicated study, I have discovered that most government officials, economists, and other scholarly experts subscribe to two basic schools of thought as it relates to small business and job creation: 1.