Military

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the 2003 Indian film, see Military (film).
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (August 2008)
This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it
has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing
more precise citations. (September 2013)
The military are forces authorized to use deadly force, and weapons, to support the
interests of the state and some or all of its citizens. The task of the military is usually
defined as defense of the state and its citizens, and the prosecution of war against another
state. The military may also have additional sanctioned and non-sanctioned functions
within a society, including, the promotion of a political agenda, protecting corporate
economic interests, internal population control, construction, emergency services, social
ceremonies, and guarding important areas. The military can also function as a discrete
subculture within a larger civil society, through the development of separate infrastructures,
which may include housing, schools, utilities, food production and banking.
The profession of soldiering as part of a military is older than recorded history itself. Some
of the most enduring images of the classical antiquity portray the power and feats of its
military leaders. The Battle of Kadesh in 1274 BC was one of the defining points of
Pharaoh Ramesses II's reign and is celebrated in bas-relief on his monuments. A thousand
years later the first emperor of unified China, Qin Shi Huang, was so determined to impress
the gods with his military might that he was buried with an army of terracotta soldiers.[1]
The Romans were dedicated to military matters, leaving to posterity many treatises and
writings as well as a large number of lavishly carved triumphal arches and victory columns.

War
History[show]
Battlespace[show]
Weapons[show]
Tactics[show]
Operational[show]
Strategy[show]
Grand strategy[show]
Organization[show]

Logistics[show]
Related[show]
Lists[show]

v
t
e

Contents

1 Etymology and definitions

2 History
3 Organization
o 3.1 Command
o 3.2 Personnel
o 3.3 Intelligence
o 3.4 Economics
o 3.5 Capability development
o 3.6 Science
o 3.7 Logistics
o 3.8 Operations
o 3.9 Performance assessment
4 In combat
o 4.1 Strategic victory
o 4.2 Operational victory
o 4.3 Tactical victory
5 Technology
6 As part of society
o 6.1 Ideology and ethics
o 6.2 Antimilitarism
7 Stereotypes
o 7.1 In the media
8 Masculinity
o 8.1 Masculine emotional control
o 8.2 Masculinity in military women
o 8.3 Masculine language within the military
9 See also
10 References
11 External links

Etymology and definitions

The first recorded use of the word military in English, spelled militarie, was in 1585.[2] It
comes from the Latin militaris (from Latin miles meaning "soldier") but is of uncertain
etymology, one suggestion being derived from *mil-it- going in a body or mass.[3][4] The
word is now identified as denoting someone that is skilled in use of weapons, or engaged in
military service or in warfare.[5][6]

Soldiers from the Canadian Grenadier Guards in the Kandahar Province of Afghanistan
As a noun the military usually refers generally to a country's armed forces or sometimes,
more specifically, to the senior officers who command them.[5][6] In general it refers to the
physicality of armed forces, their personnel, equipment, and physical area which they
occupy.
As an adjective military originally referred only to soldiers and soldiering, but it soon
broadened to apply to land forces in general and anything to do with their profession.[2] The
names of both the Royal Military Academy (1741) and United States Military Academy
(1802) reflect this. However, at about the time of the Napoleonic Wars, "military" began to
be used in reference to armed forces as a whole[2] and in the 21st century expressions like
"military service", "military intelligence" and "military history" encompass naval, marine
and air force aspects. As such, it now connotes any activity performed by armed force
personnel.

History
Main article: Military history
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (April 2011)
Military history is often considered to be the history of all conflicts, not just the history of
the state militaries. It differs somewhat from the history of war with military history
focusing on the people and institutions of war-making while the history of war focuses on
the evolution of war itself in the face of changing technology, governments, and geography.
Military history has a number of purposes. One main purpose is to learn from past
accomplishments and mistakes so as to more effectively wage war in the future. Another is
to create a sense of military tradition which is used to create cohesive military forces. Still
another may be to learn to prevent wars more effectively. Human knowledge about the

military is largely based on both recorded and oral history of military conflicts (war), their
participating armies and navies and, more recently, air forces.
There are two types of military history, although almost all texts have elements of both:
descriptive history that serves to chronicle conflicts without offering any statements about
the causes, nature of conduct, the ending and effects of a conflict; and analytical history
that seeks to offer statements about the causes, nature, ending and aftermath of conflicts as
a means of deriving knowledge and understanding of conflicts as a whole, and prevent
repetition of mistakes in future, to suggest better concepts or methods in employing forces,
or to advocate the need for new technology.

Organization
In the whole history of humanity, every nation had different needs for military forces. How
these needs are determined forms the basis of their composition, equipment and use of
facilities. It also determines what military does in terms of peacetime and wartime
activities.
All militaries, whether large or small, are military organizations that have official state and
world recognition as such. Organizations with similar features are paramilitary, civil
defense, militia or other which are not military. These commonalities of the state's military
define them.

An example of military command; a map of Argentina's military zones (19751983)

Command
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this
section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
The first requirement of the military is to establish it as a force with the capability to
execute national defence policy. Invariably, although the policy may be created by policy
makers or Policy analyst, its implementation requires specific expert knowledge of how the
military functions and how it fulfils roles.
The first of these skills is the ability to create a cohesive force capable of acting on policy
as and when required, and therefore the first function of the military is to provide military
command. One of the roles of military command is to translate policy into concrete
missions and tasks, and to express them in terms understood by subordinates, generally
called orders.
Military command make effective and efficient military organisation possible through
delegation of authority which encompass organisational structures as large as military
districts or military zones, and as small as platoons. The command element of the military
is often a strong influence on the organisational culture of the forces.

Personnel
See also: Military reserve and War finance

CF-18 Hornet launches a laser-guided bomb

Another requirement is for the military command personnel, often called the officer corps,
to command subordinated military personnel, generally known as soldiers, sailors, marines,
or airmen, capable of executing the many specialised operational missions and tasks
required for the military to execute policy directives.
Just as in the commercial enterprises where there are, in a corporate setting, directors,
managers and various staff that carry out the business of the day as part of business
operations or undertake business project management, the military also has its routines and
projects.

During peacetime, when military personnel are mostly employed in garrisons or permanent
military facilities, they mostly conduct administrative tasks, training and education
activities, and technology maintenance. Another role of military personnel is to ensure a
continuous replacement of departing servicemen and women through military recruitment,
and the maintenance of a military reserve.

Intelligence
The next requirement comes as a fairly basic need for the military to identify possible
threats it may be called upon to face. For this purpose some of the commanding forces and
other military, as well as often civilian personnel participate in identification of these
threats. This is at once an organization, a system and a process collectively called military
intelligence (MI).
The difficulty in using military intelligence concepts and military intelligence methods is in
the nature of the secrecy of the information they seek, and the clandestine nature that
intelligence operatives work in obtaining what may be plans for a conflict escalation,
initiation of combat or an invasion.
An important part of the military intelligence role is the military analysis performed to
assess military capability of potential future aggressors, and provide combat modelling that
helps to understand factors on which comparison of forces can be made. This helps to
quantify and qualify such statements as "China and India maintain the largest armed forces
in the World" or that "the U.S. Military is considered to be the world's strongest".[7]

Guerrilla structure
Although some groups engaged in combat, such as militants or resistance movements, refer
to themselves using military terminology, notably "Army" or "Front", none have had the
structure of a national military to justify the reference, and usually have had to rely on
support of outside national militaries. They also use these terms to conceal from the MI
their true capabilities, and to impress potential ideological recruits.
Having military intelligence representatives participate in the execution of the national
defence policy is important because it becomes the first respondent and commentator on the
policy expected strategic goal compared to the realities of identified threats. When the
intelligence reporting is compared to the policy, it becomes possible for the national
leadership to think about allocating resources over an above the officers and their
subordinates military pay and the expense of maintaining military facilities and military
support services for them.

Economics
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this
section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)

Map of military expenditures as a percentage of GDP by country, CIA figures.

Military spending in 2007, in USD, according to the Stockholm International Peace

Research Institute.
More commonly referred to as defence economics, this is the financial and monetary efforts
made to resource and sustain militaries, and to finance military operations including war.
The process of allocating resources is conducted by determining a military budget which is
administered by a military finance organisation within the military. Military procurement is
then authorised to purchase or contract provision of goods and services to the military,
whether in peacetime at a permanent base or in a combat zone from local population.

Capability development
Capability development, which is often referred to as the military "strength", is arguably
one of the most complex activities known to humanity because it requires determining:
Strategic, operational and tactical capability requirements to counter the identified threats;
Strategic, operational and tactical doctrines by which the acquired capabilities will be used;
identifying concepts, methods and systems involved in executing the doctrines; creating
design specifications for the manufacturers who would produce these in adequate quantity
and quality for their use in combat; purchase the concepts, methods and systems; create a
forces structure that would use the concepts, methods and systems most effectively and
efficiently; integrate these concepts, methods and systems into the force structure by
providing military education, training, and practice that preferably resembles combat
environment of intended use; create military logistics systems to allow continued and
uninterrupted performance of military organisations under combat conditions, including
provision of health services to the personnel and maintenance for the equipment; the
services to assist recovery of wounded personnel and repair of damaged equipment; and

finally post-conflict demobilisation and disposal of war stocks surplus to peacetime

requirements.
Development of military doctrine is perhaps the more important of all capability
development activities because it determines how military forces were, and are used in
conflicts, the concepts and methods used by the command to employ appropriately military
skilled, armed and equipped personnel in achievement of the tangible goals and objectives
of the war, campaign, battle, engagement, action or a duel.[8] The line between strategy and
tactics is not easily blurred, although deciding which is being discussed had sometimes
been a matter of personal judgement by some commentators, and military historians. The
use of forces at the level of organisation between strategic and tactical is called operational
mobility.

Science
Main article: Military science
Because most of the concepts and methods used by the military, and many of its systems
are not found in commercial branches. Much of the material is researched, designed,
developed and offered for inclusion in arsenals by military science organisations within the
overall structure of the military. Military scientists are therefore found to interact with all
Arms and Services of the armed forces, and at all levels of the military hierarchy of
command.
Although concerned with research into military psychology, and particularly combat stress
and how it affect troop morale, often the bulk of military science activities is directed at
military intelligence technology, military communications and improving military
capability through research. The design, development and prototyping of weapons, military
support equipment, and military technology in general is also an area in which lots of effort
is invested it includes everything from global communication networks and aircraft
carriers to paint and food.

Logistics
Main article: Military logistics

The Kawasaki C-1 is a tactical military transport of the Japan Air Self-Defence Force.
Possessing military capability is not sufficient if this capability cannot be deployed for, and
employed in combat operations. To achieve this, military logistics are used for the logistics
management and logistics planning of the forces supply "tail", the consumables and capital
equipment of the troops.

Although mostly concerned with the military transport as a means of delivery using
different modes of transport from military trucks to container ships operating from
permanent military base, it also involves creating field supply dumps in the rear of the
combat zone, and even forward supply points in specific unit's Tactical Area of
Responsibility.
These supply points are also used to provide military engineering services such as the
recovery of defective and derelict vehicles and weapons, maintenance of weapons in the
field, the repair and field modification of weapons and equipment, and in peacetime the
life-extension programs undertaken to allow continued use of equipment. One of the most
important role of logistics is the supply of munitions as a primary type of consumable, their
storage and disposal.

Operations
Main articles: Military strategy and Military tactics
While capability development is about enabling the military to perform its functions and
roles in executing the defence policy, how personnel and their equipment are used in
engaging the enemy, winning battles, successfully concluding campaigns, and eventually
the war, is the responsibility of military operations. Military operations oversees the policy
interpretation into military plans, allocation of capability to specific strategic, operational
and tactical goals and objectives, change in posture of the armed forces, the interaction of
Combat Arms, Combat Support Arms and Combat Support Services during combat
operations, defining of military missions and tasks during the conduct of combat,
management of military prisoners and military civil affairs, and the military occupation of
enemy territory, seizure of captured equipment, and maintenance of civil order in the
territory under its responsibility. Throughout the combat operations process, and during the
lulls in combat combat military intelligence provides reporting on the status of plan
completion and its correlation with desired, expected and achieved satisfaction of policy
fulfilment.

Performance assessment
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this
section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
The last requirement of the military is for military performance assessment and learning
from it. These two functions are performed by military historians and military theorists who
seek to identify failures and success of the armed force and integrate corrections into the
military reform with the aim of producing an improved force capable of performing
adequately should there be a national defence policy review.

In combat

The primary reason for the existence of the military is to engage in combat, should it be
required to do so by the national defence policy, and to win. This represents an
organizational goal of any military, and the primary focus for military thought through
military history.
The "show" of military force has been a term that referred as much to military force
projection, as to the units such as regiments or gunboats deployed in a particular theatre, or
as an aggregate of such forces. In the Gulf War the United States Central Command
controlled military forces (units) of each of the four military services of the United States.
How victory is achieved, and what shape it assumes is studied by most, if not all, military
groups on three levels.

Strategic victory
Main article: Strategic victory
Military strategy is the management of forces in wars and military campaigns by a
commander-in-chief employing large military forces either national and allied as a whole,
or the component elements of armies, navies and air forces such as army groups, fleets and
large numbers of aircraft. Military strategy is a long-term projection of belligerents' policy
with a broad view of outcome implications, including outside the concerns of military
command. Military strategy is more concerned with the supply of war and planning, than
management of field forces and combat between them. The scope of Strategic military
planning can span weeks, but is more often months or even years.[8]

Dutch civilians celebrating the arrival of the I Canadian Corps in Utrecht as the Canadian
Army liberates the Netherlands from Nazi occupation

Operational victory
Operational mobility is, within warfare and military doctrine, the level of command which
coordinates the minute details of tactics with the overarching goals of strategy. A common
synonym is operational art.

