Volume 1, Issue 3

Contents

  • The United States has shown a marked tendency to start all strategic discussion by defining the ends and ways it wishes to achieve. It has assumed the means will be available. Political reluctance to commit significant forces and the fiscal crisis mean the United States should start with the limited resources it will have available and then determine what goals can be accomplished.

    Read
  • On Paradigms

    Justin Kelly

    Justin Kelly questions whether the processes we usually rely on to generate theories and doctrines are logically sound. He concludes that many of the categories we use to order knowledge are, at best, problematic.

    Read
  • Gian P. Gentile argues that the tactics and methods of counterinsurgency have eclipsed strategy in Afghanistan, and have stifled intellectual rigor and creative thinking in the American Army.

    Read
  • Patrick Porter argues that the term ‘isolationist’ damages strategic debate. It makes it harder to argue for a rebalancing of ends and means in U.S. statecraft, and presents Americans with a false choice between global hegemony and retreat.

    Read
  • In this article David Betz finds much similarity between today’s talk of decisive ‘cyberwar’ and the overblown claims of the prophets of air power almost a hundred years ago.

    Read
Volume 1, Issue 3

Volume 1, Issue 3

Summer 2011