• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Cambridge Review of International Affairs >Victory in scholarship on strategy and war
【24h】

Victory in scholarship on strategy and war

机译：战略与战争奖学金

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

When policy-makers use force to achieve political ends, they use the word ‘victory’, yet its meaning is frequently left unclear. Policy-makers are using force for new purposes (peace operations, preemption, state-building, democracy promotion, counterinsurgencies and counterterrorism), but the language and thinking on victory in these new situations has not kept pace with the times. The essential problem is that the term ‘victory’ is an imprecisely defined concept for guiding decisions about military intervention. Everyone, from scholars to policy-makers, should understand that the failure historically to develop a precise concept of victory weakens the ability of policy-makers to use force effectively and contributes to confusion when societies debate whether to use force. This article seeks to make three fundamental contributions towards reducing the ambiguity that surrounds the term ‘victory’ in the strategic studies literature. First, it establishes the renewed importance of the question: ‘what is precisely the meaning of “victory?”’ Second, it presents a typology for understanding the nature of victory. Third, it uses this typology to reevaluate the contributions of prominent and lesser-known thinkers in strategic studies whose ideas have contributed to the scholarship on what it means to achieve victory in war.View full textDownload full textRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2011.617356
机译：当决策者使用武力实现政治目的时，他们使用“胜利”一词，但其含义经常不清楚。决策者们正在将武力用于新的目的（和平行动，先发制人，国家建设，民主促进，反叛和反恐），但是在这些新形势下胜利的语言和思想与时俱进。根本的问题是，“胜利”一词是用于指导有关军事干预决策的不精确定义的概念。从学者到决策者，每个人都应该理解，历史上未能发展出精确的胜利概念的失败削弱了决策者有效使用武力的能力，并在社会辩论是否使用武力时造成混乱。本文旨在为减少战略研究文献中围绕“胜利”一词的歧义性做出三项基本贡献。首先，它确立了问题的新重要性：“胜利的确切含义是什么？”其次，它提出了一种理解胜利本质的类型学。第三，它使用这种类型来重新评估战略研究中杰出和鲜为人知的思想家的贡献，这些思想的思想对取得战争胜利的意义的学术贡献很大。查看全文下载全文相关的var addthis_config = {ui_cobrand：“泰勒＆Francis Online”，services_compact：“ citeulike，netvibes，twitter，technorati，delicious，linkedin，facebook，stumbleupon，digg，google，更多”，发布号：“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2011.617356

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号