The operational level is at a scale bigger than one where line of sight and the time of day
are important, and smaller than the strategic level, where production and politics are
considerations. Formations are of the operational level if they are able to conduct
operations on their own, and are of sufficient size to be directly handled or have a
significant impact at the strategic level. This concept was pioneered by the German army
prior to and during the Second World War. At this level planning and duration of activities
takes from one week to a month, and are executed by Field Armies and Army Corps and
their naval and air equivalents.[8]

Tactical victory
Main article: Tactical victory
Military tactics concerns itself with the methods for engaging and defeating the enemy in
direct combat. Military tactics are usually used by units over hours or days, and are focused
on the specific, close proximity tasks and objectives of squads, companies, battalions,
regiments, brigades and divisions and their naval and air equivalents.[8]
One of the oldest military publications is The Art of War by the Chinese philosopher Sun
Tzu.[9] Written in the 6th century BCE, the 13-chapter book is intended as military
instruction and not as military theory, but has had a huge influence on Asian military
doctrine, and from the late 19th century, on European and United States military planning.
It has even been used to formulate business tactics, and can even be applied in social and
political areas[where?].

Battle formation and tactics of Macedon[10]

The Classical Greeks and the Romans wrote prolifically on military campaigning. Among
the best-known Roman works are Julius Caesar's commentaries on the Gallic Wars and the
Roman Civil war written about 50 BC.
Two major works on tactics come from the late Roman period: Taktike Theoria by Aelianus
Tacticus and De Re Militari ("On military matters") by Vegetius. Taktike Theoria examined
Greek military tactics, and was most influential in the Byzantine world and during the
Golden Age of Islam.
De Re Militari formed the basis of European military tactics until the late 17th century.
Perhaps its most enduring maxim is Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum (let he
who desires peace prepare for war).

Due to the changing nature of combat with the introduction of artillery in the European
Middle Ages, and infantry firearms in the Renaissance, attempts were made to define and
identify those strategies, grand tactics and tactics that would produce a victory more often
than that achieved by the Romans in praying to the gods before the battle.
Later this became known as military science, and later still would adopt the scientific
method approach to the conduct of military operations under the influence of the Industrial
Revolution thinking. In his seminal book On War the Prussian Major-General and leading
expert on modern military strategy Carl von Clausewitz defined military strategy as "the
employment of battles to gain the end of war."[11] According to Clausewitz
strategy forms the plan of the War, and to this end it links together the series of acts which
are to lead to the final decision, that is to say, it makes the plans for the separate campaigns
and regulates the combats to be fought in each.[12]
Hence, Clausewitz placed political aims above military goals, ensuring civilian control of
the military. Military strategy was one of a triumvirate of "arts" or "sciences" that governed
the conduct of warfare, the others being: military tactics, the execution of plans and
manoeuvring of forces in battle, and maintenance of an army.
The meaning of military tactics has changed over time from the deployment and
manoeuvring of entire land armies on the fields of ancient battles, and galley fleets, to
modern use of small unit ambushes, encirclements, bombardment attacks, frontal assaults,
air assaults, hit-and-run tactics used mainly by guerrilla forces and, in some cases, suicide
attacks on land and at sea. Evolution of aerial warfare introduced its own air combat tactics.
Often, military deception, in the form of military camouflage or misdirection using decoys,
is used to confuse the enemy as a tactic.
A major development in infantry tactics came with the increased use of trench warfare in
the 19th and 20th century. This was mainly employed in World War I in the Gallipoli
campaign and the Western Front. Trench warfare often turned to a stalemate, only broken
by a large loss of life, because in order to attack an enemy entrenchment soldiers had to run
through an exposed "no man's land" under heavy fire from an entrenched enemy.

Technology

Arrow-head. Bronze, 4th century BC. From Olynthus, Chalcidice.

Main article: Military technology and equipment
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)

As with any occupation, since the ancient times the military has been distinguished from
other members of the society by their tools, the military weapons and military equipment
used in combat. When Stone Age humans first took a sliver of flint to tip the spear, it was
the first example of applying technology to improve the weapon.
Since then, the advances made by human societies and that of weapons has been
irretrievably linked. Stone weapons gave way to Bronze Age weapons, and later the Iron
Age weapons. With each technological change was realised some tangible increase in
military capability, such as through greater effectiveness of a sharper edge in defeating
leather armour, or improved density of materials used in manufacture of weapons.
On land the first really significant technological advance in warfare was the development of
the ranged weapons and notably the sling. The next significant advance came with the
domestication of the horses and mastering of equestrianism.

Mounted armored knight. Armor and cavalry dominated the battlefield until the invention
of firearms.
Arguably the greatest invention that affected not just the military, but all society, after
adoption of fire, was the wheel, and its use in the construction of the chariot. There were no
advances in military technology until, from the mechanical arm action of a slinger, the
Greeks, Egyptians, Romans, Persians, Chinese, etc. development the siege engines. The
bow was manufactured in increasingly larger and more powerful versions to increase both
the weapon range and armour penetration performance. These developed into the powerful
composite and/or recurve bows, and crossbows of Ancient China. These proved particularly
useful during the rise of cavalry, as horsemen encased in ever-more sophisticated armour
came to dominate the battlefield.
Somewhat earlier in medieval China, gunpowder had been invented, and was increasingly
used by the military in combat. The use of gunpowder in the early vase-like mortars in
Europe, and advanced versions of the long bow and cross bow, which all had armourpiercing arrowheads, that put an end to the dominance of the armoured knight. After the
long bow, which required great skill and strength to use, the next most significant
technological advance was the musket, which could be used effectively with little training.
In time the successors to muskets and cannon, in the form of rifles and artillery, would
become core battlefield technology.

As the speed of technological advances accelerated in civilian applications, so too warfare

became more industralised. The newly invented machine gun and repeating rifle redefined
firepower on the battlefield and, in part, explains the high casualty rates of the American
Civil War. The next breakthrough was the conversion of artillery parks from the muzzle
loading guns to the breech loading guns, and in particular the highly mobile, recoilless,
field-gun, the French Soixante-Quinze, in the late 19th century.
The development of breech loading had the greatest effect on naval warfare, for the first
time since the Middle Ages altering the way weapons are mounted on warships, and
therefore naval tactics, now divorced from the reliance on sails with the invention of the
internal combustion. A further advance in military naval technology was the design of the
submarine and its weapon, the torpedo.
Main battle tanks and other heavy equipment such as AFVs, Military aircraft and ships are
characteristic to organised military forces.
During World War I the need to break the deadlock of the trenches saw the rapid
development of many new technologies, particularly the tanks and military aviation.
Military aviation was extensively used, and particularly the bombers during the World War
II, which marked the most frantic period of weapons development in history. Many new
designs and concepts were used in combat, and all existing technologies were improved
between 1939 and 1945.
During the war significant advances were made in military communications through use of
radio, military intelligence through use of the radar, and in military medicine through use of
penicillin, while in the air the missile, jet aircraft and helicopters were seen for the first
time. Perhaps the most infamous of all military technologies was the creation of the atomic
bomb, although the effects of radiation were unknown until the early 1950s. Far greater use
of military vehicles had finally eliminated the cavalry from the military force structure.

AIM-7 Sparrow medium range air-to-air missile from an F-15 Eagle

After World War II, with the onset of the Cold War, the constant technological
development of new weapons was institutionalised as participants engaged in a constant
arms race in capability development. This constant state of weapons development continues
into the present, and remains a constant drain on national resources, which some blame on
the military-industrial complex.

The most significant technological developments that influenced combat have been the
guided missiles which are used by all Services. More recently, information technology, and
its use in surveillance, including space-based reconnaissance systems, have played an
increasing role in military operations.
The impact of information warfare that focuses on attacking command communication
systems, and military databases has been coupled with the new development in military
technology has been the use of robotic systems in intelligence combat, both in hardware
and software applications.
Recently, there has also been a particular focus towards the use of renewable fuels for
running military vehicles on. Unlike fossil fuels, renewable fuels can be produced in any
country, creating a strategic advantage. The US military has already committed itself to
have 50% of its energy consumption come from alternative sources.[13]
The MIRV, ICBM and the Tsar Bomb are considered the most destructive weapons
invented.

As part of society
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
For much of military history the armed forces were considered to be for use by the heads of
their societies, until recently, the crowned heads of states. In a democracy or other political
system run in the public interest, it is a public force.
The relationship between the military and the society it serves is a complicated and everevolving one. Much depends on the nature of the society itself and whether it sees the
military as important, as for example in time of threat or war, or a burdensome expense
typified by defence cuts in time of peace.
One difficult matter in the relation between military and society is control and transparency.
In many countries only few information on military operations and budgeting is accessible
for the public. However transparency in the military sector is crucial to fight corruption.
This showed the Government Defence Anti-corruption Index Transparency International
published in 2013.[14]
These relationships are seen from the perspective of political-military relations, the
military-industrial complex mentioned above, and the socio-military relationship. The last
can be divided between those segments of society that offer support for the military, those
who voice opposition to the military, the voluntary and involuntary civilians in the military
forces, the populations of civilians in a combat zone, and of course the military's selfperception.

Militaries often function as societies within societies, by having their own military
communities, economies, education, medicine and other aspects of a functioning civilian
society. Although a "military" is not limited to nations in of itself as many private military
companies (or PMC's) can be used or "hired" by organisations and figures as security,
escort, or other means of protection where police, agencies, or militaries are absent or not
trusted.

Ideology and ethics

Main article: Militarism
Militarist ideology is the society's social attitude of being best served, or being a
beneficiary of a government, or guided by concepts embodied in the military culture,
doctrine, system, or leaders.
Either because of the cultural memory, national history, or the potentiality of a military
threat, the militarist argument asserts that a civilian population is dependent upon, and
thereby subservient to the needs and goals of its military for continued independence.
Militarism is sometimes contrasted with the concepts of comprehensive national power,
soft power and hard power.
Most nations have separate military laws which regulate conduct in war and during
peacetime. An early exponent was Hugo Grotius, whose On the Law of War and Peace
(1625) had a major impact of the humanitarian approach to warfare development. His
theme was echoed by Gustavus Adolphus.
Ethics of warfare have developed since 1945 to create constraints on the military treatment
of prisoners and civilians primarily by the Geneva Conventions, but rarely apply to use of
the military forces as internal security troops during times of political conflict that results in
popular protests and incitement to popular uprising.
International protocols restrict the use, or have even created international bans on weapons,
notably weapons of mass destruction. International conventions define what constitutes a
war crime and provides for war crimes prosecution. Individual countries also have
elaborate codes of military justice, an example being the United States' Uniform Code of
Military Justice that can lead to court martial for military personnel found guilty of war
crimes.
Military actions are sometimes argued to be justified by furthering a humanitarian cause
such as disaster relief operations or in defence of refugees. The term military humanism is
used to refer to such actions.

Antimilitarism
Main article: Antimilitarism

Antimilitarism is the society's social attitude opposed to war between states, and in
particular countering arguments based on militarism. Following Hegel's exploration of the
relationship between history and violence, antimilitarists argue that there are different types
of violence, some of which can be said to be legitimate others non-legitimate. Anarchosyndicalist Georges Sorel advocated the use of violence as a form of direct action, calling it
"revolutionary violence", which he opposed in Reflections on Violence (1908) to the
violence inherent in class struggle. Sorel thus followed the International Workingmen's
Association theorization of propaganda of the deed.
War, as violence, can be distinguished into war between states, and civil war, in which case
class struggle is, according to antimilitarists theorists, a primordial component. Hence,
Marx's influence on antimilitarist doctrine was not surprising, although making Marx
accountable for the antimilitarist tradition is a large overstatement. The belief in the eternal
antimilitarist spirit, present in all places and time, is however a myth because the modern
military as an institution is a historic achievement formed during the 18th and 19th
centuries, as a by-product of the modern nation-states. Napoleon's invention of conscription
is a fundamental progress in the organization of state armies. Later, Prussian militarism
would be exposed by 19th century social theorists.

Stereotypes
A military brat is a colloquial term for a child with at least one parent who served as an
active duty member (vice reserve) in the armed forces. Children of armed forces members
may move around to different military bases or international postings, which gives them an
unusual childhood. Unlike common usage of the term brat, when it is used in this context,
it is not necessarily a derogatory term.

In the media
Main article: Military in the media
Soldiers and armies have been prominent in popular culture since the beginnings of
recorded history. In addition to the countless images of military leaders in heroic poses
from antiquity, they have been an enduring source of inspiration in war literature. Not all of
this has been entirely complementary and the military have been lampooned or ridiculed as
often as they have been idolised. The classical Greek writer Aristophanes, devoted an entire
comedy, Lysistrata, to a strike organised by military wives where they withhold sex from
their husbands to prevent them from going to war.
In Medieval Europe, tales of knighthood and chivalry, the officer class of the period,
captured the popular imagination. Writers and poets like Taliesin, Chrtien de Troyes and
Thomas Malory wrote tales of derring-do featuring Arthur, Guinevere, Lancelot and
Galahad. Even in the 21st century, books and films about the Arthurian legend and the
Holy Grail continue to appear.

A century or so later, in the hands of writers such as Jean Froissart, Miguel Cervantes and
William Shakespeare, the fictional knight Tirant lo Blanch and the real-life condottieri John
Hawkwood would be juxtaposed against the fantastical Don Quixote and the carousing Sir
John Falstaff. In just one play, Henry V, Shakespeare provides a whole range of military
characters, from cool-headed and clear-sighted generals, to captains, and common soldiery.

