War Argumentative Analysis

Improved Essays
When diplomacy fails, war steps forward. Tensions may escalate dramatically to war until diplomacy works again. Since war is another political instrument, political outcomes should be the motive for the powerful military states to wage, escalate and terminate wars. But sometimes, and despite its military power, these states struggle to reach its political outcomes due to many factors that stand in the way of achieving political outcomes smoothly. For instance, military power restrictions and fear from escalation , strategic vision and mistakes, war predictability, the balance of power and enemy potentials, history, alliances, civil-military relations and domestic support, type of war, and regime type. In this paper, I will argue why these …show more content…
The first factor that makes powerful states struggle to achieve the intended political outcomes is military power restriction and the fear of escalation. To clarify, major military powers avoid the escalation to the extent that makes other major powers to interfere directly, or to use a destructive weapon like the atomic bomb. With the innovation of nuclear weapon the Clausewitz concept of “absolute war” is finally achievable. This will generate fear and will restraint powerful state from using maximum power to prevail. Thus the victory as a proper outcome to be expected of the use of American arms was intractable for the duration of the cold war, for the reason of the sensible fear of the escalation of nuclear holocaust. In nuclear age, it is dangerous to compel our enemy to do our will. So, the only kind of conflict that the United States dared to wage in the nuclear era was limited war. For instance, fear was clear during Vietnam War, where nuclear option was expelled from US strategy during the war, although the US was losing the war and nuclear power could be its only way to achieve its political outcome. Fearing that the nuclear escalation in that war will lead to total war with china, who had established nuclear test a year earlier, or USSR who have been already in the nuclear club. Another example, due to the suffering …show more content…
For instance, the invasion of Iraq in 2003 intended to be a duplication to the previous First Golf War in 1990. However, it took only a decision to blow off the operational success of the American forces in the battlefield. Paul Bremer, the governor of the occupation assigned by the US government, took an infuriating and tragic decision to dissolute the Iraqi civil society, leading to the rise of sectarian strife. As a result, the most authoritarian, cruelest, and powerful terrorist organization of all times would born, and comprised at its command level former members of Saddam Hussein’s military that, Paul Bremer disbanded shortly after he banned Baath Party from civil service jobs, creating thousands of angry, armed, trained, and unemployed Iraqis. Another example is the strategic mistake, arrogant Hitler did in the Second World War, in thinking he could sweep through Russia before winter in a reckless endeavor to expand to the East seeking resources and raw materials for his war against the alliances in the West in addition to other political and military reasons. He added a new enemy to his list and opened a new front in a mistake that will cost him to lose the

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    Decision-theoretic deterrence theory focuses on the interplay of the outcomes, choices and preferences in determining interstate conflict behavior. Under decision-theoretic deterrence theory, it is believed that nuclear war is a costly endeavor that only an unreasonable actor would contemplate it as a means to resolve conflict. This theory looks at interstate conflict and goes to prescribe solutions as to how states must act once presented with conflicts that don’t end in the usage of nuclear weapons. Under this theory of deterrence there is strategic uncertainty because you can never be certain of the intentions of others. There is rationality, because each state picks a strategy that will harvest the maximum possible utility and there is subjectivity also because states base their activities on how they identify others might…

    • 2367 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Sovereignty In North Korea

    • 1858 Words
    • 8 Pages

    However, this is not true the United States does not want to fight because they do not see the reason being fit. However, North Korea has recently been threating us with their nuclear capabilities that can supposedly reach the U.S. mainland’s. This is having an impact on the worlds international relations. International relations are the relationship between states governments and the connection to actors and social and geographical influences. Recently North Korea has released the fact that they have enough power to release a hydrogen bomb in the top of a missile.…

