DOCSLIB.ORG

Authority and Harm in War LIBRARY VERSION.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Authority and Harm in War LIBRARY VERSION.Pdf Authority and Harm in War Jonathan Parry Thesis Submitted for the of Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Philosophy) June 2014 Department of Philosophy The University of Sheffield Abstract Two features of warfare are particularly ethically striking. Firstly, and most obviously, war involves killing and maiming on a grand scale. Secondly, war involves large numbers of individuals obeying the commands of those who claim to possess authority over them, such as their superior officers and political leaders. Whereas leading contemporary work on the ethics of war focuses on the former aspect, this thesis investigates the relevance of the latter. The project is orientated around a discussion of the traditional just war requirement that wars be waged by a ‘legitimate authority’, and makes three central contributions. Firstly, I argue that the authority criterion plays a much more important role within just war theory than is commonly supposed. Rather than simply imposing a necessary condition for justifying the resort to war, the criterion also plays a crucial role in judgements about the permissibility of individuals’ conduct in war. More specifically, the criterion captures the idea that individuals who fight on behalf of a certain type of entity are subject to a more extensive range of permissions to cause harm than those that apply to private actors. Secondly, I assess the extent to which the commands of authorities are capable of affecting the deontic status of acts of harming. Drawing on a ‘service-based’ account of the justification of authority, I argue for the controversial conclusion that individuals may be morally required, all- things-considered, to obey commands to cause serious harm to others, even in cases were doing so would be straightforwardly morally unjustified in the absence of the command. This argument has important revisionary implications for our understanding of both the ethics of harm and the moral limits of the duty to obey. Thirdly, I employ this argument to provide a qualified defence of the authority criterion against powerful objections raised by an influential ‘reductivist’ approach to just war theory. While they diverge in important respects, I argue that my defence is compatible with the basic commitments that motivate a reductivist view. Acknowledgements I owe thanks to many people for their help in producing this thesis. Four persons deserve special mention. My supervisors Daniel Viehoff and Jimmy Lenman have been fantastic throughout. I also greatly benefitted from the input of Jeff McMahan, who went above and beyond the call of duty in taking on the role of unofficial supervisor. I am also grateful to Helen Frowe, who first introduced me to the topics addressed in the thesis as an undergraduate and encouraged me to pursue them further. For written comments on parts of the thesis, which are incredibly time- consuming to produce, I am extremely grateful to Saba Bazargan, Yitzhak Benbaji, Ian Fishback. Jeff McMahan, Helen Frowe, Seth Lazar, Michael Neu, Jonathan Quong, Daniel Statman, and Victor Tadros. I presented material from the thesis at the following conferences and workshops: MANCEPT Annual Workshops in Political Theory (Manchester, 2011); Brave New World (Manchester, 2012); The Society for Applied Philosophy Annual Conference (Oxford, 2012); The Association for Legal and Social Philosophy (Stirling, 2013); and a workshop in Rogoznica, Croatia (2013). I also presented material at The University of Toronto (2014); the Oxford War Discussion Group (2013); and at several seminars at The University of Sheffield. Many thanks to audience members at these events for stimulating and helpful discussions. I also greatly benefitted from innumerable conversations, philosophical or otherwise, with my fellow graduate students at the University of Sheffield. In particular with Carl Fox, Tash McKeever, Jessica Begon, Angie Pepper, Peter Cavan, Kathy Puddifoot, Clara Sandelind, Richard Healey, Nicola Kemp, Jan Kandiyali, Angie Pepper and Stephen Wright. Special thanks to Steve, and to my parents Janette and Gareth, for proofreading portions of the thesis. Work on this thesis was supported by grants from the Arts and Humanities Research Council, the Society for Applied Philosophy, and the Faculty of Arts and Humanities at the University of Sheffield. My thanks to these organisations. For everything else, and much more besides, I thank my wife Kwun Ye. Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................... 01 Chapter 1 – The Role of the Authority Criterion ...................................... 11 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 11 1.2 The Structure of Orthodox Just War Theory ............................................... 12 1.3 The Standard Interpretation of the Authority Criterion ........................ 14 1.4 The Discontinuity Thesis ..................................................................................... 18 1.5 The Demarcation Requirement ........................................................................ 23 1.6 The Revised Interpretation of the Authority Criterion .......................... 24 1.7 The (Real) Challenge of Irregular Belligerency ......................................... 28 1.8 Classical Just War Theory and the Authority Criterion .......................... 35 1.9 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 39 Chapter 2 –Scepticism Regarding the Authority Criterion ................... 40 2.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 40 2.2 Reductivism: An Overview .................................................................................. 42 2.2.1 The Continuity Thesis .................................................................................. 42 2.2.2 The Content Thesis ........................................................................................ 44 2.3 Jettisoning the Restrictive Authority Criterion .......................................... 47 2.3.1 The First Spectrum Argument .................................................................. 50 2.3.2 Deflating the Restrictive Authority Criterion .................................... 54 2.4 Jettisoning the Permissive Authority Criterion ......................................... 56 2.4.1 The Continuity Thesis .................................................................................. 57 2.4.2 Rejecting the Orthodox View .................................................................... 58 2.4.3 Rejecting the Classical View ...................................................................... 60 2.4.4 The Second Spectrum Argument ............................................................ 62 2.5 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 64 Chapter 3 – Non-Reductivist Approaches to Just War Theory ............ 66 3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 66 3.2 Motivating Non-Reductivism ............................................................................. 67 3.2.1 The Permissibility of Participation in Unjust Wars ........................ 67 3.2.2 The Avoidance of Pacifism ......................................................................... 68 3.3 Non-Reductivist Approaches ............................................................................. 70 3.3.1 The Collectivist View .................................................................................... 72 3.3.2 The Associative Duty View ........................................................................ 75 3.4 The Relevance of Non-Reductivism ................................................................ 77 3.5 The War Crimes Objection .................................................................................. 78 3.6 Alternative Groundings for Constraints on Targeting ............................ 84 3.6.1 Role-Based Obligations ............................................................................... 85 3.6.2 The Avoidance of Cowardice ..................................................................... 87 3.6.3 Modes of Agency ............................................................................................. 88 3.6.4 Risk ....................................................................................................................... 90 3.6.5 Vulnerability .................................................................................................... 91 3.7 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 97 Chapter 4 – Authority and Harm ................................................................... 99 4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 99 4.2 Authority: The Basics ............................................................................................ 100 4.3 Authority and the Ethics of Harming .............................................................. 102 4.4 The Ethics of Harm: Completeness and Immunity .................................... 104 4.5 Two Claims ...............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Philosophy of War and Peace
    THE PHILOSOPHY OF WAR AND PEACE Oleg Bazaluk1 — Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, Pereiaslav-Khmelnytskyi State Pedagogical University (Pereiaslav-Khmelnytskyi, Ukraine) E-mail: [email protected] Tamara Blazhevych2 — Senior lecturer, Kyiv University of Tourism, Economy, and Law (Kyiv, Ukraine) E-mail: [email protected] In the paper the author comprehends ontology of the war and peace. Using the results of empiri- cal and theoretical research in the field of geophilosophy, as well as neuroscience, psychology, social philosophy and military history, the author comprehends the philosophy of war and peace. The author proves that the problem of war and peace originates in the features of forming men- tality. War and peace are the ways to achieve a regulatory compromise between manifestations of the active principle, which was initially laid in the foundation of the human mentality, and the influence of the external environment through natural selection; between the complicating needs of mental space as a totality of mentalities at the scale of the Earth and the possibilities of satisfying them; between the proclaimed idea that unites mental space, and the possibility of its implementa- tion. War and Peace regulate high-quality structure and manifestations of mental space: reduce the number of mentalities, whose structures predispose to aggression, and increase the number of men- talities, whose manifestations are directed at integration and cooperation. Through the proposed theory of war and peace, I have come to realize that, the state of peace for the evolving mental space includes the philosophy of war; the transition from peace to war depends mainly on the effective- ness of educational technology.
    [Show full text]
  • Spring 2012 CAS Department of Philosophy Undergraduate Courses
    01/20/2012 Spring 2012 CAS Department of Philosophy Undergraduate Courses http://www.philosophy.buffalo.edu/courses PHI 101 BEE Intro. to Philosophy Beebe, J M 6:00pm - 8:40pm Cooke 121 13444 This course will introduce students to some of the basic questions and methods of philosophy. We will begin by looking at the birth of Western philosophy in ancient Greece. We will read three of Plato's dialogues and will learn about the life of Socrates, the first great Western philosopher. We will then wrestle with philosophical questions such as the following: What must one do to be truly happy? Are there absolute truths? Is truth relative? Is it ethically permissible to clone human beings? Is euthanasia morally permissible? How is the mind related to the brain? Is it anything more than the brain? Can computers think? Do humans have free will? If so, what is the nature of that freedom? Is it rational to believe in God? Is the existence of evil incompatible with the existence of a wholly good God? PHI 101 CHO Intro. to Philosophy Cho, K MWF 9:00am-9:50am O’Brian 109 15620 In addition to discussing the standardized introductory topics such as Reality, Knowledge, Ethics, Religion, Art, Mind and Body, based on the works of classical Western philosophers, the course is designed to make ourselves to be more critically inquisitive about what we normally take (in the Western world) for granted. For this purpose, a second textbook with sources from John Dewey and Confucius, is selected. Required texts: 1. R. Solomon, Introducing Philosophy, 10th edition, Oxford University Press.
    [Show full text]
  • The Philosophy of Loyalty
    29 The Philosophy of Loyalty I. The Nature and the Need of Loyalty One of the most familiar traits of our time is the tendency to revise tradition, to reconsider the foundations of old beliefs, and some­ times mercilessly to destroy what once seemed indispensable. This disposition, as we all know, is especially prominent in the realms of social theory and of religious belief. But even the exact sciences do not escape from the influence of those who are fond of the reexamination of dogmas. And the modern tendency in question has, of late years, been very notable in the field of Ethics. Conven­ tional morality has been required, in company with religion, and also in company with exact science, to endure the fire of criticism. And although, in all ages, the moral law has indeed been exposed to the assaults of the wayward, the peculiar moral situation of our time is this, that it is no longer either the flippant or the vicious who are the most pronounced or the most dangerous opponents of our moral traditions. Devoted reformers, earnest public servants, ardent prophets of a coming spiritual order,-all these types of lovers of humanity are represented amongst those who to-day demand great and deep changes in the moral standards by which our lives are [The complete text of The P!Jilosopby of Loyalty is reprinted here from PL.] 8 )6 MORAL AND RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE to be governed. We have become accustomed, during the past few generations,-during the period of Socialism and of Individualism, of Karl Marx, of Henry George, of Ibsen, of Nietzsche, of Tolstoi, -to hear unquestionably sincere lovers of humanity sometimes de­ claring our traditions regarding the rights of property to be im­ moral, and sometimes assailing, in the name of virtue, our present family ties as essentially unworthy of the highest ideals.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall 2014 Department of Philosophy Graduate Course Descriptions
    Fall 2014 Department of Philosophy Graduate Course Descriptions http://www.buffalo.edu/cas/philosophy/grad-study/grad_courses.html CANCELLED: PHI 519 (w/489) DIP Topics in Logic: Phi Software Dipert, R (Special Topics) #22597 After a rapid review of propositional and quantificational logic, including some alternative logics and alternative notations, we will study two important "extensions" of first-order logic, axiomatic formulations of mereology (part-whole theory) and axiomatic (Zermelo-Fraenkel) set theory. We will discuss some of the philosophical issues that surround these theories but will mostly explore their deductive structure. The last part of the course will be devoted to software tools for use in exploring logical theories: the computer language Prolog (and the paradigm of logic programming), software tools in Prolog, and then various “automatic” theorem-provers and reasoners, such as Prover9 and SNARK. At the end of the course we will also look at logical formulations of metaphysics, in the form of characteristic axioms of the Basic Formal Ontology (BFO 2.0). PHI 556 PWL Topics in History of Philosophy Powell, L TH, 4:00-6:50 Park 141 #24196 In this course, we will read Thomas Reid’s Inquiry into the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense, as well as related works from John Locke, David Hume, George Berkeley and Mary Shepherd, as well as secondary literature on these figures. Thomas Reid’s concerns in the work are centered around Epistemology, Perception, and the Philosophy of Mind. Students will gain familiarity with some major early modern positions about epistemology and perception, and influential criticisms of those views.
    [Show full text]
  • Warfare in St. Augustine's De Civitate Dei
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Master's Theses Theses and Dissertations 1942 Warfare in St. Augustine's De Civitate Dei Richard Albert Schuchert Loyola University Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses Part of the History of Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Schuchert, Richard Albert, "Warfare in St. Augustine's De Civitate Dei" (1942). Master's Theses. 694. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/694 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 1942 Richard Albert Schuchert -· WARFARE IN ST. AUGUSTINE'S DE CIVITATE DEI RICHARD A. SCHUCHERT, S. J. "Si autem ipsum bellum est Mars: utinam, quam manifestum est quod non sit deus, tam non sit et bel­ lum,quod uel falso uocetur deus." (vii. 14) A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Loyola University 1942 VITA AUCTORIS Richard Albert Schuchart, S. J., was born in Toledo, Ohio, January 31, 1914. He attended the Cathedral Chapel Parochial School in that city from 1920 to 1928. He then received part of his secondary education in the high school department of St. Charles College, Catonsville, Maryland, from 1928 to 1931, after which time he attended the St. John's University High School of Toledo, Ohio, where he graduated in 1932.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall 2021 Course Descriptions
    UNDERGRADUATE FALL 2021 COURSE DESCRIPTIONS PHI 100 (DEC: B, SBC: CER, HUM) Concepts of the Person (II), Main Focus An historical introduction to philosophy through readings and discussions on topics such as human identity, human understanding, and human values. PHI 100.02 MWF 10:30-11:25 E. Mindich What are the key categories of personhood, and through what processes and mechanisms do we demonstrate that we appreciate, or do not appreciate, the value of another human life? Humans share several key features or attributes, including but not limited to: having finitude, having mobility, having emotions, having knowledge and opinions, having political agency, as well as a desire to be treated respectfully, and as a human being. But, what does this latter claim mean? What does it mean to be treated as a human being, and what are the manifold ways in which we neglect to treat “others” as human beings? In this course, we will examine the concept of ontological value, that is, which beings are treated as valuable, and examine this phenomenon as one that is differentially distributed. In other words, not all humans appear to be valued equally; and in this course, we will examine the forms in which value is attributed and demonstrated, but also withheld. Finally, we will consider what an ethical and equitable distribution of ontological value might look like, and how we might be able to pursue it. PHI 100.03 MWF 11:45-12:40 E. Russo Philosophy of the Human Person: The Category of Sex This course examines different perspectives on the concept of “sex” -- the classification of persons as “man/male” or “woman/female"— in the history of philosophy and today.
    [Show full text]
  • Minimal Justice and Regime Change in Brian Orend's Political Ethics
    Arseniy D. Kumankov MINIMAL JUSTICE AND REGIME CHANGE IN BRIAN OREND’S POLITICAL ETHICS BASIC RESEARCH PROGRAM WORKING PAPERS SERIES: HUMANITIES WP BRP 120/HUM/2016 This Working Paper is an output of a research project implemented at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE). Any opinions or claims contained in this Working Paper do not necessarily reflect the views of HSE. Arseniy D. Kumankov1 MINIMAL JUSTICE AND REGIME CHANGE IN BRIAN OREND’S POLITICAL ETHICS2 Brian Orend, one of the leading just war theorists, is best known today for elaborating jus post bellum principles while his works contain another distinctive component, concept of “minimally just” political community. This article explores Briand Orend’s conception of “minimally just” political community, especially the meaning of this concept for Orend’s version of just war theory. Orend uses Kantian political and moral philosophy in order to prove there are two key functions of state: protection of human rights and establishing order. Since human rights are universal, a state should assist in protection of human rights of every person, not only its citizen’s rights. This leads to situation when states avoid of harming foreigners and aggressive wars become banned. Orend call a state “minimally just” if it follows these rules. However, these states could violate non-intervention principle and start wars. A crucial point here is an idea that a “minimally just” state has a right to fight for the overthrow of the aggressive regimes and establishment of “minimal justice”. The author concludes that this notion helps Orend extend the list of just causes of war, though his original intention was limitation of cases when arms could be used.
    [Show full text]
  • War As Aesthetic: the Philosophy of Carl Von Clausewitz
    WAR AS AESTHETIC: THE PHILOSOPHY OF CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ AS THE EMBODIMENT OF JOHN DEWEY’S CONCEPT OF EXPERIENCE A Dissertation by OAK HERBERT DE BERG Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY August 2011 Major Subject: Philosophy War as Aesthetic: The Philosophy of Carl von Clausewitz as the Embodiment of John Dewey’s Concept of Experience Copyright 2011 Oak Herbert De Berg WAR AS AESTHETIC: THE PHILOSOPHY OF CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ AS THE EMBODIMENT OF JOHN DEWEY’S CONCEPT OF EXPERIENCE A Dissertation by OAK HERBERT DE BERG Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved by: Chair of Committee, John J. McDermott Committee Members, Gregory F. Pappas Kristi Sweet John Van Alstyne David Erlandson Head of Department, Daniel Conway August 2011 Major Subject: Philosophy iii ABSTRACT War as Aesthetic: The Philosophy of Carl von Clausewitz as the Embodiment of John Dewey’s Concept of Experience. (August 2011) Oak Herbert De Berg, B.S., University of California at Berkeley; B.A., University of Texas at San Antonio; M.S., Air Force Institute of Technology Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. John J. McDermott This dissertation confirms war as the zenith of aesthetic experience and demonstrates the pragmatic nature of war through explication of John Dewey’s aesthetic philosophy. Likewise, the coherency of Carl von Clausewitz’s philosophy parallels Dewey as it too leads to complete development, or flourishing, of the individual in a complex, ever-changing world.
    [Show full text]
  • Asian-Arab Philosophical Dialogues on War and Peace
    UNESCO Bangkok Regional Unit for Social and Human Sciences in Asia and the Pacific Asian-Arab Philosophical Dialogues on War and Peace War Dialogues Philosophical on Asian-Arab UNESCO Bangkok Regional Unit for Social and Human Science in Asia and the Pacific Asian-Arab Philosophical Dialogues on War and Peace Asian-Arab Philosophical Dialogues on War and Peace Editors: Darryl R.J. Macer and Souria Saad-Zoy Published by UNESCO Bangkok Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education Mom Luang Pin Malakul Centenary Building 920 Sukhumvit Road, Prakanong, Klongtoey Bangkok 10110, Thailand © UNESCO 2010 All rights reserved ISBN 978-92-9223-315-0 (Print Version) ISBN 978-92-9223-316-7 (Electronic version) The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The authors are responsible for the choice and the presentation of the facts contained in this book and for the opinions expressed therein, which are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization. Edited by Darryl R.J. Macer Design/Layout by Alessandra Blasi (cover) and Darryl R.J. Macer, Raine Boonlong and Sirasak Chaiyasook Cover photo by © UNESCO/S. Chaiyasook Printed by UNESCO Bangkok Printed in Thailand SHS/10/OS/022-1000 CONTENTS Preface .........................................................................................................................................................v