Emperor Augustus Caesar in a martial pose (1st century)

The Flight of Pompey after Pharsalus, by Jean Fouquet

Medieval view: Richard II of England meets rebels

Sir John Hawkwood (fresco in the Duomo, Florence)

Shakespeare's Sir John Falstaff by Eduard von Grtzner

"The Cruel Practices of Prince Rupert" (1643)

The rapid growth of movable type in the late 16th century and early 17th century saw an
upsurge in private publication. Political pamphlets became popular, often lampooning
military leaders for political purposes. A pamphlet directed against Prince Rupert of the
Rhine is a typical example. During the 19th century, irreverence towards authority was at
its height and for every elegant military gentleman painted by the master-portraitists of the
European courts for example, Gainsborough, Goya and Reynolds, there are the sometimes
affectionate and sometimes savage caricatures of Rowland and Hogarth.
This continued in the 19th century, with publications like Punch in the British Empire and
Le Pre Duchesne in France, poking fun at the military establishment. This extended to
media other print also. An enduring example is the Major-General's Song from the Gilbert
and Sullivan light opera, The Pirates of Penzance, where a senior army officer is satirised
for his enormous fund of irrelevant knowledge.

Colonel John Hayes St. Leger (detail) by Sir Joshua Reynolds

Rowlandson often satirised the military

"A modern major general" (The Pirates of Penzance)

Punch: war reporter, W H Russell, Crimean War

The increasing importance of cinema in the early 20th century provided a new platform for
depictions of military subjects. During the First World War, although heavily censored,
newsreels enabled those at home to see for themselves a heavily sanitised version of life at
the front line. About the same time, both pro-war and anti-war films came to the silver
screen. One of the first films on military aviation, Hell's Angels, broke all box office
records on its release in 1929. Soon, war films of all types were showing throughout the
world, notably those of Charlie Chaplin who actively promoted war bonds and voluntary
enlistment.
The First World War was also responsible for a new kind of military depiction, through
poetry. Hitherto, poetry had been used mostly to glorify or sanctify war. The Charge of the
Light Brigade by Alfred, Lord Tennyson, with its galloping hoofbeat rhythm, is a prime
late Victorian example of this, though Rudyard Kipling had written a scathing reply, The
Last of the Light Brigade, criticising the poverty in which many Light Brigade veterans
found themselves in old age. Instead, the new wave of poetry, from the war poets, was
written from the point of view of the disenchanted trench soldier.
Leading war poets included Siegfried Sassoon, Wilfred Owen, John McCrae, Rupert
Brooke, Isaac Rosenberg and David Jones. A similar movement occurred in literature,
producing a slew of novels on both sides of the Atlantic including notably All Quiet on the
Western Front and Johnny Got His Gun. The 1963 English stage musical Oh, What a
Lovely War! provided a satirical take on World War I, which was released in a cinematic
version directed by Richard Attenborough in 1969.
The propaganda war that accompanied World War II invariably depicted the enemy in
unflattering terms. Examples of this exist not only in posters but also in the films of Leni
Riefenstahl and Sergei Eisenstein.
Alongside this, World War II also inspired films as varied as Bridge on the River Kwai, The
Longest Day, Catch-22, Saving Private Ryan, and The Sea Shall Not Have Them. The next
major event, the Korean War inspired a long-running television series M*A*S*H. With the
Vietnam War, the tide of balance turned and its films, notably Apocalypse Now, Good
Morning, Vietnam, Go Tell the Spartans, Born on the Fourth of July, and We Were
Soldiers, have tended to contain critical messages.
There is even a nursery rhyme about war, "The Grand Old Duke of York", ridiculing a
general for his inability to command any further than marching his men up and down a hill.

The huge number of songs focusing on war include "And the Band Played Waltzing
Matilda" and "Universal Soldier".

Masculinity
This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying
the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original
research should be removed. (March 2013)
The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on
the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (May
2015)

Masculinity and perceptions of masculinity plays an important role in the military. Military
organizations form roles and responsibilities that they expect members to adapt to
especially under adverse and life-threatening conditions. Just like it is used within society,
masculinity is a word that is associated with the military quite often as gender hierarchy
exists in relation to gender subordinated gender constructs.[15] Studies of masculinity within
the military have been conducted with British servicemen and it was determined that
military forces are masculine institutions and the military culture support this.[16] According
to soldiers, toughness, endurance, physical prowess and aggression are requirements to be
an effective soldier.[17] Military unit cohesion is created by social rituals which entails
almost total subordination to the group and a sense of depersonalization.[15] In addition,
military culture is characterized by extremely high levels of social cohesion that is
considered essential to the unit's operational efficiency.[15] This masculine emphasis
separates rather rigidly the male from the female and puts them in conflict with one
another. There have been some attempts of changing this perception late in the 20th century
as women in combat have been portrayed in movies like "G.I. Jane" and "Down Periscope".

Masculine emotional control

Military service offers men unique resources for the construction of a masculine identity
defined by emotional control, overt heterosexual desire, physical fitness, self-discipline,
self-reliance, the willingness to use aggression and physical violence, and risk taking.[18]
Emotional control is a very important part of military training and is incorporated into
operations. Training exercises are designed to elicit strong emotions that one may face on
the battle field. Soldiers are taught to control anger, fear, and grief as to not get in the way
of difficult judgments. This type of training creates the 'warrior mindset', but it comes at a
cost as it leaves many soldiers without a healthy way to process emotions and events faced
by the battle field.[18] Unfortunately, this is believed to be the main cause of the high rate of
suicides amongst soldiers.[15] This masculine imperative for emotional self-control places
men in a prestigious position and superior to women, since women are believed to be more
emotional than men.[19] The presence of women in the military challenges this ideology.

Masculinity in military women

Femininity does have a place within the military, as it does in society, although to a much
lesser extent.[20] The increased number of women in the military undeniably signifies a shift
in policy. However, current debates focusing on women's contributions to war efforts only
serve to consolidate the dominant position of military masculinities within the institution.
Focusing on women's difference and women's ability to contribute to strategic military
objectives, they fail to challenge the very nature of the armed forces and militarism more
widely.[20] Women's role as peace makers and life bearers is thus constructed in opposition
to that of the soldier/combatant. Femininity and women are therefore excluded from this
essentially male and masculine institution[20]
Though women have long served in the Army and currently make up 15% of U.S. forces in
Iraq and Afghanistan and 30% say they served in a combat zone, recent reports attest to
their continued marginalization within Army ranks.[21] Women in the military are
marginalized because they violate one of the premises of military indoctrination and the
myth of an exclusively male-dominated world. As a result of their transgression, not only
are women excluded from key aspects of military life, but they are also subjected to
violence with great frequency.[21] Recent studies indicate that between 4360% of female
enlisted personnel experience some form of physical or sexual harassment or
violence.[citation needed] This physical and sexual abuse attests to the exclusion of women
within the military. Recently the pentagon lifted the ban on military women in combat
roles.[22]

Masculine language within the military

Within discussions among military actions and security, they are commonly seen as
gendered and directed towards a masculine approach towards war. Masculinity is seen
within the military through the use of sexual metaphors to discuss actions and missiles.
Within the military, they are commonly seen in relating missiles to phallic imagery and
discussing about warfare. But, it is also apparent through the sanitization of the discussion
to avoid the results of using weapons.[citation needed] Some examples of sexual imagery used
within the military include "Harden the missiles", and "Put missiles in a nice hole."[23]
However, the language shifts away from phallic imagery when talking about a state
involved with weapons. When referring to a state that has released nuclear weapons or
getting involved with them, the state is referred to as a woman, and is considered to have
"lost their virginity".[24] The state is referenced as a woman as there is a patriarchal
belief[citation needed] in which the state has lost its innocence for getting involved with the
taboo; nuclear weapons. By using sexual metaphors, the seriousness of war is reduced
significantly and is no longer seen as dangerous or life-threatening.[23] Using sexual
metaphors help to promote a false sense of excitement, and willingness to support the idea
of weapons used within the military. It is shown as glamourising the concept of military
action through sexual imagery and encouraging others to agree with sexual imagery that
attracts masculinity. There is also an attraction to the belief of sexual dominance within the
military with the use of sexual metaphors. In the international community, the use of sexual
metaphors promotes the idea of "missile" envy, in which by using sexual metaphors,
countries become motivated to develop their nuclear force in order to compete with other
nations.[23] This displays how little moral values are considered within the military and how

the idea of patriarchy remains evident. Feminist critics challenge this masculine
language.[citation needed] By using sexual metaphors, a masculine image is promoted towards
other nations and is displayed as something nations want to strive to be. Feminist critics
argue that there is no evidence that feminist criticism has reached out to the men of the
military and gotten their understanding on how discussions within the military are
gendered.[24]
With discussions regarding weapons, the language used is often abstract. For instance,
"clean bombs" refers to bombs with high amounts of energy used for explosive power,
while "collateral damage" refers to human deaths caused as a result of nuclear
weapons.[citation needed][24] However, using abstract words to discuss the outcomes of war
emphasizes the lack of emotion or concern towards the use of weapons. By using abstract
language to cover up the severity of violence, the association between masculinity and the
military is enforced. Femininity is generally not seen within military negotiations as the use
of male dominated language is seen as normalized within discussions in the military.
Within the military, discussions about non-militaristic topics (emotions, peace talks,
identity, etc.) are considered to be "feminine" values or "fluff".[citation needed][23] There is fear
of appearing feminized towards colleagues within the military and fear about having their
masculinity challenged for expressing their opinions against certain actions.[25]

See also
Military history portal
War portal

Mercenary
Military terminology
Private military company

References
1.
Terra cotta of massed ranks of Qin Shi Huang's terra cotta soldiers
Oxford English Dictionary (2nd edition) Oxford: 1994
Harper, Douglas. "military". Online Etymology Dictionary.
Tucker, T.G. (1985) Etymological dictionary of Latin, Ares publishers Inc., Chicago.
p. 156
Oxford dictionary
"Merriam Webster Dictionary online". Merriam-webster.com. Retrieved 2011-08-01.
Statistics on Americans' opinion about the U.S. being the world's no1 military power,
Gallup, March 2012. Retrieved May 3, 2013.
Dupuy, T.N. (1990) Understanding war: History and Theory of combat, Leo Cooper,
London, p. 67

 "The Art of War". Mypivots.com. 2011-06-11. Retrieved 2011-08-01.

"Welcome to the Department of History". westpoint.edu. Retrieved 2011-08-01.
MacHenry, Robert (1993). The New Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia
Britannica, Incorporated. p. 305.
"On War by General Carl von Clausewitz". gutenberg.org. Retrieved 2007-05-31.
Craig Hooper. "Ray Mabus greening the military". Nextnavy.com. Retrieved 2012-0522.
Pyman, Mark (March 2013). "Transparency is feasible". dandc.eu.
Braswell, H; Kushner, H. I. (2012). "Suicide, social integration, and masculinity in the
U.S. Military". Social Science & Medicine 74 (4): 5306.
doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.07.031. PMID 21036443. edit
Gender and the armed forces. research.ncl.ac.uk
Green, Gill (2010). "Exploring the Ambiguities of Masculinity in Accounts of
Emotional Distress in the Military Among Young Ex-servicemen". Social Science &
Medicine 71: 14801488. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.07.015.
Eisold, K. (2010-06-01). The stoism of soldiers. psychologytoday.com
Spade, J.Z. & Valentine, C.G. (2011). The Kaleidoscope of Gender. Pine Forge Press:
CA.
Guerrina, Roberta. (2012-09-26). Birthing on the front line: A tale of military
femininity. e-ir.info
Hynes, Patricia (2012-01-26) Military sexual abuse: A greater menace than combat.
truth-out.org
Pentagons Lifting of Combat Ban Comes as Role of Military Women Grows.
pewresearch.org. 2013-01-24
Duncanson, Claire; Eschle, Catherine (1 December 2008). "Gender and the Nuclear
Weapons State: A Feminist Critique of the UK Government's White Paper on Trident".
New Political Scienc 30 (4): 545563. doi:10.1080/07393140802518120.
Cohn, Carol (Summer 1987). "Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense
Intellectuals". Signs. Within and Without: Women, Gender, and Theory 12 (4): 687718.
doi:10.1086/494362.
25. Enloe, Cynthia (Jan 2004). "'Gender' is not enough: the need for a feminist
consciousness". International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944
) 80 (1): 9597. doi:10.1111/j..2004.00370.x.

External links

Military Expenditure % of GDP hosted by Lebanese economy forum, extracted

from the World Bank public data
Find more about
military
at Wikipedia's sister projects

Definitions from Wiktionary

Media from Commons
News stories from Wikinews
Quotations from Wikiquote
Source texts from Wikisource
Textbooks from Wikibooks
Learning resources from Wikiversity

Military at DMOZ

Categories:

Military
Military terminology
Defense

Navigation menu

Create account
Log in

Article
Talk

Read
Edit
View history

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction

Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools

What links here

Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export

Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages

Alemannisch

Aragons

()

Bosanski
Brezhoneg

Catal
etina
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Espaol
Esperanto
Euskara

Fiji Hindi
Froyskt
Franais
Frysk
Galego
/Hak-k-ng

Hrvatski
Ilokano
Bahasa Indonesia
slenska
Italiano

Basa Jawa

Kiswahili
Latina
Latvieu
Ltzebuergesch
Lietuvi

Bahasa Melayu
Mng-dng-ng
Mirands

Norsk bokml
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan



Piemontis
Plattdtsch
Portugus

Scots

Simple English
Slovenina
Slovenina

/ srpski
Srpskohrvatski /
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog

Trke

Vneto
Ting Vit
Vro
Winaray

Edit links

This page was last modified on 31 May 2015, at 06:35.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License;
additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and
Privacy Policy. Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation,
Inc., a non-profit organization.