    • 1858 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Defeating Communism

    • 847 Words
    • 4 Pages

    This attack will forever live in infamy as a catastrophic attack on American soil. It also identified a flaw in American foreign policy. From 1945 until 1991, when the Soviet Union collapsed, the United States’ leaders considered defeating Communism the national interest. They believed that defeating Communism would best protect American security, both physically and economically. Unfortunately, the United States indirectly caused the rise in Islamic terrorism by siding with the mujahedeen against the Soviets in Afghanistan and by continuously fighting the secular Saddam Hussein in the 1990’s.…

    • 847 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This would create a competition between the two rivalries such that one would never need to be overtaken by the other in terms of vital armaments. For this reason, this created animosity between the two countries where each State wanted to prove their powers through newly developed weapons (Phillips, 2011). Consequently, their rivalry led to division as more countries entered the war to support their allies to win. The economic rivalry and political guidelines between the two countries was another set-up which led to the cold war, with the United States, its political policies recommended that cold war was inevitable. In particular, the concrete actions and events that carried out by both the USSR and the United States carried out a root cause of the cold war (Phillips, 2011).…

    • 1803 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    At the time of the Cold War, communism was one of the big issues. The Soviet Union wanted to expand its power, and gain control of Europe. Americans were worried that a nuclear war could begin, and communism would keep spreading. There were also Civil Rights movements, technological improvements, historical elections, and important events that were happening in the middle of the Cold War. In Peace Without Conquest by Lyndon B. Johnson, he states, "We will always oppose the effort of one nation to conquer another nation.…

    • 1349 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Brett's War Theory

    • 1500 Words
    • 6 Pages

    B.H. Liddell Hart’s approach was evident in both the adversaries. This was an attack by a non-state actor (arguably with state support) against a powerful sovereign state using an undeclared and limited war tactic. The attacks’ objectives (again, arguably) were to instill fear, likely to warn the West that new influences were being tested and expanded in south Asia and the Middle East to change the global balance of power and geopolitical realities. Osama Bin Laden’s network could not hope to conquer the United States in a total war but could potentially reach some of its objectives in the indirect approach surprise attacks that it used.…

    • 1500 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Russia has effectively been pushed in a corner, by its own leadership, and is now desperate to secure a future, and I believe that the other sovereign states sees that that is the case, and appeasing Russia-for now. If Russia decided to militarily occupy other nations, then a war may be in our future, but it would not turn out in favor for the Russians, who is already close to demise. Hitler was just power hungry, and used Germany as his vessel to get as much as possible. Germany’s neighboring countries underestimated how powerful they would get in such a short time, so when they appeased them, Germany took it as a pass to continue to do as it pleased. Once Germany took to invade other nations, then war became…

    • 1122 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Since the Treaty was enforced by nuclear powers in our scenario, and rational leaders would be deterred by this fact before violating the Treaty. However, due to Hitler’s ambition for empire, he can be categorized as an irrational leader, so I don’t believe he would be deterred by nuclear weapons. For Hitler, undoing the Treaty was the first step in accomplishing his desire for empire. Besides, at a times when Germany started violating the Treaty, countries worldwide were suffering from Great Depression, France and Britain were still recovering from WWI. From Hitler’s point of view, the French and British were too weak to enforce the Treaty.…

    • 1047 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Fearon argues that the bargaining issues among nations are rather complicated and multiple-dimension. And it is possible that side-payment is linked with other issues. In Principle, a nation may randomly choose the resolution to appease the conflict. Powell even discard the independent position of “issue indivisibility”, supposing that it still subject to commitment problems, because war is still costly, and there are still some possibilities of bargaining. The reason why negotiations break down is that even the tiniest concession will lead to catastrophic change on the distribution of power.…

    • 990 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Clarke also wrote that, “it would be morally unjust to nuke North Korea just because they are expanding their reach with their nuclear weapons”. A first strike would be uncalled for. The regime has only threatened the United States, a strike on them from the United States would destroy all of their land and would be devastating to our partnership with China. A first strike would most likely result in a war between North Korea and the United States with help from South KOREA. Clarke argues that if the United States were to go to war with North Korea, a war on their…

    • 1937 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays