0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)
24 Ansichten3 Seiten
The document discusses Obama's agenda for intervention in Syria and argues that it is not purely for protecting peace and punishing wickedness. It claims that war is a continuation of politics and that political objectives are the real motivation. Specifically, it says that the objective in war, according to Clausewitz, is to compel the adversary to do one's will and achieve political control, rather than for purely moral reasons of protecting peace. The document questions whether the US would really sacrifice resources just for protecting peace or if there is a hidden political agenda behind pushing for intervention in Syria.
Originalbeschreibung:
Political Analysis class , Politicla Science Politics and Governance , International LAW
The document discusses Obama's agenda for intervention in Syria and argues that it is not purely for protecting peace and punishing wickedness. It claims that war is a continuation of politics and that political objectives are the real motivation. Specifically, it says that the objective in war, according to Clausewitz, is to compel the adversary to do one's will and achieve political control, rather than for purely moral reasons of protecting peace. The document questions whether the US would really sacrifice resources just for protecting peace or if there is a hidden political agenda behind pushing for intervention in Syria.
The document discusses Obama's agenda for intervention in Syria and argues that it is not purely for protecting peace and punishing wickedness. It claims that war is a continuation of politics and that political objectives are the real motivation. Specifically, it says that the objective in war, according to Clausewitz, is to compel the adversary to do one's will and achieve political control, rather than for purely moral reasons of protecting peace. The document questions whether the US would really sacrifice resources just for protecting peace or if there is a hidden political agenda behind pushing for intervention in Syria.
Obamas Hidden Agenda A Christian could be a soldier and serve God and country honourably. Individuals should not resort immediately to violence; God has given the sword to government for good reason. Christians as part of government should not be ashamed to protect peace and punish wickedness. These are the wise words by Saint Augustine in accordance to the justification of war. Is its purpose only to safeguard peace and to punish wickedness? Or do our leaders use war on their own self interest? The Obama administration is continuing this push for intervention in Syria. They're working on getting approval from Congress. The U.S. will not even seek UN authorization for a possible intervention. Obama and Putin are meeting in Russia to get Putin to sign off on the strike. The way to go against another country except self defense is to go to the Security Council in the United Nations and get a majority of nine to agree to the use of force. And that has to include the permanent members, or at least they can't veto it. In this case, you would need both China and Russia to at a minimum abstain from doing it, from giving a veto, or approve it one way or another. And the United States apparently doesn't think it can get it. Even if they get the U.S. Congress to approve the bombing of Syria, which is not 100 percent clear, and we can talk about that, but it's 100 percent they'll get that, but even were they to get it, they would still need authority from the Security Council of the United Nations. And if they don't get it, it's an illegal war; it's an illegal use of force. It's a war crime. It would be considered a crime of aggression. It's the kind of crime that the Jo Vanne Trivilegio A.B. Political Science 4 Germans were tried for at Nuremberg. That's where actually the crime of aggression came out of. It's a war crime to not get UN authority. If you were U.S.A would you sacrifice your time and resources on just protecting peace and punish those who are wicked? I think not, U.S.A has a hidden agenda on pushing for intervention in Syria. German-Prussian soldier and military theorist named Clausewitz stressed that War is the continuation of politics by other means. This means that war has been purely for the advancement of the nation. Politics is taken from the Greek word Politikos meaning "of, for, or relating to citizens". It is a process in which groups of people make collective decisions. All warfare is based on the process of making decisions; in which the actions are carried out in battle; stand-offs, or even presence in the Area Objective. Therefore war is not separate from politics; it is in fact; a continuation thereof. If we are to define politics; we need more than a simple phrase taken from a long list of definitions. Meriam-Webster elaborates on it as; saying:
"The art of or science concerned with guiding or influencing the governmental policy/The art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government."
If we are to apply these definitions; then we can clearly see examples that point to what Clausewitz was saying. Again; our actions can clearly see this set into motion. The art of war is defined by Clausewitz as an act "to compel our adversary to do our will". Such agenda is a Jo Vanne Trivilegio A.B. Political Science 4 political objective. Our "will" is our policy. Our policy is achieved through enforcing it upon our enemy. These are the words of Carl von Clausewitz. The objective in war is to win and hold control over our enemy forces; and of our enemy government. So again; the act of war is to 'compel our adversary to do our will" meaning it is to obtain political control and not to protect peace and punish the wicked.
Sources: "Truthout." Truthout. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Sept. 2013. <http://truth- out.org/video/item/18660-us-attack-on-syria-violates-international-law>. ^ Clausewitz, Carl von (1984) [1832]. Howard, Michael; Paret, Peter, eds. On War [Vom Krieg] (Indexed ed.). New Jersey: Princeton University Press. p. 87. ISBN 978-0-691-01854-6. Pleitgen, Frederik, Chelsea J. Carter, Barbara Starr, Lesa Jansen, Ben Brumfield, Elise Labott, Nick Paton Walsh, Jim Acosta, Max Foster, and Bharati Naik. "'War-weary' Obama Says Syria Chemical Attack Requires Response." CNN. Cable News Network, 30 Aug. 2013. Web. 07 Sept. 2013. <http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/30/world/europe/syria-civil-war>.
Horrendous Military Strategies In Israel-Hamas War: Is Demolition Bombardment An Acceptable Military Strategy? Is Deterrence An Effective Weapon? What Constitute War Crimes?
Summary: Chaos: Charles Manson, the CIA, and the Secret History of the Sixties by Tom O’ Neill & Dan Piepenbring: Key Takeaways, Summary & Analysis Included