What to Know Before You Go

[William F. Owen]

Okay, if we go by that definition, the Special Forces troops engaged in behind the lines actions are criminals, as are partisans. I could also argue, again based on your definition, that George Washington was a criminal as were all of the signatories to the Declaration of Independence. The point I'm trying to make here is that "actions" are not a thing in and of themselves - they take place in a context of meaning (a point, I should note, that is recognized in most of the English derived legal systems). If we judge solely by actions, then there is no difference between "killing" and "murder".

Whoah there! I only said "Military Force" is defined by action. It is killing folks, frightening cats and breaking stuff. These are actions. The legitimacy of the action is defined by the intent and against whom it takes place. (GW being a terrorist is a whole other argument and as my family lost considerable wealth when we left the Americas, one I am willing to have!! )

It strikes me that you are actually making my point for me . I never said that kinetic operations must be a "reasoned debate" . "Break the will of another"? What is that but soften them up to accept your "solution".

I may well be making your point, but I am using my understanding and language. I consider the "breaking of will" to be central tenet of military thought.

Hmmm, I think I'm going to disagree that a military defeat is a necessary condition here. As examples, I'll cite Vietnam and Pyrrhus, but there ae others.

Correct me if I am wrong, but was not the US Governments/Army's will to continue action broken by North Vietnams use of violence? What caused the US withdrawal and then failure to defend South Vietnam?

Anyway, I'm off watching the US primaries. Some inetersting results coming out now.

Marc

Got that right. I see Obama got Utah and North Dakota. I guess the African American populations of those states must have turned out in force!!