Principles of Asymmetrical Warfare: How to Beat Islamo-fascists at Their Own Game provides principles, strategies, tactics, and methods available to the Administration in winning and ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the War on Terrorism. Some strategies and tactics appear extreme to a civilized country as the United States. However, we should know about and understand these strategies and tactics in case we must use them because the Isfasts are about to annihilate, conquer, or place us in bondage. I have quoted ideas from Sun Tzu, Gen. George S. Patton, Jr., and Dr. Michael Savage, a man of great intellect. Our Administration has made a major mistake by not learning from great warriors like Sun Tzu and Gen. Patton. Our Administration makes an even larger mistake by ignoring Michael Savage's thoughts, ideas, and suggestions. Many ideas are common sense, which seems to be lacking in our politicians, Administration, and military generals. Apparently, they do not know how to fight and win an asymmetrical war. "Principles of Asymmetrical Warfare" provides fresh ideas on fighting the Isfasts and winning. Therefore, if you desire to know how to beat the Isfasts at their own game, read Principles of Asymmetrical Warfare.

During the Cold War - an era in which the term ‘asymmetric warfare’ was not well known - the issue of the laws and ethics of war seemed simple enough to most soldiers, being concerned mainly with leadership, management, and morale. Post-Cold War reality revealed a very different set of challenges, including a significantly wider moral dimension, particularly when forces, initially under UN leadership and later under the NATO flag, were deployed in different parts of the turbulent Balkans. Military observers, by now with legal advisers close by, watched events in the Balkans, East Timor and then in central and West Africa with professional interest, and some were involved there. A few years later, soldiers were subsequently caught as much by surprise by the events of 9/11, a graphic example of asymmetric warfare, as most of the rest of the world. The initial, post 9/11 response in Afghanistan and Iraq brought the notion of the fragile or collapsed state, and the blurring of the roles of military forces, international organisations, non-governmental organisations, non-state actors, and indigenous administrators and their uniformed organisations, and with them the moral dilemmas, to much wider notice. More recent conflicts have indeed shown the need for commanders and soldiers in all types of conflict to have a much better understanding of the complex moral and legal environments, and opened new debates about the principle of ‘winning hearts and minds’ in counter-insurgency and peace support operations. Moreover, technological superiority by the West has also produced mixed benefits in the field of military operations, and posed additional dilemmas, many of them moral. The trend towards defining human rights and ‘fundamental freedoms’ poses further questions for the soldier today. This collection of essays, written by a wide variety of practising experts and scholars, touches on all these issues. It links the medieval traditions of jus in bello, codified by Saint Thomas Aquinas in the Christian Church nearly eight centuries ago, to examination of modern challenges and moral dilemmas relating to the ethics and laws of conflict and crises of all types in the twenty-first century, and in a global context among people of many different faiths and beliefs, and none. It is an important collection for all those researching or practically involved in conflict and post-conflict situations.

Principles of International Criminal Law is one of the leading textbooks in the field. This third edition builds on the highly-successful work of the previous editions, setting out the general principles governing international crimes as well as the fundamentals of both substantive and procedural international criminal law.

Jus Post bellum: Restraint, Stabilisation and Peace seeks to answer the question “is restraint in war essential for a just and lasting peace”? With a foreword by Professor Brian Orend who asserts this as “a most commendable subject” in extending Just War Theory, the book contains chapters on the ethics of war-fighting since the end of the Cold War and a look into the future of conflict. From the causes of war, with physical restraint and reconciliation in combat and political settlement, further chapters written by expert academics and military participants cover international humanitarian law, practicalities of the use of force and some of the failures in achieving safe and lasting peace in modern-day theatres of conflict.

All armed conflicts, whether international or non-international, are characterized by some sort of asymmetry. Disparities between parties to armed hostilities have always been an issue as a matter of fact, although not necessarily addressed by International Humanitarian Law (IHL) as a matter of law. IHL remains a stranger to such situations, for it is based on its equal applicability to all parties of a conflict. Nonetheless, contemporary conflicts have shown that the said equality may no longer be the rule, but rather the exception. This refers in particular to non-international armed conflicts where parties are inherently asymmetrical and the weaker ones tend to act in straightforward violation of universally hailed rules in order to engage their technologically advanced and more resourceful enemy. Accordingly, the ways in which asymmetric actors behave during armed conflicts challenge IHL’s basic foundations, and the fact that civilians still endure the burden of hostilities, as their primary victims, underpins the necessity for further efforts in the attempt to promote respect for IHL. This work assesses diverse alternatives to respond to these brutal forms of asymmetric confrontations, with a view on those mechanisms which best address the causes why non-state actors deny not only complying with IHL from a legal perspective but also contemplating policy-making considerations.

Donald M. Snow invites readers to consider what criteria should be evaluated when considering whether the United States should engage in military action across the globe: when its vital interests are at stake and when the endeavor can reasonably be considered feasible, what Snow refers to as the "IF factor." It is hard to justify promoting an application of American military force to a situation where its use will not succeed or where US interests are not clearly vital, but, Snow argues, that is exactly what has happened frequently since Vietnam. The book is organized into three sections, examining a historical overview of how the United States became involved in intervening in asymmetrical warfare, the problem of internal war in the developing world, and future American military involvement, particularly in conflicts in the Global South and Ukraine.

Since independence, Israel has lived with a paradox, needing and seeking legitimacy and empathy from the world community whilst also discounting the world. This volume reflects upon Israel's troubled attempts to balance its desire to be different from a world that it needs and of which it also wants to be a legitimate member.

The essays selected for the first part of this volume offer an insight into the development, as distinguished from the history, of international humanitarian law. The focus of the majority of the works reprinted here is on an analysis of the adequacy of the law as it stood at the time of the respective publication and in the light of existing contemporary armed conflicts and military operations. Thus, the reader is afforded an in-depth look at the early roots of international humanitarian law, the continuing relevance of that body of law despite advances in weapons technology and the efforts to progressively develop it. International humanitarian law's development cannot be considered in isolation from its principles. The essays selected for the second part of the volume deal with the two fundamental principles underlying all of international humanitarian law: humanity and military necessity. The articles on the principles of humanity include reflections on the famous Martens Clause, and the analyses of military necessity take no account of 'Kriegsraison'. Moreover, they offer proof of the customary character of the principle of distinction in land, air and naval warfare.

This book features the contributions of a distinguished group of experts in the field of the law of armed conflicts that gathered in Berlin in June 2005. The goal of the colloquium, which marked the 70th birthday of Knut Ipsen, was to find operable solutions for problems and challenges that confront the contemporary law of armed conflict.

A potential competition exists between India and China, and there is also no doubt that China started the war. Highlighting the mistakes made by India rather than empirically analysing the available data can be regarded as the primary causes for the confusion that exists today. Though complete details and evidence of the developments are available and documented, few of us have attempted to draw up a pragmatic and realist analysis. The consequences of that war have yet to die down entirely and are frequently raked up with issues on recent developments which are not widely dissimilar to those of 1962. China is a complex country. To understand this rapidly progressing nation is even more difficult. There are many perceptions on this country and many of them are formed on account of some international events and China’s growing assertiveness. It may be far-fetched to expect for a paradigm change in stance and motive which could give China an uncertain negotiating position. This edited volume provides the reader an excellent blend of the historical run-up to the aberration, the military developments and consequences. It is also provides useful material to understand the geographical boundary issues between India and China and developing Chinese strategies both on the political and military front.