Search

This essay argues that the United States is engaged in the first post-modern conflict, a form of warfare for which it is not ready. It advances the argument that the nature of war has changed because the sociology of war has changed, but, the United States readies itself to fight those wars it understands and knows how to fight. The problem is that the nature of warfare is changing, has changed and that much of US policy, strategy, and the institutions that develop and implement them have not understood or adjusted to the changing nature of war. We have moved from the era of modern war into the era of post-modern war, into an age of war without a center of gravity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the nature of mumming, a traditional form of folk theater, and compares it to contemporary interactive murder mysteries. The efforts of the United Services Organization (USO) and the Department of Defense Overseas Shows to entertain U.S. troops abroad on military assignment are specifically highlighted.

The article compares the current counterinsurgency campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan by the U.S. and Great Britain with the British colonial counterinsurgency methods of the 19th and 20th centuries. The goal of providing security for the indigenous population is stressed. The far greater resources of the current Iraqi and Afghani insurgencies are cited. The article concludes nations must be prepared to admit defeat if a counterinsurgency campaign's cost outweigh its benefits.

The article examines the participation of private military and security corporations in the armed foreign policy of the U.S., with emphasis in the war on Iraq. The U.S. demand for private security forces exceeds the amount of trained personnel. As a result, soldiers and their short-hired colleagues from private military and security firms are not skilled for military duties. The high number of foreign corporations and employees leads to a lack of supervision by authorities in Iraq, leading to continued human rights violation.

Examines the counternarcotics justification devised by the United States (U.S.) government regarding its military presence in Latin America. Negative consequences of the U.S. government's war on drugs in the Latin America region; Forces driving the U.S. war on drugs; Roots of the U.S. government's narcoguerilla theory; Aid package approved by the Congress in June 2000 for Colombia's counternarcotics initiatives; Problem ignored by the Colombian aid package. INSETS: Yanquis Return to El Salvador;The Value of Vieques.