Modeling the Complexity of the Terrorism/Counter-Terrorism Struggle

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 31-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Arney ◽  
Zachary Silvis ◽  
Matthew Thielen ◽  
Jeff Yao
Keyword(s):  
Armed Forces ◽  
The United States ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Counter Terrorism ◽  
Asymmetric Warfare ◽  
United States Armed Forces ◽  
Us Military ◽  
The Us ◽  
Complex Mathematical Model

The United States armed forces could be considered the world’s most powerful military force. However, in modern conflicts, techniques of asymmetric warfare (terrorism) wreak havoc on the inflexible, regardless of technological or numerical advantage. In order to be more effective, the US military must improve its counter-terrorism (CT) capabilities and flexibility. In this light, the authors model the terrorism-counter-terrorism (T-CT) struggle with a detailed and complex mathematical model and analyze the model’s components of leadership, promotion, recruitment, resources, operational techniques, cooperation, logistics, security, intelligence, science, and psychology in the T-CT struggle, with the goal of informing today’s decision makers of the options available in counter-terrorism strategy.

scholarly journals Nonconventional opponents: a review of malaria and leishmaniasis among United States Armed Forces

PeerJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. e6313
Author(s):  
Kaylin J. Beiter ◽  
Zachariah J. Wentlent ◽  
Adrian R. Hamouda ◽  
Bolaji N. Thomas
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The United States ◽  
Canine Leishmaniasis ◽  
United States Military ◽  
Treatment Delays ◽  
United States Armed Forces ◽  
Us Military ◽  
The Us ◽  
Significant Disease

As the United States military engage with different countries and cultures throughout the world, personnel become exposed to new biospheres as well. There are many infectious pathogens that are not endemic to the US, but two of particular importance are Plasmodium and Leishmania, which respectively cause malaria and leishmaniasis. These parasites are both known to cause significant disease burden in their endemic locales, and thus pose a threat to military travelers. This review introduces readers to basic life cycle and disease mechanisms for each. Local and military epidemiology are described, as are the specific actions taken by the US military for prevention and treatment purposes. Complications of such measures with regard to human health are also discussed, including possible chemical toxicities. Additionally, poor recognition of these diseases upon an individual’s return leading to complications and treatment delays in the United States are examined. Information about canine leishmaniasis, poorly studied relative to its human manifestation, but of importance due to the utilization of dogs in military endeavors is presented. Future implications for the American healthcare system regarding malaria and leishmaniasis are also presented.

The Origin and Nature of the US “Military-Industrial Complex”

Vulcan ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
John A. Alic
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The United States ◽  
Industrial Complex ◽  
Design Development ◽  
Military Industrial Complex ◽  
Technical Requirements ◽  
Us Military ◽  
The Us ◽  
Military Systems

This paper makes three primary claims. First, the so-called military-industrial complex (MIC) has its roots in the United States during World War I, when the army and navy turned to private firms for design of aircraft, and not, as some analysts have proposed, in the latter part of the nineteenth century. Second, theMICtook on its current shape during the 1950s. President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s famous warning, in effect, expressed recognition of and perhaps something like dismay at his own creation. Finally, despite the broad shift in responsibility for design, development, and production of military systems from government to industry in the middle of the last century, the armed forces remain the dominant partner in theMICby reason of their control over the technical requirements that shape and constrain weapons system design. This leaves the defense industry a junior partner.

Introduction to Armed Forces & Society

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brenda L. Moore
Keyword(s):  
Vietnam War ◽  
South African ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Defense ◽  
Women In The Military ◽  
Us Military ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Military

This Armed Forces & Society issue is on women in the contemporary armed forces in the United States and other nations to include the South African National Defense Force and the Australian Defense Force. This issue contains a collection of nine papers, each reviewing a current aspect of women serving in the military since the post–Vietnam War Era. There are also two review essays of Megan Mackenzie’s book, Beyond the Band of Brothers: The US Military and the Myth That Women Can’t Fight. An overview of changing laws and the expanding role of women in the military is provided in this introduction, as well as summaries of the nine articles, and comments on the two book reviews mentioned above.

EDUCATIONAL-TRAINING FACILITIES OF GROUND US FORCES

2019 ◽  
pp. 168-176
Author(s):  
D.B. Izyumov ◽  
E.L. Kondratyuk
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The United States ◽  
Educational Training ◽  
Us Army ◽  
The Us ◽  
Level Of Training ◽  
Army Personnel

The article discusses issues related to the development and use of training means and facilities in order to improve the level of training of US Army personnel. An overview of the main simulators used in the US Armed Forces at present is given, and the prospects for the development of the United States in this area are presented.

The Soviet Factor in the US-China Military-Technical Cooperation during the Cold War

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 12-47
Author(s):  
Yinan Li
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Active Role ◽  
The United States ◽  
Technical Cooperation ◽  
Arms Sales ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
The Military

The development of the PRC’s armed forces included three phases when their modernization was carried out through an active introduction of foreign weapons and technologies. The first and the last of these phases (from 1949 to 1961, and from 1992 till present) received wide attention in both Chinese and Western academic literature, whereas the second one — from 1978 to 1989 —when the PRC actively purchased weapons and technologies from the Western countries remains somewhat understudied. This paper is intended to partially fill this gap. The author examines the logic of the military-technical cooperation between the PRC and the United States in the context of complex interactions within the United States — the USSR — China strategic triangle in the last years of the Cold War. The first section covers early contacts between the PRC and the United States in the security field — from the visit of R. Nixon to China till the inauguration of R. Reagan. The author shows that during this period Washington clearly subordinated the US-Chinese cooperation to the development of the US-Soviet relations out of fear to damage the fragile process of detente. The second section focuses on the evolution of the R. Reagan administration’s approaches regarding arms sales to China in the context of a new round of the Cold War. The Soviet factor significantly influenced the development of the US-Chinese military-technical cooperation during that period, which for both parties acquired not only practical, but, most importantly, political importance. It was their mutual desire to undermine strategic positions of the USSR that allowed these two countries to overcome successfully tensions over the US arms sales to Taiwan. However, this dependence of the US-China military-technical cooperation on the Soviet factor had its downside. As the third section shows, with the Soviet threat fading away, the main incentives for the military-technical cooperation between the PRC and the United States also disappeared. As a result, after the Tiananmen Square protests, this cooperation completely ceased. Thus, the author concludes that the US arms sales to China from the very beginning were conditioned by the dynamics of the Soviet-American relations and Beijing’s willingness to play an active role in the policy of containment. In that regard, the very fact of the US arms sales to China was more important than its practical effect, i.e. this cooperation was of political nature, rather than military one.

Protocol to the Convention on the Prohibition of Bacteriological (Biological) Weapons – History, Main Provisions, Significance and Reasons for Not Signing

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-21
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
The United States ◽  
Biological Weapons ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Special Role ◽  
International Agreement ◽  
Us Military ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Weapons Control

Received 30 January 2021. Accepted for publication 20 March 2021 The Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction (BTWC) does not have a legally binding verification regime. An attempt by the Ad Hoc Group of Experts, created by the UN Committee on Disarmament, to strengthen the BTWC by developing a legally binding document – the Protocol, was blocked by the United States in July 2001. The purpose of this work is to study the history, main provisions, significance and reasons for not signing the Protocol to the BTWC. The attention is paid to the events in biological weapons control, which have led a number of countries to the understanding of the necessity to develop the Protocol. The background of the US actions to block this document is the subject of special consideration. During the Second Review Conference on the Implementation of the Convention (8–25 September 1986, Geneva) the USSR, the German Democratic Republic and the Hungarian People's Republic proposed to develop and adopt the Protocol as an addition to the BTWC. This document was supposed to establish general provisions, definitions of terms, lists of agents and toxins, lists of equipment that was present or used at production facilities, threshold quantities of biological agents designed to assess means and methods of protection. The proposed verification mechanism was based on three «pillars»: initial declarations with the basic information about the capabilities of each State Party; inspections to assess the reliability of the declarations; investigations to verify and confirm or not confirm the alleged non-compliance with the Convention. The verification regime was to be under the control of an international organization – the Organization for the Prohibition of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons. However, the US military and pharmaceutical companies opposed the idea of international inspections. The then US Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, John Robert Bolton II, played a special role in blocking the Protocol. During the Fifth Review Conference in December 2001, he demanded the termination of the Ad Hoc Group of Experts mandate for negotiations under the pretext that any international agreement would constrain US actions. The current situation with biological weapons control should not be left to chance. Measures to strengthen the BTWC should be developed, taking into account the new fundamental changes in dual-use biotechnology. It should be borne in mind, that the Protocol, developed in the 1990s, is outdated nowadays.

scholarly journals Limits and Possibilities of the United States Military in Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Stabilization

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alcir Santos Neto
Keyword(s):  
Nation Building ◽  
The United States ◽  
Humanitarian Assistance ◽  
Inspector General ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Us Military ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Government ◽  
Post War ◽  
Military Engagement

This study probes the limits and possibilities of US military efforts to facilitate the transition from warfighting to nation-building. Most comparative studies conceive the complexity of this transition along a spectrum from conflict to humanitarian assistance to post-conflict stabilization. While the last two stages have often been interpreted as a coordinated act of civil-military ‘nation-building’; the spectrum, in fact, represents an ideal type simplification. At one level, outcomes depend on the players involved, including: sovereign nations, national militaries, international and regional institutions, UN peacekeepers, private security contractors, and non-governmental humanitarian providers, among others. On the other hand, because the number, types, and causes of case outcomes are highly diverse and contingent upon many possible factors (among them for example: political, economic, military, organizational, humanitarian, cultural, and religious), institutions like the US military face serious difficulties both planning and coordinating post-conflict scenarios. Assuming this complex backdrop, the present study offers a qualitative analysis of two recent US government reports by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) and the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) on US military engagement in Afghanistan and Iraq. In both cases, the US government sought to ‘nation-build’ by facilitating post-war stabilization and humanitarian assistance, detailing its genuine efforts to record both processes. While results indicate some limited successes in both cases, they also indicate a familiar pattern of uneven performance failures consistent with other cases internationally. The analysis concludes with recommendations for further research that may better control the contingencies of post-conflict management.

A White Man’s War?

2020 ◽  
pp. 39-68
Author(s):  
Brian Taylor
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil War ◽  
African Americans ◽  
Black Men ◽  
The United States ◽  
Us Army ◽  
Us Military ◽  
The Us ◽  
Founding Principle ◽  
Proper Response

This chapter looks at the first two years of the Civil War, when black men were barred from serving in the US Army. It follows the debate that black Northerners conducted about the proper response to the call to serve in the US military, which they were sure would come at some point. Immediate enlistment advocates sparred with those who counseled withholding enlistment until African Americans’ demands had been met. Black Northerners began to articulate the terms under which they would serve the Union, among which citizenship emerged as central, as well as the changes necessary to bring lived reality in the United States in line with the founding principle of equality.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document