Without these weapons, inventions, and techniques they wouldn’t have been able to win the war. The weapons were very important to help with the war. The techniques were very important because it also helped with the war. The inventions very very important because without these inventions there's no way the people who fought for our country would have won. The countries responded to these innovations by shock.
Finally, the technology and weapons utilized by the Macedonians enabled them to be better equipped in battle than other armies. It also allowed them to sustain fewer casualties and losses. Peter Connolly and numerous other historians agree that advanced technology such as pikes, sarissas, shields, swords, helmets, and chest plates were either invented, developed, or modified to fit the needs of the Macedonians and allow the army to defeat enemy armies like the Persians and Greeks (Conolly 60-61). Arrian in his book gives proof of how Alexander’s men were often better equipped than those they were facing during his recount of the Battle of the Granicus, where the Macedonians gained the advantage “both through their superior strength and military
This practice had disastrous consequences with the II Corp operations order for the defense of Sidi Bou Zid. The order specified the exact locations of Combat Command A’s battalions and some companies (thus, II Corp not only bypassed the division HQ, but also bypassed BG Mcquillen’s Combat Command HQ). To make matters worse, since MG Fredendall rarely left his HQ, this overly directive order was based only on a map
America’s own economy was strengthened, and led to less foreign dependence. Monroe’s “Era of Good Feelings” was ushered in, and the Federalist Party, which had been seen with disdain at its antiwar ideas, was essentially extinct. The immediate effects of the war of 1812 were small, but the accomplishments and increased sense of nationality would lead America down a new, united path. America’s success at the Battle of New Orleans boosted the country’s damaged morale, even though America did not achieve any of its pre-war objectives. The new pride in the nation’s army and navy led to a stronger and more organized military, which wouldn’t have been possible without the nations new support for military and its new sense of nationalism.
Soldiers could no longer run at the enemy head on and attack them because the machine gun was too quick to out maneuver or ambush. With this advance in weaponry, there needed to be an advancement in mobility to counter or at least match the ferocity of the machine gun. Unfortunately, there was no advancements in mobility and the machine gun was able to tear through enemy forces with ease as there was a lack of mobility to provide protection for the defending forces. This caused troops to dig into the earth and build trench walls in order to defend themselves from the hail of machine gun
Even though they both have high IQ, Robert Oppenheimer succeed, but Chris Langan does not. For the difference, Chris Langan didn’t have the practical intelligence to change the world as he wanted, but Robert Oppenheimer possessed the practical intelligence that allowed him to get what he wanted from the world. Actually, Chris Langan couldn’t get a scholarship of college because he didn’t explain the circumstance properly which shows that he didn’t have the practical intelligence to change bad result to good result (Gladwell, 2008). Actually, Chris Langan just asserting himself. Meanwhile, using practical intelligence, Robert Oppenheimer persuaded the general Leslie Groves, who was in charge of
Although the North and South had many advantages over one another, they each had as many disadvantages. The North had to conquer a large amount of land in order to win the Civil War. They were also invading unfamiliar land. The North may of had a strong Navy, but overall their soldiers were not properly skilled compared to the South. The South did have the advantage of good officers to train the soldiers, but they had very few people for the job.
Preventive diplomacy has been an effective tool used by both internal and external bodies in conflict resolution. It has registered many successes around the world because it is believed that it is cheaper to prevent any kind of conflict than to intervene. The 1990’s crisis in the Persian (Arabian) Gulf could have been prevented if effective measures were taken in time to prevent it. This brings us to the main focus of the paper: why preventive diplomacy failed to avoid Iraq invasion of Kuwait in 1990? And what could be done?
Continuing conflict with the Safavid Empire through much of the period due to not wanting Shi’ a Islam to spread and took Iraq from Safavids. The Ottoman Empire was the most powerful empire military wise, but government corruption prevented necessary advancements to be made and thus gave the empire no political power amongst other regions. Intellectual The Ottoman Empire Used advanced gunpowder and military equipment to advance into new territories. Lacked innovated technology compared to other advancing empires. Remained the same technologically due to a lack of innovation versus other competing empires advancing.
The thought of having peace is almost always thought of as a good thing. Sometimes, however, peace is not always such a good thing and can lead to even worse situations than before. One reason why peace isn’t always good and can lead to war is because of punishments put onto other countries for their previous actions. Another reason why peace can lead to war is because alliances will always be thought of in peace treaties. The last reason why peace can lead to war is because some governments don’t really get much of a say in peace talks.
foreign policy and military tactics. One major change was the diversification of intel gathering sources relying less on technology and more on people. The way they valued informant information changed as well. The failure of the op made the military realize that the decisive terrain in combat is human terrain meaning that without significant first hand intel the success of an operation cannot be guaranteed. Probably the most important lesson learned is that the media plays a much larger role in war today than in previous wars.
The American troops had other advantages, one being that General George Washington, who led the American troops, was an experienced leader. The American soldiers were very motivated fighters, as they tried to regain their rights they had lost as Englishmen when they left England to come to the colonies- they had a better reason to win and a worse reason to lose.
In McMaster’s words, Enthoven, “held military experience in low regard and considered military men intellectually inferior.” This was a nightmare for the military. The men in command didn’t really know what they were doing, and they didn’t listen or take advice to the people who did know what they were doing. One of the very influential commanders in the Vietnam war was Defense Secretary McNamara. McMaster does not agree with the way McNamara went about the Vietnam war. He makes it sounds like McNamara was a
If the war had not been won, independence would not have been given, and America most likely would not be what it is today. Another reason that the war is impactful is that it led to the ability to have government. The government was also finally able to publish laws. Without success in the war, having a good government would be difficult. This is because in
President Lyndon Johnson 's continued support for the South Vietnamese was a culmination of misunderstandings and misconceptions throughout the war. Johnson inherited a difficult issue from Kennedy, and his choices were few and crucial. The United States entered the war confident of, if not certain of, success. However, a small-scale military effort quickly expanded into a vast military crisis. Events of Vietnam locked the United States onto a path of immense military intervention and ultimately destroyed Johnson 's presidency.