Military
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the 2003 Indian film, see Military (film).
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (August 2008)
This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it
has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing
more precise citations. (September 2013)
The military are forces authorized to use deadly force, and weapons, to support the
interests of the state and some or all of its citizens. The task of the military is usually
defined as defense of the state and its citizens, and the prosecution of war against another
state. The military may also have additional sanctioned and non-sanctioned functions
within a society, including, the promotion of a political agenda, protecting corporate

economic interests, internal population control, construction, emergency services, social

ceremonies, and guarding important areas. The military can also function as a discrete
subculture within a larger civil society, through the development of separate infrastructures,
which may include housing, schools, utilities, food production and banking.
The profession of soldiering as part of a military is older than recorded history itself. Some
of the most enduring images of the classical antiquity portray the power and feats of its
military leaders. The Battle of Kadesh in 1274 BC was one of the defining points of
Pharaoh Ramesses II's reign and is celebrated in bas-relief on his monuments. A thousand
years later the first emperor of unified China, Qin Shi Huang, was so determined to impress
the gods with his military might that he was buried with an army of terracotta soldiers.[1]
The Romans were dedicated to military matters, leaving to posterity many treatises and
writings as well as a large number of lavishly carved triumphal arches and victory columns.

War
History[show]
Battlespace[show]
Weapons[show]
Tactics[show]
Operational[show]
Strategy[show]
Grand strategy[show]
Organization[show]
Logistics[show]
Related[show]
Lists[show]

v
t
e

Contents

1 Etymology and definitions

2 History
3 Organization
o 3.1 Command
o 3.2 Personnel

o
o
o
o
o
o
o

3.3 Intelligence
3.4 Economics
3.5 Capability development
3.6 Science
3.7 Logistics
3.8 Operations
3.9 Performance assessment
4 In combat
o 4.1 Strategic victory
o 4.2 Operational victory
o 4.3 Tactical victory
5 Technology
6 As part of society
o 6.1 Ideology and ethics
o 6.2 Antimilitarism
7 Stereotypes
o 7.1 In the media
8 Masculinity
o 8.1 Masculine emotional control
o 8.2 Masculinity in military women
o 8.3 Masculine language within the military
9 See also
10 References
11 External links

Etymology and definitions

The first recorded use of the word military in English, spelled militarie, was in 1585.[2] It
comes from the Latin militaris (from Latin miles meaning "soldier") but is of uncertain
etymology, one suggestion being derived from *mil-it- going in a body or mass.[3][4] The
word is now identified as denoting someone that is skilled in use of weapons, or engaged in
military service or in warfare.[5][6]

Soldiers from the Canadian Grenadier Guards in the Kandahar Province of Afghanistan
As a noun the military usually refers generally to a country's armed forces or sometimes,
more specifically, to the senior officers who command them.[5][6] In general it refers to the

physicality of armed forces, their personnel, equipment, and physical area which they
occupy.
As an adjective military originally referred only to soldiers and soldiering, but it soon
broadened to apply to land forces in general and anything to do with their profession.[2] The
names of both the Royal Military Academy (1741) and United States Military Academy
(1802) reflect this. However, at about the time of the Napoleonic Wars, "military" began to
be used in reference to armed forces as a whole[2] and in the 21st century expressions like
"military service", "military intelligence" and "military history" encompass naval, marine
and air force aspects. As such, it now connotes any activity performed by armed force
personnel.

History
Main article: Military history
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (April 2011)
Military history is often considered to be the history of all conflicts, not just the history of
the state militaries. It differs somewhat from the history of war with military history
focusing on the people and institutions of war-making while the history of war focuses on
the evolution of war itself in the face of changing technology, governments, and geography.
Military history has a number of purposes. One main purpose is to learn from past
accomplishments and mistakes so as to more effectively wage war in the future. Another is
to create a sense of military tradition which is used to create cohesive military forces. Still
another may be to learn to prevent wars more effectively. Human knowledge about the
military is largely based on both recorded and oral history of military conflicts (war), their
participating armies and navies and, more recently, air forces.
There are two types of military history, although almost all texts have elements of both:
descriptive history that serves to chronicle conflicts without offering any statements about
the causes, nature of conduct, the ending and effects of a conflict; and analytical history
that seeks to offer statements about the causes, nature, ending and aftermath of conflicts as
a means of deriving knowledge and understanding of conflicts as a whole, and prevent
repetition of mistakes in future, to suggest better concepts or methods in employing forces,
or to advocate the need for new technology.

Organization
In the whole history of humanity, every nation had different needs for military forces. How
these needs are determined forms the basis of their composition, equipment and use of
facilities. It also determines what military does in terms of peacetime and wartime
activities.

All militaries, whether large or small, are military organizations that have official state and
world recognition as such. Organizations with similar features are paramilitary, civil
defense, militia or other which are not military. These commonalities of the state's military
define them.

An example of military command; a map of Argentina's military zones (19751983)

Command
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this
section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
The first requirement of the military is to establish it as a force with the capability to
execute national defence policy. Invariably, although the policy may be created by policy
makers or Policy analyst, its implementation requires specific expert knowledge of how the
military functions and how it fulfils roles.
The first of these skills is the ability to create a cohesive force capable of acting on policy
as and when required, and therefore the first function of the military is to provide military
command. One of the roles of military command is to translate policy into concrete
missions and tasks, and to express them in terms understood by subordinates, generally
called orders.

Military command make effective and efficient military organisation possible through
delegation of authority which encompass organisational structures as large as military
districts or military zones, and as small as platoons. The command element of the military
is often a strong influence on the organisational culture of the forces.

Personnel
See also: Military reserve and War finance

CF-18 Hornet launches a laser-guided bomb

Another requirement is for the military command personnel, often called the officer corps,
to command subordinated military personnel, generally known as soldiers, sailors, marines,
or airmen, capable of executing the many specialised operational missions and tasks
required for the military to execute policy directives.
Just as in the commercial enterprises where there are, in a corporate setting, directors,
managers and various staff that carry out the business of the day as part of business
operations or undertake business project management, the military also has its routines and
projects.
During peacetime, when military personnel are mostly employed in garrisons or permanent
military facilities, they mostly conduct administrative tasks, training and education
activities, and technology maintenance. Another role of military personnel is to ensure a
continuous replacement of departing servicemen and women through military recruitment,
and the maintenance of a military reserve.

Intelligence
The next requirement comes as a fairly basic need for the military to identify possible
threats it may be called upon to face. For this purpose some of the commanding forces and
other military, as well as often civilian personnel participate in identification of these
threats. This is at once an organization, a system and a process collectively called military
intelligence (MI).
The difficulty in using military intelligence concepts and military intelligence methods is in
the nature of the secrecy of the information they seek, and the clandestine nature that
intelligence operatives work in obtaining what may be plans for a conflict escalation,
initiation of combat or an invasion.

An important part of the military intelligence role is the military analysis performed to
assess military capability of potential future aggressors, and provide combat modelling that
helps to understand factors on which comparison of forces can be made. This helps to
quantify and qualify such statements as "China and India maintain the largest armed forces
in the World" or that "the U.S. Military is considered to be the world's strongest".[7]

Guerrilla structure
Although some groups engaged in combat, such as militants or resistance movements, refer
to themselves using military terminology, notably "Army" or "Front", none have had the
structure of a national military to justify the reference, and usually have had to rely on
support of outside national militaries. They also use these terms to conceal from the MI
their true capabilities, and to impress potential ideological recruits.
Having military intelligence representatives participate in the execution of the national
defence policy is important because it becomes the first respondent and commentator on the
policy expected strategic goal compared to the realities of identified threats. When the
intelligence reporting is compared to the policy, it becomes possible for the national
leadership to think about allocating resources over an above the officers and their
subordinates military pay and the expense of maintaining military facilities and military
support services for them.

Economics
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this
section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)

Map of military expenditures as a percentage of GDP by country, CIA figures.

Military spending in 2007, in USD, according to the Stockholm International Peace

Research Institute.
More commonly referred to as defence economics, this is the financial and monetary efforts
made to resource and sustain militaries, and to finance military operations including war.
The process of allocating resources is conducted by determining a military budget which is
administered by a military finance organisation within the military. Military procurement is
then authorised to purchase or contract provision of goods and services to the military,
whether in peacetime at a permanent base or in a combat zone from local population.

Capability development
Capability development, which is often referred to as the military "strength", is arguably
one of the most complex activities known to humanity because it requires determining:
Strategic, operational and tactical capability requirements to counter the identified threats;
Strategic, operational and tactical doctrines by which the acquired capabilities will be used;
identifying concepts, methods and systems involved in executing the doctrines; creating
design specifications for the manufacturers who would produce these in adequate quantity
and quality for their use in combat; purchase the concepts, methods and systems; create a
forces structure that would use the concepts, methods and systems most effectively and
efficiently; integrate these concepts, methods and systems into the force structure by
providing military education, training, and practice that preferably resembles combat
environment of intended use; create military logistics systems to allow continued and
uninterrupted performance of military organisations under combat conditions, including
provision of health services to the personnel and maintenance for the equipment; the
services to assist recovery of wounded personnel and repair of damaged equipment; and
finally post-conflict demobilisation and disposal of war stocks surplus to peacetime
requirements.
Development of military doctrine is perhaps the more important of all capability
development activities because it determines how military forces were, and are used in
conflicts, the concepts and methods used by the command to employ appropriately military
skilled, armed and equipped personnel in achievement of the tangible goals and objectives
of the war, campaign, battle, engagement, action or a duel.[8] The line between strategy and
tactics is not easily blurred, although deciding which is being discussed had sometimes
been a matter of personal judgement by some commentators, and military historians. The
use of forces at the level of organisation between strategic and tactical is called operational
mobility.

Science
Main article: Military science
Because most of the concepts and methods used by the military, and many of its systems
are not found in commercial branches. Much of the material is researched, designed,

developed and offered for inclusion in arsenals by military science organisations within the
overall structure of the military. Military scientists are therefore found to interact with all
Arms and Services of the armed forces, and at all levels of the military hierarchy of
command.
Although concerned with research into military psychology, and particularly combat stress
and how it affect troop morale, often the bulk of military science activities is directed at
military intelligence technology, military communications and improving military
capability through research. The design, development and prototyping of weapons, military
support equipment, and military technology in general is also an area in which lots of effort
is invested it includes everything from global communication networks and aircraft
carriers to paint and food.

Logistics
Main article: Military logistics

The Kawasaki C-1 is a tactical military transport of the Japan Air Self-Defence Force.
Possessing military capability is not sufficient if this capability cannot be deployed for, and
employed in combat operations. To achieve this, military logistics are used for the logistics
management and logistics planning of the forces supply "tail", the consumables and capital
equipment of the troops.
Although mostly concerned with the military transport as a means of delivery using
different modes of transport from military trucks to container ships operating from
permanent military base, it also involves creating field supply dumps in the rear of the
combat zone, and even forward supply points in specific unit's Tactical Area of
Responsibility.
These supply points are also used to provide military engineering services such as the
recovery of defective and derelict vehicles and weapons, maintenance of weapons in the
field, the repair and field modification of weapons and equipment, and in peacetime the
life-extension programs undertaken to allow continued use of equipment. One of the most
important role of logistics is the supply of munitions as a primary type of consumable, their
storage and disposal.

Operations
Main articles: Military strategy and Military tactics

While capability development is about enabling the military to perform its functions and
roles in executing the defence policy, how personnel and their equipment are used in
engaging the enemy, winning battles, successfully concluding campaigns, and eventually
the war, is the responsibility of military operations. Military operations oversees the policy
interpretation into military plans, allocation of capability to specific strategic, operational
and tactical goals and objectives, change in posture of the armed forces, the interaction of
Combat Arms, Combat Support Arms and Combat Support Services during combat
operations, defining of military missions and tasks during the conduct of combat,
management of military prisoners and military civil affairs, and the military occupation of
enemy territory, seizure of captured equipment, and maintenance of civil order in the
territory under its responsibility. Throughout the combat operations process, and during the
lulls in combat combat military intelligence provides reporting on the status of plan
completion and its correlation with desired, expected and achieved satisfaction of policy
fulfilment.

Performance assessment
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this
section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
The last requirement of the military is for military performance assessment and learning
from it. These two functions are performed by military historians and military theorists who
seek to identify failures and success of the armed force and integrate corrections into the
military reform with the aim of producing an improved force capable of performing
adequately should there be a national defence policy review.

In combat
The primary reason for the existence of the military is to engage in combat, should it be
required to do so by the national defence policy, and to win. This represents an
organizational goal of any military, and the primary focus for military thought through
military history.
The "show" of military force has been a term that referred as much to military force
projection, as to the units such as regiments or gunboats deployed in a particular theatre, or
as an aggregate of such forces. In the Gulf War the United States Central Command
controlled military forces (units) of each of the four military services of the United States.
How victory is achieved, and what shape it assumes is studied by most, if not all, military
groups on three levels.

Strategic victory
Main article: Strategic victory

Military strategy is the management of forces in wars and military campaigns by a

commander-in-chief employing large military forces either national and allied as a whole,
or the component elements of armies, navies and air forces such as army groups, fleets and
large numbers of aircraft. Military strategy is a long-term projection of belligerents' policy
with a broad view of outcome implications, including outside the concerns of military
command. Military strategy is more concerned with the supply of war and planning, than
management of field forces and combat between them. The scope of Strategic military
planning can span weeks, but is more often months or even years.[8]

Dutch civilians celebrating the arrival of the I Canadian Corps in Utrecht as the Canadian
Army liberates the Netherlands from Nazi occupation

Operational victory
Operational mobility is, within warfare and military doctrine, the level of command which
coordinates the minute details of tactics with the overarching goals of strategy. A common
synonym is operational art.
The operational level is at a scale bigger than one where line of sight and the time of day
are important, and smaller than the strategic level, where production and politics are
considerations. Formations are of the operational level if they are able to conduct
operations on their own, and are of sufficient size to be directly handled or have a
significant impact at the strategic level. This concept was pioneered by the German army
prior to and during the Second World War. At this level planning and duration of activities
takes from one week to a month, and are executed by Field Armies and Army Corps and
their naval and air equivalents.[8]

Tactical victory
Main article: Tactical victory
Military tactics concerns itself with the methods for engaging and defeating the enemy in
direct combat. Military tactics are usually used by units over hours or days, and are focused
on the specific, close proximity tasks and objectives of squads, companies, battalions,
regiments, brigades and divisions and their naval and air equivalents.[8]

One of the oldest military publications is The Art of War by the Chinese philosopher Sun
Tzu.[9] Written in the 6th century BCE, the 13-chapter book is intended as military
instruction and not as military theory, but has had a huge influence on Asian military
doctrine, and from the late 19th century, on European and United States military planning.
It has even been used to formulate business tactics, and can even be applied in social and
political areas[where?].

