Topic
Doctrine
About: Doctrine is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 21901 publications have been published within this topic receiving 204282 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
•
01 Jan 1986
TL;DR: Conflict of Myths as mentioned in this paper is an in-depth devastating critique of how the U.S. government and its military services approached and misconceived the problems of guerilla warfare and counter-insurgency conflict in general, and in Vietnam in particular.
Abstract: "Conflict of Myths is an in-depth devastating critique of how the U.S. government and its military services approached and misconceived the problems of guerilla warfare and counterinsurgency conflict in general, and in Vietnam in particular. It is also a first-rate overview built on original sources of how military institutions make and revise strategic doctrine. Finally, it is a concise treatment of the nature of pre-Vietnam, twentieth-century low-intensity military conflict which will be a useful starting point for both scholars and practitioners interested in the subject." --David A. Rosenberg,Department of Strategy,Naval War College "This brilliant new book offers a plausible explanation for American military strategy in Vietnam, particularly the bombing efforts along the Ho Chi Minh Trail, the Rolling Thunder Campaign in North Vietnam and explains why we trained, structured, and equipped the South Vietnamese Army in the American image. Cable offers not only solid research, but also considerable insight and a marvelous writing style. It is most encouraging to find a scholar concerned with national security affairs who is willing to do solid research on a difficult subject. Cable has tackled a difficult, emotion-laden subject crucial to the most likely future conflicts that may draw American involvement. Must reading!" --Colonel Dennis Drew,Director, Airpower Research Institute,Air University
74 citations
•
TL;DR: The "Harmon doctrine" is perhaps the most notorious theory in all of intent-general natural courts law as mentioned in this paper, which holds that a country is abSQlutely sovereign over a portion of an international watercourse within its borders.
Abstract: The \"Harmon Doctrine\" is perhaps the most notorious theory in all of intentJJtional natural re5'Jurces law. Based upon an opinion of Attorney General Judson Harmon issued a hundred years ago, the doctrine holds that a country is abSQlutely sovereign over the portion of an intentJJtional watercourse within its borders. Thus that country would be free to divert all of the water from an international watercourse, leaving none for downstream states. This article looks closely at the Harmon Doctrine in historical context. An ex.amination of the condud of the United States during the dispute with Mexico over the Rio Grande that produced the Doctrine, as well as other contemporaneous and subsequent practice, demonstrates that the United States never actually folluwed the Doctrine in its practice. It is therefore highly 1uestionable whether this doctrine is, or ever was, a part of international aw.
74 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper, a new conceptualization of legal constraint examining how legal rules permit varying degrees of ideological discretion, which establishes how strongly ideological preferences will influence justices' votes, is proposed.
Abstract: Does law exhibit a significant constraint on Supreme Court justices' decisions? Although proponents of the attitudinal model argue that ideology predominantly influences justices' choices, “hybrid models” posit that law and ideology exhibit discrete and concurrent effects on justices' choices. I offer a new conceptualization of legal constraint examining how legal rules permit varying degrees of ideological discretion, which establishes how strongly ideological preferences will influence justices' votes. In examining the levels-of-scrutiny legal doctrine, I posit theoretical models highlighting the differential constraining capacities of the strict scrutiny, intermediate scrutiny, and rational basis rules. I use a multilevel modeling framework to test the hypotheses within the context of the Grayned doctrine in free expression law. The results show that strict scrutiny, which Grayned applied to content-based regulations of expression, significantly constrains ideological voting, whereas intermediate scrutiny (applied to content-neutral regulations) and the low scrutiny categories each promote high levels of ideological voting.
74 citations