    [Show full text]
  • War Crimes and Just War by Larry May, Cambridge University Press, 2007, 343 Pp
    War Crimes and Just War by Larry May, Cambridge University Press, 2007, 343 pp. Irfan Khawaja I. In his pathbreaking (but pre-Internet) book After Virtue, the philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre asks us to [i]magine that the natural sciences were to suffer the effects of a catastrophe. A series of environmental disasters [is] blamed by the general public on the scientists. Widespread riots occur, laboratories are burnt down, physicists are lynched, books and instruments are destroyed. Finally a Know-Nothing political movement takes power and successfully abolishes science teaching in schools and universities, imprisoning and executing the remaining scientists. If there were, say, decades or centuries later to be ‘a reaction against this destructive movement’, seeking ‘to revive science’, they would, despite their best efforts, find that they had ‘largely forgotten’ what science was. They would perhaps possess ‘fragments’ of a field hitherto called science, but this revived science would in the nature of things consist of a knowledge of experiments detached from any knowledge of the theoretical context which gave them significance; parts of theories unrelated either to the other bits and pieces of theory which they possess or to experiment; instruments whose use has been forgotten; half-chapters from books, single pages from articles, not always fully legible because torn and charred. Though there would, under this later iteration, be an activity called ‘science’, almost no one would realise ‘that what they [were] doing [was] not natural science in any proper sense at all.’ MacIntyre describes his fictional scenario as a ‘disquieting suggestion’ and argues, controversially and at some length, that it accurately represents the state of moral theory today.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ethics of War and Peace
    THE ETHICS OF WAR AND PEACE: COMPETING TRADITIONS A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Notre Dame in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Jennifer Rose Stutzman Rodriguez ____________________________________ David Solomon, Director Graduate Program in Philosophy Notre Dame, Indiana July 2012 © Copyright by JENNIFER R. S. RODRIGUEZ 2012 All Rights Reserved THE ETHICS OF WAR AND PEACE: COMPETING TRADITIONS Abstract by Jennifer Rose Stutzman Rodriguez Controversies on how best to deal with other groups of people, especially aggressive ones, have surely been with us nearly as long as people have been forming groups, and modern advances, both political and technological, have only complicated these matters. That moral agents must give some thought to our moral responsibility in this arena is a given, but what form such reasoning will take is not. Over time, a number of traditions regarding war have emerged, ranging from categorical rejection (pacifism) to a limited acceptance (just war tradition) to an enthusiastic acceptance (crusading tradition); others ultimately reject the notion that war is subject to moral strictures at all (realism). As a first step to evaluating these views, I will work to more precisely define each, especially the two most popularly espoused (pacifism and just war theory), by way of a survey of their histories and scope. Building on this groundwork, I will then show how all four traditions relate to one another, by situating them along a continuum, arguing in particular that just war theory and pacifism have far more in common than Jennifer Rose Stutzman Rodriguez most realize.
    [Show full text]
  • A Philosophy of War (TMCI)
    A PHILOSOPHY OF WAR First Edition © 2013 The Military Conflict Institute Roger Mickelson, Editor Primary Authors: Frank Benedict Rosser Bobbitt Ted DuBois Chuck Hawkins John Honig Wayne Hughes John McIver Roger Mickelson Clayton Newell Itzhak Ravid Russ Vane Gene Visco Greg Wilcox Copyright 2013 by The Military Conflict Institute (TMCI) All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the Editor at [email protected] Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data ISBN: 978-0-9762550-3-1 Printed in the United States of America The Military Conflict Institute A Philosophy of War Contents FOREWORD ................................................................................................................................... iii THE MILITARY CONFLICT INSTITUTE - PURPOSE .................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................... vi Part I. Fundamentals of War ......................................................................................................... 1 PHILOSOPHY ........................................................................................................................ 1 WAR ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]