Battle formation and tactics of Macedon[10]

The Classical Greeks and the Romans wrote prolifically on military campaigning. Among
the best-known Roman works are Julius Caesar's commentaries on the Gallic Wars and the
Roman Civil war written about 50 BC.
Two major works on tactics come from the late Roman period: Taktike Theoria by Aelianus
Tacticus and De Re Militari ("On military matters") by Vegetius. Taktike Theoria examined
Greek military tactics, and was most influential in the Byzantine world and during the
Golden Age of Islam.
De Re Militari formed the basis of European military tactics until the late 17th century.
Perhaps its most enduring maxim is Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum (let he
who desires peace prepare for war).
Due to the changing nature of combat with the introduction of artillery in the European
Middle Ages, and infantry firearms in the Renaissance, attempts were made to define and
identify those strategies, grand tactics and tactics that would produce a victory more often
than that achieved by the Romans in praying to the gods before the battle.
Later this became known as military science, and later still would adopt the scientific
method approach to the conduct of military operations under the influence of the Industrial
Revolution thinking. In his seminal book On War the Prussian Major-General and leading
expert on modern military strategy Carl von Clausewitz defined military strategy as "the
employment of battles to gain the end of war."[11] According to Clausewitz
strategy forms the plan of the War, and to this end it links together the series of acts which
are to lead to the final decision, that is to say, it makes the plans for the separate campaigns
and regulates the combats to be fought in each.[12]
Hence, Clausewitz placed political aims above military goals, ensuring civilian control of
the military. Military strategy was one of a triumvirate of "arts" or "sciences" that governed

the conduct of warfare, the others being: military tactics, the execution of plans and
manoeuvring of forces in battle, and maintenance of an army.
The meaning of military tactics has changed over time from the deployment and
manoeuvring of entire land armies on the fields of ancient battles, and galley fleets, to
modern use of small unit ambushes, encirclements, bombardment attacks, frontal assaults,
air assaults, hit-and-run tactics used mainly by guerrilla forces and, in some cases, suicide
attacks on land and at sea. Evolution of aerial warfare introduced its own air combat tactics.
Often, military deception, in the form of military camouflage or misdirection using decoys,
is used to confuse the enemy as a tactic.
A major development in infantry tactics came with the increased use of trench warfare in
the 19th and 20th century. This was mainly employed in World War I in the Gallipoli
campaign and the Western Front. Trench warfare often turned to a stalemate, only broken
by a large loss of life, because in order to attack an enemy entrenchment soldiers had to run
through an exposed "no man's land" under heavy fire from an entrenched enemy.

Technology

Arrow-head. Bronze, 4th century BC. From Olynthus, Chalcidice.

Main article: Military technology and equipment
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
As with any occupation, since the ancient times the military has been distinguished from
other members of the society by their tools, the military weapons and military equipment
used in combat. When Stone Age humans first took a sliver of flint to tip the spear, it was
the first example of applying technology to improve the weapon.
Since then, the advances made by human societies and that of weapons has been
irretrievably linked. Stone weapons gave way to Bronze Age weapons, and later the Iron
Age weapons. With each technological change was realised some tangible increase in
military capability, such as through greater effectiveness of a sharper edge in defeating
leather armour, or improved density of materials used in manufacture of weapons.
On land the first really significant technological advance in warfare was the development of
the ranged weapons and notably the sling. The next significant advance came with the
domestication of the horses and mastering of equestrianism.

Mounted armored knight. Armor and cavalry dominated the battlefield until the invention
of firearms.
Arguably the greatest invention that affected not just the military, but all society, after
adoption of fire, was the wheel, and its use in the construction of the chariot. There were no
advances in military technology until, from the mechanical arm action of a slinger, the
Greeks, Egyptians, Romans, Persians, Chinese, etc. development the siege engines. The
bow was manufactured in increasingly larger and more powerful versions to increase both
the weapon range and armour penetration performance. These developed into the powerful
composite and/or recurve bows, and crossbows of Ancient China. These proved particularly
useful during the rise of cavalry, as horsemen encased in ever-more sophisticated armour
came to dominate the battlefield.
Somewhat earlier in medieval China, gunpowder had been invented, and was increasingly
used by the military in combat. The use of gunpowder in the early vase-like mortars in
Europe, and advanced versions of the long bow and cross bow, which all had armourpiercing arrowheads, that put an end to the dominance of the armoured knight. After the
long bow, which required great skill and strength to use, the next most significant
technological advance was the musket, which could be used effectively with little training.
In time the successors to muskets and cannon, in the form of rifles and artillery, would
become core battlefield technology.
As the speed of technological advances accelerated in civilian applications, so too warfare
became more industralised. The newly invented machine gun and repeating rifle redefined
firepower on the battlefield and, in part, explains the high casualty rates of the American
Civil War. The next breakthrough was the conversion of artillery parks from the muzzle
loading guns to the breech loading guns, and in particular the highly mobile, recoilless,
field-gun, the French Soixante-Quinze, in the late 19th century.
The development of breech loading had the greatest effect on naval warfare, for the first
time since the Middle Ages altering the way weapons are mounted on warships, and
therefore naval tactics, now divorced from the reliance on sails with the invention of the
internal combustion. A further advance in military naval technology was the design of the
submarine and its weapon, the torpedo.
Main battle tanks and other heavy equipment such as AFVs, Military aircraft and ships are
characteristic to organised military forces.

During World War I the need to break the deadlock of the trenches saw the rapid
development of many new technologies, particularly the tanks and military aviation.
Military aviation was extensively used, and particularly the bombers during the World War
II, which marked the most frantic period of weapons development in history. Many new
designs and concepts were used in combat, and all existing technologies were improved
between 1939 and 1945.
During the war significant advances were made in military communications through use of
radio, military intelligence through use of the radar, and in military medicine through use of
penicillin, while in the air the missile, jet aircraft and helicopters were seen for the first
time. Perhaps the most infamous of all military technologies was the creation of the atomic
bomb, although the effects of radiation were unknown until the early 1950s. Far greater use
of military vehicles had finally eliminated the cavalry from the military force structure.

AIM-7 Sparrow medium range air-to-air missile from an F-15 Eagle

After World War II, with the onset of the Cold War, the constant technological
development of new weapons was institutionalised as participants engaged in a constant
arms race in capability development. This constant state of weapons development continues
into the present, and remains a constant drain on national resources, which some blame on
the military-industrial complex.
The most significant technological developments that influenced combat have been the
guided missiles which are used by all Services. More recently, information technology, and
its use in surveillance, including space-based reconnaissance systems, have played an
increasing role in military operations.
The impact of information warfare that focuses on attacking command communication
systems, and military databases has been coupled with the new development in military
technology has been the use of robotic systems in intelligence combat, both in hardware
and software applications.
Recently, there has also been a particular focus towards the use of renewable fuels for
running military vehicles on. Unlike fossil fuels, renewable fuels can be produced in any
country, creating a strategic advantage. The US military has already committed itself to
have 50% of its energy consumption come from alternative sources.[13]
The MIRV, ICBM and the Tsar Bomb are considered the most destructive weapons
invented.

As part of society
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
For much of military history the armed forces were considered to be for use by the heads of
their societies, until recently, the crowned heads of states. In a democracy or other political
system run in the public interest, it is a public force.
The relationship between the military and the society it serves is a complicated and everevolving one. Much depends on the nature of the society itself and whether it sees the
military as important, as for example in time of threat or war, or a burdensome expense
typified by defence cuts in time of peace.
One difficult matter in the relation between military and society is control and transparency.
In many countries only few information on military operations and budgeting is accessible
for the public. However transparency in the military sector is crucial to fight corruption.
This showed the Government Defence Anti-corruption Index Transparency International
published in 2013.[14]
These relationships are seen from the perspective of political-military relations, the
military-industrial complex mentioned above, and the socio-military relationship. The last
can be divided between those segments of society that offer support for the military, those
who voice opposition to the military, the voluntary and involuntary civilians in the military
forces, the populations of civilians in a combat zone, and of course the military's selfperception.
Militaries often function as societies within societies, by having their own military
communities, economies, education, medicine and other aspects of a functioning civilian
society. Although a "military" is not limited to nations in of itself as many private military
companies (or PMC's) can be used or "hired" by organisations and figures as security,
escort, or other means of protection where police, agencies, or militaries are absent or not
trusted.

Ideology and ethics

Main article: Militarism
Militarist ideology is the society's social attitude of being best served, or being a
beneficiary of a government, or guided by concepts embodied in the military culture,
doctrine, system, or leaders.
Either because of the cultural memory, national history, or the potentiality of a military
threat, the militarist argument asserts that a civilian population is dependent upon, and
thereby subservient to the needs and goals of its military for continued independence.

Militarism is sometimes contrasted with the concepts of comprehensive national power,

soft power and hard power.
Most nations have separate military laws which regulate conduct in war and during
peacetime. An early exponent was Hugo Grotius, whose On the Law of War and Peace
(1625) had a major impact of the humanitarian approach to warfare development. His
theme was echoed by Gustavus Adolphus.
Ethics of warfare have developed since 1945 to create constraints on the military treatment
of prisoners and civilians primarily by the Geneva Conventions, but rarely apply to use of
the military forces as internal security troops during times of political conflict that results in
popular protests and incitement to popular uprising.
International protocols restrict the use, or have even created international bans on weapons,
notably weapons of mass destruction. International conventions define what constitutes a
war crime and provides for war crimes prosecution. Individual countries also have
elaborate codes of military justice, an example being the United States' Uniform Code of
Military Justice that can lead to court martial for military personnel found guilty of war
crimes.
Military actions are sometimes argued to be justified by furthering a humanitarian cause
such as disaster relief operations or in defence of refugees. The term military humanism is
used to refer to such actions.

Antimilitarism
Main article: Antimilitarism
Antimilitarism is the society's social attitude opposed to war between states, and in
particular countering arguments based on militarism. Following Hegel's exploration of the
relationship between history and violence, antimilitarists argue that there are different types
of violence, some of which can be said to be legitimate others non-legitimate. Anarchosyndicalist Georges Sorel advocated the use of violence as a form of direct action, calling it
"revolutionary violence", which he opposed in Reflections on Violence (1908) to the
violence inherent in class struggle. Sorel thus followed the International Workingmen's
Association theorization of propaganda of the deed.
War, as violence, can be distinguished into war between states, and civil war, in which case
class struggle is, according to antimilitarists theorists, a primordial component. Hence,
Marx's influence on antimilitarist doctrine was not surprising, although making Marx
accountable for the antimilitarist tradition is a large overstatement. The belief in the eternal
antimilitarist spirit, present in all places and time, is however a myth because the modern
military as an institution is a historic achievement formed during the 18th and 19th
centuries, as a by-product of the modern nation-states. Napoleon's invention of conscription
is a fundamental progress in the organization of state armies. Later, Prussian militarism
would be exposed by 19th century social theorists.

Stereotypes
A military brat is a colloquial term for a child with at least one parent who served as an
active duty member (vice reserve) in the armed forces. Children of armed forces members
may move around to different military bases or international postings, which gives them an
unusual childhood. Unlike common usage of the term brat, when it is used in this context,
it is not necessarily a derogatory term.

In the media
Main article: Military in the media
Soldiers and armies have been prominent in popular culture since the beginnings of
recorded history. In addition to the countless images of military leaders in heroic poses
from antiquity, they have been an enduring source of inspiration in war literature. Not all of
this has been entirely complementary and the military have been lampooned or ridiculed as
often as they have been idolised. The classical Greek writer Aristophanes, devoted an entire
comedy, Lysistrata, to a strike organised by military wives where they withhold sex from
their husbands to prevent them from going to war.
In Medieval Europe, tales of knighthood and chivalry, the officer class of the period,
captured the popular imagination. Writers and poets like Taliesin, Chrtien de Troyes and
Thomas Malory wrote tales of derring-do featuring Arthur, Guinevere, Lancelot and
Galahad. Even in the 21st century, books and films about the Arthurian legend and the
Holy Grail continue to appear.
A century or so later, in the hands of writers such as Jean Froissart, Miguel Cervantes and
William Shakespeare, the fictional knight Tirant lo Blanch and the real-life condottieri John
Hawkwood would be juxtaposed against the fantastical Don Quixote and the carousing Sir
John Falstaff. In just one play, Henry V, Shakespeare provides a whole range of military
characters, from cool-headed and clear-sighted generals, to captains, and common soldiery.

