Please Read - Theory of War Survey

[St Leo]

1) Canada
2) B - Self Defense and Peacekeeping
3) What's the "War on Terror"? No.
4) No.

[GePap]

1, US
2. A - War is politics by other means. Now if you want to ask about where policies should come from, that is a different question
3. NO. A war on terrorism is a moronic thing even to contemplate.
4. NO. Given the pure idiocy of the monicker for the mess currently ongoing, how could the answer not be no?

[Ninot]

Re: Please Read - Theory of War Survey

1. Canada
2. B
3. No
4. No

[Ted Striker]

I can't answer these questions because the "War on Terror" as defined by the White House makes no distinction between the actions in Iraq and in Afghanistan.

[Jethro83]

Re: Please Read - Theory of War Survey

Originally posted by Micaelis Rex

1.) What country do you live in?

Australia

2.) Which of the following positions most closely echos your own belief about when war should be waged?

• Position A I believe that the most important reason for a country to consider in deciding whether or not to go to war should be whether or not the war will provide a net benefit to their own citizens.
• Position B I believe that the most important reason for a country to consider in deciding whether or not to go to war should be whether the war is morally justifyable or not.
• Position C I believe that since it is never morally right for a country to go to war, countries never should go to war.

Position B

3.) Overall, do you believe that the reasons that the US government gave for fighting its War on Terror were sufficient enough causes to go to war?

No

4.) Overall, do you believe that the execution of the War on Terror has reflected the reasons that the US Government gave for fighting it?

No

[Nickiow]

Re: Please Read - Theory of War Survey

Originally posted by Micaelis Rex
I am writing a paper on the theory of war, and would really appreciate your help. All you have to do is answer the four questions below. To participate, just reply to this post with your answer to each of these four questions.

Which thoery?, that as part of national policy it is the perview of the nations political leaders as in antiquity, and that the peoples of countries were tobe used in thye GHreat game of war between Kings?, or the theory that wars fought without the consent of the governed are not a good thing to have?. Just war theory, UN Atlantic charter, and so on. Calaswitizian thoery etc.

Originally posted by Micaelis Rex
1.) What country do you live in?

UK
[QUOTE] Originally posted by Micaelis Rex

2.) Which of the following positions most closely echos your own belief about when war should be waged?

• Position A I believe that the most important reason for a country to consider in deciding whether or not to go to war should be whether or not the war will provide a net benefit to their own citizens.[QUOTE]
  
  Who choses?, the political ruller or the citizen?, is it the benivalent dictator say an Augustus extending markets along european shores for italian merchants or the AH extended living room to the east?. Is it the forced service in war of the persain Empires peoples or the soldier citizens of America?.
  
  Last point war for profit as part of national policy based on a cost benifit shema is only part of the model, wars are not only fought for gain, as gain can and has ment many things to many different people.
  
  Originally posted by Micaelis Rex
  
• Position B I believe that the most important reason for a country to consider in deciding whether or not to go to war should be whether the war is morally justifyable or not..[QUOTE]
  
  And whose morality is the one determing this?. Is it AH moarally we cannot let the threat of the Jewish race on our future generations continue, or the Church that would burn all to save their souls?.
  
  [QUOTE] Originally posted by Micaelis Rex
• Position C I believe that since it is never morally right for a country to go to war, countries never should go to war.

..[QUOTE]

Ignores meeting war with war, ie acting in self defence as against wars of agression.

Originally posted by Micaelis Rex
3.)
Overall, do you believe that the reasons that the US government gave for fighting its War on Terror were sufficient enough causes to go to war?

Nope, but thats imaterial, im not an American, but if i were the first problem is a war on terrorism, as defined by the White house on the WH site as part of official US policy is an oxymoron.

Terrorism is a tactic of warfighting, you may just as well go war to stop the use of blockades or strategic bombing or any other tactic. the war cannot end as war cannot deliver the stated goal.

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Micaelis Rex
4.) Overall, do you believe that the execution of the War on Terror has reflected the reasons that the US Government gave for fighting it?.[QUOTE]

Yes, they have the tec and training equavalent of the 1800s concpot that we have the maxim gun and they do not approach to warfare, we can nintervene as and when it is prudent to do so and defeat any and all commers, unless they adopt asymetric warfare, so we will call that unlawfull and attempt to maintain our advantage by making such use unlawfull.

We have the top mil in the world and we will continue to do so, one starnd of which is to make it unaceptable to use acts of terror, problem is that war is the act of terror of the mil advanced and powerfull and terorism is the act of war of the mil weak. ergo the whole concept/theory is flawed.

Originally posted by Micaelis Rex
Thank you very much for participating in my survey!
Micaelis Rex

No probelm, try looking here for some theory of warfare ate/gabrmetz/gabr0001.htm

[Az]

1)Israel
2) B ( but I think that A and B are somewhat close - I am utilitarian )
3) If you talk about the war in Iraq, and refer to "regime change to bring democracy" - then YES
4) no

[Sandman]

1) UK
2) B - but this is not a well-constructed question.
3) No...
4) No...

[child of Thor]

Neo-conservitism(and political theories like it) is flawed and will not work - we are seeing this. I think it answers your survey

[The Mad Viking]

Re: Please Read - Theory of War Survey

1.) What country do you live in?
Canada

2.) Which of the following positions most closely echos your own belief about when war should be waged?[list][*]Position A

3.) Overall, do you believe that the reasons that the US government gave for fighting its War on Terror were sufficient enough causes to go to war?

Yes (Afganistan)

4.) Overall, do you believe that the execution of the War on Terror has reflected the reasons that the US Government gave for fighting it?

No (Iraq)

[Winston]

Denmark, B, yes, yes.

[Zkribbler]

Re: Please Read - Theory of War Survey

Originally posted by Micaelis Rex
I am writing a paper on the theory of war, and would really appreciate your help. All you have to do is answer the four questions below. To participate, just reply to this post with your answer to each of these four questions.

1.) What country do you live in?

USA

2.) Which of the following positions most closely echos your own belief about when war should be waged?

• Position A I believe that the most important reason for a country to consider in deciding whether or not to go to war should be whether or not the war will provide a net benefit to their own citizens.
• Position B I believe that the most important reason for a country to consider in deciding whether or not to go to war should be whether the war is morally justifyable or not.
• Position C I believe that since it is never morally right for a country to go to war, countries never should go to war.

Prob'ly "B." Self defense ~ morally justifiable.

3.) Overall, do you believe that the reasons that the US government gave for fighting its War on Terror were sufficient enough causes to go to war?

Fighting the War on Terror vs. al Qaeda, yes. Invading Iraq, no.

4.) Overall, do you believe that the execution of the War on Terror has reflected the reasons that the US Government gave for fighting it?

No. The War on Terror was supposed to be directed against those who attacked us on 9/11. Instead, the US has gone off on a "Grand Diversion" to attack Iraq, a country that never attacked or threatened us and did not have the military capacity to attack or threaten us.

[Dauphin]

My objection to Position A is that it advocates Imperialism and/or the occupation of weaker countries with exploitable resources. Hitler (ach Godwin!) invaded Russia for lebensraum and the benefit of the German people.

[Chemical Ollie]

Michaelis from mexico

[Chemical Ollie]

1 Sweden
2 C I think
3 No, duh!
4 No, duh!
5 No ****!!!
6 Just shoot me!
7 My wife won't love me anyway