Emperor Augustus Caesar in a martial pose (1st century)

The Flight of Pompey after Pharsalus, by Jean Fouquet

Medieval view: Richard II of England meets rebels

Sir John Hawkwood (fresco in the Duomo, Florence)

Shakespeare's Sir John Falstaff by Eduard von Grtzner

"The Cruel Practices of Prince Rupert" (1643)

The rapid growth of movable type in the late 16th century and early 17th century saw an
upsurge in private publication. Political pamphlets became popular, often lampooning
military leaders for political purposes. A pamphlet directed against Prince Rupert of the
Rhine is a typical example. During the 19th century, irreverence towards authority was at
its height and for every elegant military gentleman painted by the master-portraitists of the
European courts for example, Gainsborough, Goya and Reynolds, there are the sometimes
affectionate and sometimes savage caricatures of Rowland and Hogarth.
This continued in the 19th century, with publications like Punch in the British Empire and
Le Pre Duchesne in France, poking fun at the military establishment. This extended to
media other print also. An enduring example is the Major-General's Song from the Gilbert

and Sullivan light opera, The Pirates of Penzance, where a senior army officer is satirised
for his enormous fund of irrelevant knowledge.

Colonel John Hayes St. Leger (detail) by Sir Joshua Reynolds

Rowlandson often satirised the military

"A modern major general" (The Pirates of Penzance)

Punch: war reporter, W H Russell, Crimean War

The increasing importance of cinema in the early 20th century provided a new platform for
depictions of military subjects. During the First World War, although heavily censored,
newsreels enabled those at home to see for themselves a heavily sanitised version of life at
the front line. About the same time, both pro-war and anti-war films came to the silver
screen. One of the first films on military aviation, Hell's Angels, broke all box office
records on its release in 1929. Soon, war films of all types were showing throughout the
world, notably those of Charlie Chaplin who actively promoted war bonds and voluntary
enlistment.

The First World War was also responsible for a new kind of military depiction, through
poetry. Hitherto, poetry had been used mostly to glorify or sanctify war. The Charge of the
Light Brigade by Alfred, Lord Tennyson, with its galloping hoofbeat rhythm, is a prime
late Victorian example of this, though Rudyard Kipling had written a scathing reply, The
Last of the Light Brigade, criticising the poverty in which many Light Brigade veterans
found themselves in old age. Instead, the new wave of poetry, from the war poets, was
written from the point of view of the disenchanted trench soldier.
Leading war poets included Siegfried Sassoon, Wilfred Owen, John McCrae, Rupert
Brooke, Isaac Rosenberg and David Jones. A similar movement occurred in literature,
producing a slew of novels on both sides of the Atlantic including notably All Quiet on the
Western Front and Johnny Got His Gun. The 1963 English stage musical Oh, What a
Lovely War! provided a satirical take on World War I, which was released in a cinematic
version directed by Richard Attenborough in 1969.
The propaganda war that accompanied World War II invariably depicted the enemy in
unflattering terms. Examples of this exist not only in posters but also in the films of Leni
Riefenstahl and Sergei Eisenstein.
Alongside this, World War II also inspired films as varied as Bridge on the River Kwai, The
Longest Day, Catch-22, Saving Private Ryan, and The Sea Shall Not Have Them. The next
major event, the Korean War inspired a long-running television series M*A*S*H. With the
Vietnam War, the tide of balance turned and its films, notably Apocalypse Now, Good
Morning, Vietnam, Go Tell the Spartans, Born on the Fourth of July, and We Were
Soldiers, have tended to contain critical messages.
There is even a nursery rhyme about war, "The Grand Old Duke of York", ridiculing a
general for his inability to command any further than marching his men up and down a hill.
The huge number of songs focusing on war include "And the Band Played Waltzing
Matilda" and "Universal Soldier".

Masculinity
This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying
the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original
research should be removed. (March 2013)
The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on
the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (May
2015)

Masculinity and perceptions of masculinity plays an important role in the military. Military
organizations form roles and responsibilities that they expect members to adapt to
especially under adverse and life-threatening conditions. Just like it is used within society,
masculinity is a word that is associated with the military quite often as gender hierarchy
exists in relation to gender subordinated gender constructs.[15] Studies of masculinity within
the military have been conducted with British servicemen and it was determined that

military forces are masculine institutions and the military culture support this.[16] According
to soldiers, toughness, endurance, physical prowess and aggression are requirements to be
an effective soldier.[17] Military unit cohesion is created by social rituals which entails
almost total subordination to the group and a sense of depersonalization.[15] In addition,
military culture is characterized by extremely high levels of social cohesion that is
considered essential to the unit's operational efficiency.[15] This masculine emphasis
separates rather rigidly the male from the female and puts them in conflict with one
another. There have been some attempts of changing this perception late in the 20th century
as women in combat have been portrayed in movies like "G.I. Jane" and "Down Periscope".

Masculine emotional control

Military service offers men unique resources for the construction of a masculine identity
defined by emotional control, overt heterosexual desire, physical fitness, self-discipline,
self-reliance, the willingness to use aggression and physical violence, and risk taking.[18]
Emotional control is a very important part of military training and is incorporated into
operations. Training exercises are designed to elicit strong emotions that one may face on
the battle field. Soldiers are taught to control anger, fear, and grief as to not get in the way
of difficult judgments. This type of training creates the 'warrior mindset', but it comes at a
cost as it leaves many soldiers without a healthy way to process emotions and events faced
by the battle field.[18] Unfortunately, this is believed to be the main cause of the high rate of
suicides amongst soldiers.[15] This masculine imperative for emotional self-control places
men in a prestigious position and superior to women, since women are believed to be more
emotional than men.[19] The presence of women in the military challenges this ideology.

Masculinity in military women

Femininity does have a place within the military, as it does in society, although to a much
lesser extent.[20] The increased number of women in the military undeniably signifies a shift
in policy. However, current debates focusing on women's contributions to war efforts only
serve to consolidate the dominant position of military masculinities within the institution.
Focusing on women's difference and women's ability to contribute to strategic military
objectives, they fail to challenge the very nature of the armed forces and militarism more
widely.[20] Women's role as peace makers and life bearers is thus constructed in opposition
to that of the soldier/combatant. Femininity and women are therefore excluded from this
essentially male and masculine institution[20]
Though women have long served in the Army and currently make up 15% of U.S. forces in
Iraq and Afghanistan and 30% say they served in a combat zone, recent reports attest to
their continued marginalization within Army ranks.[21] Women in the military are
marginalized because they violate one of the premises of military indoctrination and the
myth of an exclusively male-dominated world. As a result of their transgression, not only
are women excluded from key aspects of military life, but they are also subjected to
violence with great frequency.[21] Recent studies indicate that between 4360% of female
enlisted personnel experience some form of physical or sexual harassment or
violence.[citation needed] This physical and sexual abuse attests to the exclusion of women

within the military. Recently the pentagon lifted the ban on military women in combat
roles.[22]

Masculine language within the military

Within discussions among military actions and security, they are commonly seen as
gendered and directed towards a masculine approach towards war. Masculinity is seen
within the military through the use of sexual metaphors to discuss actions and missiles.
Within the military, they are commonly seen in relating missiles to phallic imagery and
discussing about warfare. But, it is also apparent through the sanitization of the discussion
to avoid the results of using weapons.[citation needed] Some examples of sexual imagery used
within the military include "Harden the missiles", and "Put missiles in a nice hole."[23]
However, the language shifts away from phallic imagery when talking about a state
involved with weapons. When referring to a state that has released nuclear weapons or
getting involved with them, the state is referred to as a woman, and is considered to have
"lost their virginity".[24] The state is referenced as a woman as there is a patriarchal
belief[citation needed] in which the state has lost its innocence for getting involved with the
taboo; nuclear weapons. By using sexual metaphors, the seriousness of war is reduced
significantly and is no longer seen as dangerous or life-threatening.[23] Using sexual
metaphors help to promote a false sense of excitement, and willingness to support the idea
of weapons used within the military. It is shown as glamourising the concept of military
action through sexual imagery and encouraging others to agree with sexual imagery that
attracts masculinity. There is also an attraction to the belief of sexual dominance within the
military with the use of sexual metaphors. In the international community, the use of sexual
metaphors promotes the idea of "missile" envy, in which by using sexual metaphors,
countries become motivated to develop their nuclear force in order to compete with other
nations.[23] This displays how little moral values are considered within the military and how
the idea of patriarchy remains evident. Feminist critics challenge this masculine
language.[citation needed] By using sexual metaphors, a masculine image is promoted towards
other nations and is displayed as something nations want to strive to be. Feminist critics
argue that there is no evidence that feminist criticism has reached out to the men of the
military and gotten their understanding on how discussions within the military are
gendered.[24]
With discussions regarding weapons, the language used is often abstract. For instance,
"clean bombs" refers to bombs with high amounts of energy used for explosive power,
while "collateral damage" refers to human deaths caused as a result of nuclear
weapons.[citation needed][24] However, using abstract words to discuss the outcomes of war
emphasizes the lack of emotion or concern towards the use of weapons. By using abstract
language to cover up the severity of violence, the association between masculinity and the
military is enforced. Femininity is generally not seen within military negotiations as the use
of male dominated language is seen as normalized within discussions in the military.
Within the military, discussions about non-militaristic topics (emotions, peace talks,
identity, etc.) are considered to be "feminine" values or "fluff".[citation needed][23] There is fear
of appearing feminized towards colleagues within the military and fear about having their
masculinity challenged for expressing their opinions against certain actions.[25]

See also
Military history portal
War portal

Mercenary
Military terminology
Private military company

References
1.
Terra cotta of massed ranks of Qin Shi Huang's terra cotta soldiers
Oxford English Dictionary (2nd edition) Oxford: 1994
Harper, Douglas. "military". Online Etymology Dictionary.
Tucker, T.G. (1985) Etymological dictionary of Latin, Ares publishers Inc., Chicago.
p. 156
Oxford dictionary
"Merriam Webster Dictionary online". Merriam-webster.com. Retrieved 2011-08-01.
Statistics on Americans' opinion about the U.S. being the world's no1 military power,
Gallup, March 2012. Retrieved May 3, 2013.
Dupuy, T.N. (1990) Understanding war: History and Theory of combat, Leo Cooper,
London, p. 67
"The Art of War". Mypivots.com. 2011-06-11. Retrieved 2011-08-01.
"Welcome to the Department of History". westpoint.edu. Retrieved 2011-08-01.
MacHenry, Robert (1993). The New Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia
Britannica, Incorporated. p. 305.
"On War by General Carl von Clausewitz". gutenberg.org. Retrieved 2007-05-31.
Craig Hooper. "Ray Mabus greening the military". Nextnavy.com. Retrieved 2012-0522.
Pyman, Mark (March 2013). "Transparency is feasible". dandc.eu.
Braswell, H; Kushner, H. I. (2012). "Suicide, social integration, and masculinity in the
U.S. Military". Social Science & Medicine 74 (4): 5306.
doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.07.031. PMID 21036443. edit
Gender and the armed forces. research.ncl.ac.uk
Green, Gill (2010). "Exploring the Ambiguities of Masculinity in Accounts of
Emotional Distress in the Military Among Young Ex-servicemen". Social Science &
Medicine 71: 14801488. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.07.015.
Eisold, K. (2010-06-01). The stoism of soldiers. psychologytoday.com
Spade, J.Z. & Valentine, C.G. (2011). The Kaleidoscope of Gender. Pine Forge Press:
CA.

 Guerrina, Roberta. (2012-09-26). Birthing on the front line: A tale of military

femininity. e-ir.info
Hynes, Patricia (2012-01-26) Military sexual abuse: A greater menace than combat.
truth-out.org
Pentagons Lifting of Combat Ban Comes as Role of Military Women Grows.
pewresearch.org. 2013-01-24
Duncanson, Claire; Eschle, Catherine (1 December 2008). "Gender and the Nuclear
Weapons State: A Feminist Critique of the UK Government's White Paper on Trident".
New Political Scienc 30 (4): 545563. doi:10.1080/07393140802518120.
Cohn, Carol (Summer 1987). "Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense
Intellectuals". Signs. Within and Without: Women, Gender, and Theory 12 (4): 687718.
doi:10.1086/494362.
25. Enloe, Cynthia (Jan 2004). "'Gender' is not enough: the need for a feminist
consciousness". International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944
) 80 (1): 9597. doi:10.1111/j..2004.00370.x.

External links

Military Expenditure % of GDP hosted by Lebanese economy forum, extracted

from the World Bank public data
Find more about
military
at Wikipedia's sister projects
Definitions from Wiktionary
Media from Commons
News stories from Wikinews
Quotations from Wikiquote
Source texts from Wikisource
Textbooks from Wikibooks
Learning resources from Wikiversity

Military at DMOZ

Categories:

Military
Military terminology
Defense

Navigation menu

Create account
Log in

Article
Talk

Read
Edit
View history

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction

Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools

What links here

Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export

Create a book

Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages

Alemannisch

Aragons

()

Bosanski
Brezhoneg

Catal
etina
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Espaol
Esperanto
Euskara

Fiji Hindi
Froyskt
Franais
Frysk
Galego
/Hak-k-ng

Hrvatski
Ilokano
Bahasa Indonesia
slenska
Italiano

Basa Jawa

Kiswahili
Latina
Latvieu
Ltzebuergesch

Lietuvi

Bahasa Melayu
Mng-dng-ng
Mirands

Norsk bokml
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan

Piemontis
Plattdtsch
Portugus

Scots

Simple English
Slovenina
Slovenina

/ srpski
Srpskohrvatski /
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog

Trke

Vneto
Ting Vit
Vro
Winaray

Edit links

This page was last modified on 31 May 2015, at 06:35.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License;
additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and
Privacy Policy. Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation,
Inc., a non-profit organization.

Military
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the 2003 Indian film, see Military (film).
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (August 2008)
This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it
has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing
more precise citations. (September 2013)
The military are forces authorized to use deadly force, and weapons, to support the
interests of the state and some or all of its citizens. The task of the military is usually
defined as defense of the state and its citizens, and the prosecution of war against another
state. The military may also have additional sanctioned and non-sanctioned functions
within a society, including, the promotion of a political agenda, protecting corporate
economic interests, internal population control, construction, emergency services, social
ceremonies, and guarding important areas. The military can also function as a discrete
subculture within a larger civil society, through the development of separate infrastructures,
which may include housing, schools, utilities, food production and banking.
The profession of soldiering as part of a military is older than recorded history itself. Some
of the most enduring images of the classical antiquity portray the power and feats of its
military leaders. The Battle of Kadesh in 1274 BC was one of the defining points of
Pharaoh Ramesses II's reign and is celebrated in bas-relief on his monuments. A thousand
years later the first emperor of unified China, Qin Shi Huang, was so determined to impress
the gods with his military might that he was buried with an army of terracotta soldiers.[1]
The Romans were dedicated to military matters, leaving to posterity many treatises and
writings as well as a large number of lavishly carved triumphal arches and victory columns.

War
History[show]
Battlespace[show]
Weapons[show]

Tactics[show]
Operational[show]
Strategy[show]
Grand strategy[show]
Organization[show]
Logistics[show]
Related[show]
Lists[show]

v
t
e

Contents

1 Etymology and definitions

2 History
3 Organization
o 3.1 Command
o 3.2 Personnel
o 3.3 Intelligence
o 3.4 Economics
o 3.5 Capability development
o 3.6 Science
o 3.7 Logistics
o 3.8 Operations
o 3.9 Performance assessment
4 In combat
o 4.1 Strategic victory
o 4.2 Operational victory
o 4.3 Tactical victory
5 Technology
6 As part of society
o 6.1 Ideology and ethics
o 6.2 Antimilitarism
7 Stereotypes
o 7.1 In the media
8 Masculinity
o 8.1 Masculine emotional control
o 8.2 Masculinity in military women
o 8.3 Masculine language within the military

9 See also
10 References
11 External links

Etymology and definitions

The first recorded use of the word military in English, spelled militarie, was in 1585.[2] It
comes from the Latin militaris (from Latin miles meaning "soldier") but is of uncertain
etymology, one suggestion being derived from *mil-it- going in a body or mass.[3][4] The
word is now identified as denoting someone that is skilled in use of weapons, or engaged in
military service or in warfare.[5][6]

Soldiers from the Canadian Grenadier Guards in the Kandahar Province of Afghanistan
As a noun the military usually refers generally to a country's armed forces or sometimes,
more specifically, to the senior officers who command them.[5][6] In general it refers to the
physicality of armed forces, their personnel, equipment, and physical area which they
occupy.
As an adjective military originally referred only to soldiers and soldiering, but it soon
broadened to apply to land forces in general and anything to do with their profession.[2] The
names of both the Royal Military Academy (1741) and United States Military Academy
(1802) reflect this. However, at about the time of the Napoleonic Wars, "military" began to
be used in reference to armed forces as a whole[2] and in the 21st century expressions like
"military service", "military intelligence" and "military history" encompass naval, marine
and air force aspects. As such, it now connotes any activity performed by armed force
personnel.

History
Main article: Military history
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (April 2011)
Military history is often considered to be the history of all conflicts, not just the history of
the state militaries. It differs somewhat from the history of war with military history

focusing on the people and institutions of war-making while the history of war focuses on
the evolution of war itself in the face of changing technology, governments, and geography.
Military history has a number of purposes. One main purpose is to learn from past
accomplishments and mistakes so as to more effectively wage war in the future. Another is
to create a sense of military tradition which is used to create cohesive military forces. Still
another may be to learn to prevent wars more effectively. Human knowledge about the
military is largely based on both recorded and oral history of military conflicts (war), their
participating armies and navies and, more recently, air forces.
There are two types of military history, although almost all texts have elements of both:
descriptive history that serves to chronicle conflicts without offering any statements about
the causes, nature of conduct, the ending and effects of a conflict; and analytical history
that seeks to offer statements about the causes, nature, ending and aftermath of conflicts as
a means of deriving knowledge and understanding of conflicts as a whole, and prevent
repetition of mistakes in future, to suggest better concepts or methods in employing forces,
or to advocate the need for new technology.

Organization
In the whole history of humanity, every nation had different needs for military forces. How
these needs are determined forms the basis of their composition, equipment and use of
facilities. It also determines what military does in terms of peacetime and wartime
activities.
All militaries, whether large or small, are military organizations that have official state and
world recognition as such. Organizations with similar features are paramilitary, civil
defense, militia or other which are not military. These commonalities of the state's military
define them.

An example of military command; a map of Argentina's military zones (19751983)

Command
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this
section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
The first requirement of the military is to establish it as a force with the capability to
execute national defence policy. Invariably, although the policy may be created by policy
makers or Policy analyst, its implementation requires specific expert knowledge of how the
military functions and how it fulfils roles.
The first of these skills is the ability to create a cohesive force capable of acting on policy
as and when required, and therefore the first function of the military is to provide military
command. One of the roles of military command is to translate policy into concrete
missions and tasks, and to express them in terms understood by subordinates, generally
called orders.
Military command make effective and efficient military organisation possible through
delegation of authority which encompass organisational structures as large as military
districts or military zones, and as small as platoons. The command element of the military
is often a strong influence on the organisational culture of the forces.

Personnel
See also: Military reserve and War finance

CF-18 Hornet launches a laser-guided bomb

Another requirement is for the military command personnel, often called the officer corps,
to command subordinated military personnel, generally known as soldiers, sailors, marines,
or airmen, capable of executing the many specialised operational missions and tasks
required for the military to execute policy directives.
Just as in the commercial enterprises where there are, in a corporate setting, directors,
managers and various staff that carry out the business of the day as part of business
operations or undertake business project management, the military also has its routines and
projects.
During peacetime, when military personnel are mostly employed in garrisons or permanent
military facilities, they mostly conduct administrative tasks, training and education
activities, and technology maintenance. Another role of military personnel is to ensure a
continuous replacement of departing servicemen and women through military recruitment,
and the maintenance of a military reserve.

Intelligence
The next requirement comes as a fairly basic need for the military to identify possible
threats it may be called upon to face. For this purpose some of the commanding forces and
other military, as well as often civilian personnel participate in identification of these
threats. This is at once an organization, a system and a process collectively called military
intelligence (MI).
The difficulty in using military intelligence concepts and military intelligence methods is in
the nature of the secrecy of the information they seek, and the clandestine nature that
intelligence operatives work in obtaining what may be plans for a conflict escalation,
initiation of combat or an invasion.
An important part of the military intelligence role is the military analysis performed to
assess military capability of potential future aggressors, and provide combat modelling that
helps to understand factors on which comparison of forces can be made. This helps to
quantify and qualify such statements as "China and India maintain the largest armed forces
in the World" or that "the U.S. Military is considered to be the world's strongest".[7]

Guerrilla structure
Although some groups engaged in combat, such as militants or resistance movements, refer
to themselves using military terminology, notably "Army" or "Front", none have had the
structure of a national military to justify the reference, and usually have had to rely on
support of outside national militaries. They also use these terms to conceal from the MI
their true capabilities, and to impress potential ideological recruits.
Having military intelligence representatives participate in the execution of the national
defence policy is important because it becomes the first respondent and commentator on the
policy expected strategic goal compared to the realities of identified threats. When the
intelligence reporting is compared to the policy, it becomes possible for the national
leadership to think about allocating resources over an above the officers and their
subordinates military pay and the expense of maintaining military facilities and military
support services for them.

Economics
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this
section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)

Map of military expenditures as a percentage of GDP by country, CIA figures.

Military spending in 2007, in USD, according to the Stockholm International Peace

Research Institute.
More commonly referred to as defence economics, this is the financial and monetary efforts
made to resource and sustain militaries, and to finance military operations including war.

The process of allocating resources is conducted by determining a military budget which is

administered by a military finance organisation within the military. Military procurement is
then authorised to purchase or contract provision of goods and services to the military,
whether in peacetime at a permanent base or in a combat zone from local population.

Capability development
Capability development, which is often referred to as the military "strength", is arguably
one of the most complex activities known to humanity because it requires determining:
Strategic, operational and tactical capability requirements to counter the identified threats;
Strategic, operational and tactical doctrines by which the acquired capabilities will be used;
identifying concepts, methods and systems involved in executing the doctrines; creating
design specifications for the manufacturers who would produce these in adequate quantity
and quality for their use in combat; purchase the concepts, methods and systems; create a
forces structure that would use the concepts, methods and systems most effectively and
efficiently; integrate these concepts, methods and systems into the force structure by
providing military education, training, and practice that preferably resembles combat
environment of intended use; create military logistics systems to allow continued and
uninterrupted performance of military organisations under combat conditions, including
provision of health services to the personnel and maintenance for the equipment; the
services to assist recovery of wounded personnel and repair of damaged equipment; and
finally post-conflict demobilisation and disposal of war stocks surplus to peacetime
requirements.
Development of military doctrine is perhaps the more important of all capability
development activities because it determines how military forces were, and are used in
conflicts, the concepts and methods used by the command to employ appropriately military
skilled, armed and equipped personnel in achievement of the tangible goals and objectives
of the war, campaign, battle, engagement, action or a duel.[8] The line between strategy and
tactics is not easily blurred, although deciding which is being discussed had sometimes
been a matter of personal judgement by some commentators, and military historians. The
use of forces at the level of organisation between strategic and tactical is called operational
mobility.

Science
Main article: Military science
Because most of the concepts and methods used by the military, and many of its systems
are not found in commercial branches. Much of the material is researched, designed,
developed and offered for inclusion in arsenals by military science organisations within the
overall structure of the military. Military scientists are therefore found to interact with all
Arms and Services of the armed forces, and at all levels of the military hierarchy of
command.

Although concerned with research into military psychology, and particularly combat stress
and how it affect troop morale, often the bulk of military science activities is directed at
military intelligence technology, military communications and improving military
capability through research. The design, development and prototyping of weapons, military
support equipment, and military technology in general is also an area in which lots of effort
is invested it includes everything from global communication networks and aircraft
carriers to paint and food.

Logistics
Main article: Military logistics

The Kawasaki C-1 is a tactical military transport of the Japan Air Self-Defence Force.
Possessing military capability is not sufficient if this capability cannot be deployed for, and
employed in combat operations. To achieve this, military logistics are used for the logistics
management and logistics planning of the forces supply "tail", the consumables and capital
equipment of the troops.
Although mostly concerned with the military transport as a means of delivery using
different modes of transport from military trucks to container ships operating from
permanent military base, it also involves creating field supply dumps in the rear of the
combat zone, and even forward supply points in specific unit's Tactical Area of
Responsibility.
These supply points are also used to provide military engineering services such as the
recovery of defective and derelict vehicles and weapons, maintenance of weapons in the
field, the repair and field modification of weapons and equipment, and in peacetime the
life-extension programs undertaken to allow continued use of equipment. One of the most
important role of logistics is the supply of munitions as a primary type of consumable, their
storage and disposal.

Operations
Main articles: Military strategy and Military tactics
While capability development is about enabling the military to perform its functions and
roles in executing the defence policy, how personnel and their equipment are used in
engaging the enemy, winning battles, successfully concluding campaigns, and eventually
the war, is the responsibility of military operations. Military operations oversees the policy
interpretation into military plans, allocation of capability to specific strategic, operational
and tactical goals and objectives, change in posture of the armed forces, the interaction of

Combat Arms, Combat Support Arms and Combat Support Services during combat
operations, defining of military missions and tasks during the conduct of combat,
management of military prisoners and military civil affairs, and the military occupation of
enemy territory, seizure of captured equipment, and maintenance of civil order in the
territory under its responsibility. Throughout the combat operations process, and during the
lulls in combat combat military intelligence provides reporting on the status of plan
completion and its correlation with desired, expected and achieved satisfaction of policy
fulfilment.

Performance assessment
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this
section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
The last requirement of the military is for military performance assessment and learning
from it. These two functions are performed by military historians and military theorists who
seek to identify failures and success of the armed force and integrate corrections into the
military reform with the aim of producing an improved force capable of performing
adequately should there be a national defence policy review.

In combat
The primary reason for the existence of the military is to engage in combat, should it be
required to do so by the national defence policy, and to win. This represents an
organizational goal of any military, and the primary focus for military thought through
military history.
The "show" of military force has been a term that referred as much to military force
projection, as to the units such as regiments or gunboats deployed in a particular theatre, or
as an aggregate of such forces. In the Gulf War the United States Central Command
controlled military forces (units) of each of the four military services of the United States.
How victory is achieved, and what shape it assumes is studied by most, if not all, military
groups on three levels.

Strategic victory
Main article: Strategic victory
Military strategy is the management of forces in wars and military campaigns by a
commander-in-chief employing large military forces either national and allied as a whole,
or the component elements of armies, navies and air forces such as army groups, fleets and
large numbers of aircraft. Military strategy is a long-term projection of belligerents' policy
with a broad view of outcome implications, including outside the concerns of military
command. Military strategy is more concerned with the supply of war and planning, than

management of field forces and combat between them. The scope of Strategic military
planning can span weeks, but is more often months or even years.[8]

Dutch civilians celebrating the arrival of the I Canadian Corps in Utrecht as the Canadian
Army liberates the Netherlands from Nazi occupation

Operational victory
Operational mobility is, within warfare and military doctrine, the level of command which
coordinates the minute details of tactics with the overarching goals of strategy. A common
synonym is operational art.
The operational level is at a scale bigger than one where line of sight and the time of day
are important, and smaller than the strategic level, where production and politics are
considerations. Formations are of the operational level if they are able to conduct
operations on their own, and are of sufficient size to be directly handled or have a
significant impact at the strategic level. This concept was pioneered by the German army
prior to and during the Second World War. At this level planning and duration of activities
takes from one week to a month, and are executed by Field Armies and Army Corps and
their naval and air equivalents.[8]

Tactical victory
Main article: Tactical victory
Military tactics concerns itself with the methods for engaging and defeating the enemy in
direct combat. Military tactics are usually used by units over hours or days, and are focused
on the specific, close proximity tasks and objectives of squads, companies, battalions,
regiments, brigades and divisions and their naval and air equivalents.[8]
One of the oldest military publications is The Art of War by the Chinese philosopher Sun
Tzu.[9] Written in the 6th century BCE, the 13-chapter book is intended as military
instruction and not as military theory, but has had a huge influence on Asian military
doctrine, and from the late 19th century, on European and United States military planning.

It has even been used to formulate business tactics, and can even be applied in social and
political areas[where?].

Battle formation and tactics of Macedon[10]

The Classical Greeks and the Romans wrote prolifically on military campaigning. Among
the best-known Roman works are Julius Caesar's commentaries on the Gallic Wars and the
Roman Civil war written about 50 BC.
Two major works on tactics come from the late Roman period: Taktike Theoria by Aelianus
Tacticus and De Re Militari ("On military matters") by Vegetius. Taktike Theoria examined
Greek military tactics, and was most influential in the Byzantine world and during the
Golden Age of Islam.
De Re Militari formed the basis of European military tactics until the late 17th century.
Perhaps its most enduring maxim is Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum (let he
who desires peace prepare for war).
Due to the changing nature of combat with the introduction of artillery in the European
Middle Ages, and infantry firearms in the Renaissance, attempts were made to define and
identify those strategies, grand tactics and tactics that would produce a victory more often
than that achieved by the Romans in praying to the gods before the battle.
Later this became known as military science, and later still would adopt the scientific
method approach to the conduct of military operations under the influence of the Industrial
Revolution thinking. In his seminal book On War the Prussian Major-General and leading
expert on modern military strategy Carl von Clausewitz defined military strategy as "the
employment of battles to gain the end of war."[11] According to Clausewitz
strategy forms the plan of the War, and to this end it links together the series of acts which
are to lead to the final decision, that is to say, it makes the plans for the separate campaigns
and regulates the combats to be fought in each.[12]
Hence, Clausewitz placed political aims above military goals, ensuring civilian control of
the military. Military strategy was one of a triumvirate of "arts" or "sciences" that governed
the conduct of warfare, the others being: military tactics, the execution of plans and
manoeuvring of forces in battle, and maintenance of an army.

The meaning of military tactics has changed over time from the deployment and
manoeuvring of entire land armies on the fields of ancient battles, and galley fleets, to
modern use of small unit ambushes, encirclements, bombardment attacks, frontal assaults,
air assaults, hit-and-run tactics used mainly by guerrilla forces and, in some cases, suicide
attacks on land and at sea. Evolution of aerial warfare introduced its own air combat tactics.
Often, military deception, in the form of military camouflage or misdirection using decoys,
is used to confuse the enemy as a tactic.
A major development in infantry tactics came with the increased use of trench warfare in
the 19th and 20th century. This was mainly employed in World War I in the Gallipoli
campaign and the Western Front. Trench warfare often turned to a stalemate, only broken
by a large loss of life, because in order to attack an enemy entrenchment soldiers had to run
through an exposed "no man's land" under heavy fire from an entrenched enemy.

Technology

Arrow-head. Bronze, 4th century BC. From Olynthus, Chalcidice.

Main article: Military technology and equipment
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
As with any occupation, since the ancient times the military has been distinguished from
other members of the society by their tools, the military weapons and military equipment
used in combat. When Stone Age humans first took a sliver of flint to tip the spear, it was
the first example of applying technology to improve the weapon.
Since then, the advances made by human societies and that of weapons has been
irretrievably linked. Stone weapons gave way to Bronze Age weapons, and later the Iron
Age weapons. With each technological change was realised some tangible increase in
military capability, such as through greater effectiveness of a sharper edge in defeating
leather armour, or improved density of materials used in manufacture of weapons.
On land the first really significant technological advance in warfare was the development of
the ranged weapons and notably the sling. The next significant advance came with the
domestication of the horses and mastering of equestrianism.

Mounted armored knight. Armor and cavalry dominated the battlefield until the invention
of firearms.
Arguably the greatest invention that affected not just the military, but all society, after
adoption of fire, was the wheel, and its use in the construction of the chariot. There were no
advances in military technology until, from the mechanical arm action of a slinger, the
Greeks, Egyptians, Romans, Persians, Chinese, etc. development the siege engines. The
bow was manufactured in increasingly larger and more powerful versions to increase both
the weapon range and armour penetration performance. These developed into the powerful
composite and/or recurve bows, and crossbows of Ancient China. These proved particularly
useful during the rise of cavalry, as horsemen encased in ever-more sophisticated armour
came to dominate the battlefield.
Somewhat earlier in medieval China, gunpowder had been invented, and was increasingly
used by the military in combat. The use of gunpowder in the early vase-like mortars in
Europe, and advanced versions of the long bow and cross bow, which all had armourpiercing arrowheads, that put an end to the dominance of the armoured knight. After the
long bow, which required great skill and strength to use, the next most significant
technological advance was the musket, which could be used effectively with little training.
In time the successors to muskets and cannon, in the form of rifles and artillery, would
become core battlefield technology.
As the speed of technological advances accelerated in civilian applications, so too warfare
became more industralised. The newly invented machine gun and repeating rifle redefined
firepower on the battlefield and, in part, explains the high casualty rates of the American
Civil War. The next breakthrough was the conversion of artillery parks from the muzzle
loading guns to the breech loading guns, and in particular the highly mobile, recoilless,
field-gun, the French Soixante-Quinze, in the late 19th century.
The development of breech loading had the greatest effect on naval warfare, for the first
time since the Middle Ages altering the way weapons are mounted on warships, and
therefore naval tactics, now divorced from the reliance on sails with the invention of the
internal combustion. A further advance in military naval technology was the design of the
submarine and its weapon, the torpedo.
Main battle tanks and other heavy equipment such as AFVs, Military aircraft and ships are
characteristic to organised military forces.

During World War I the need to break the deadlock of the trenches saw the rapid
development of many new technologies, particularly the tanks and military aviation.
Military aviation was extensively used, and particularly the bombers during the World War
II, which marked the most frantic period of weapons development in history. Many new
designs and concepts were used in combat, and all existing technologies were improved
between 1939 and 1945.
During the war significant advances were made in military communications through use of
radio, military intelligence through use of the radar, and in military medicine through use of
penicillin, while in the air the missile, jet aircraft and helicopters were seen for the first
time. Perhaps the most infamous of all military technologies was the creation of the atomic
bomb, although the effects of radiation were unknown until the early 1950s. Far greater use
of military vehicles had finally eliminated the cavalry from the military force structure.

AIM-7 Sparrow medium range air-to-air missile from an F-15 Eagle

After World War II, with the onset of the Cold War, the constant technological
development of new weapons was institutionalised as participants engaged in a constant
arms race in capability development. This constant state of weapons development continues
into the present, and remains a constant drain on national resources, which some blame on
the military-industrial complex.
The most significant technological developments that influenced combat have been the
guided missiles which are used by all Services. More recently, information technology, and
its use in surveillance, including space-based reconnaissance systems, have played an
increasing role in military operations.
The impact of information warfare that focuses on attacking command communication
systems, and military databases has been coupled with the new development in military
technology has been the use of robotic systems in intelligence combat, both in hardware
and software applications.
Recently, there has also been a particular focus towards the use of renewable fuels for
running military vehicles on. Unlike fossil fuels, renewable fuels can be produced in any
country, creating a strategic advantage. The US military has already committed itself to
have 50% of its energy consumption come from alternative sources.[13]
The MIRV, ICBM and the Tsar Bomb are considered the most destructive weapons
invented.

As part of society
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
For much of military history the armed forces were considered to be for use by the heads of
their societies, until recently, the crowned heads of states. In a democracy or other political
system run in the public interest, it is a public force.
The relationship between the military and the society it serves is a complicated and everevolving one. Much depends on the nature of the society itself and whether it sees the
military as important, as for example in time of threat or war, or a burdensome expense
typified by defence cuts in time of peace.
One difficult matter in the relation between military and society is control and transparency.
In many countries only few information on military operations and budgeting is accessible
for the public. However transparency in the military sector is crucial to fight corruption.
This showed the Government Defence Anti-corruption Index Transparency International
published in 2013.[14]
These relationships are seen from the perspective of political-military relations, the
military-industrial complex mentioned above, and the socio-military relationship. The last
can be divided between those segments of society that offer support for the military, those
who voice opposition to the military, the voluntary and involuntary civilians in the military
forces, the populations of civilians in a combat zone, and of course the military's selfperception.
Militaries often function as societies within societies, by having their own military
communities, economies, education, medicine and other aspects of a functioning civilian
society. Although a "military" is not limited to nations in of itself as many private military
companies (or PMC's) can be used or "hired" by organisations and figures as security,
escort, or other means of protection where police, agencies, or militaries are absent or not
trusted.

Ideology and ethics

Main article: Militarism
Militarist ideology is the society's social attitude of being best served, or being a
beneficiary of a government, or guided by concepts embodied in the military culture,
doctrine, system, or leaders.
Either because of the cultural memory, national history, or the potentiality of a military
threat, the militarist argument asserts that a civilian population is dependent upon, and
thereby subservient to the needs and goals of its military for continued independence.

Militarism is sometimes contrasted with the concepts of comprehensive national power,

soft power and hard power.
Most nations have separate military laws which regulate conduct in war and during
peacetime. An early exponent was Hugo Grotius, whose On the Law of War and Peace
(1625) had a major impact of the humanitarian approach to warfare development. His
theme was echoed by Gustavus Adolphus.
Ethics of warfare have developed since 1945 to create constraints on the military treatment
of prisoners and civilians primarily by the Geneva Conventions, but rarely apply to use of
the military forces as internal security troops during times of political conflict that results in
popular protests and incitement to popular uprising.
International protocols restrict the use, or have even created international bans on weapons,
notably weapons of mass destruction. International conventions define what constitutes a
war crime and provides for war crimes prosecution. Individual countries also have
elaborate codes of military justice, an example being the United States' Uniform Code of
Military Justice that can lead to court martial for military personnel found guilty of war
crimes.
Military actions are sometimes argued to be justified by furthering a humanitarian cause
such as disaster relief operations or in defence of refugees. The term military humanism is
used to refer to such actions.

Antimilitarism
Main article: Antimilitarism
Antimilitarism is the society's social attitude opposed to war between states, and in
particular countering arguments based on militarism. Following Hegel's exploration of the
relationship between history and violence, antimilitarists argue that there are different types
of violence, some of which can be said to be legitimate others non-legitimate. Anarchosyndicalist Georges Sorel advocated the use of violence as a form of direct action, calling it
"revolutionary violence", which he opposed in Reflections on Violence (1908) to the
violence inherent in class struggle. Sorel thus followed the International Workingmen's
Association theorization of propaganda of the deed.
War, as violence, can be distinguished into war between states, and civil war, in which case
class struggle is, according to antimilitarists theorists, a primordial component. Hence,
Marx's influence on antimilitarist doctrine was not surprising, although making Marx
accountable for the antimilitarist tradition is a large overstatement. The belief in the eternal
antimilitarist spirit, present in all places and time, is however a myth because the modern
military as an institution is a historic achievement formed during the 18th and 19th
centuries, as a by-product of the modern nation-states. Napoleon's invention of conscription
is a fundamental progress in the organization of state armies. Later, Prussian militarism
would be exposed by 19th century social theorists.

Stereotypes
A military brat is a colloquial term for a child with at least one parent who served as an
active duty member (vice reserve) in the armed forces. Children of armed forces members
may move around to different military bases or international postings, which gives them an
unusual childhood. Unlike common usage of the term brat, when it is used in this context,
it is not necessarily a derogatory term.

In the media
Main article: Military in the media
Soldiers and armies have been prominent in popular culture since the beginnings of
recorded history. In addition to the countless images of military leaders in heroic poses
from antiquity, they have been an enduring source of inspiration in war literature. Not all of
this has been entirely complementary and the military have been lampooned or ridiculed as
often as they have been idolised. The classical Greek writer Aristophanes, devoted an entire
comedy, Lysistrata, to a strike organised by military wives where they withhold sex from
their husbands to prevent them from going to war.
In Medieval Europe, tales of knighthood and chivalry, the officer class of the period,
captured the popular imagination. Writers and poets like Taliesin, Chrtien de Troyes and
Thomas Malory wrote tales of derring-do featuring Arthur, Guinevere, Lancelot and
Galahad. Even in the 21st century, books and films about the Arthurian legend and the
Holy Grail continue to appear.
A century or so later, in the hands of writers such as Jean Froissart, Miguel Cervantes and
William Shakespeare, the fictional knight Tirant lo Blanch and the real-life condottieri John
Hawkwood would be juxtaposed against the fantastical Don Quixote and the carousing Sir
John Falstaff. In just one play, Henry V, Shakespeare provides a whole range of military
characters, from cool-headed and clear-sighted generals, to captains, and common soldiery.

Emperor Augustus Caesar in a martial pose (1st century)

The Flight of Pompey after Pharsalus, by Jean Fouquet

Medieval view: Richard II of England meets rebels

Sir John Hawkwood (fresco in the Duomo, Florence)

Shakespeare's Sir John Falstaff by Eduard von Grtzner

"The Cruel Practices of Prince Rupert" (1643)

The rapid growth of movable type in the late 16th century and early 17th century saw an
upsurge in private publication. Political pamphlets became popular, often lampooning
military leaders for political purposes. A pamphlet directed against Prince Rupert of the
Rhine is a typical example. During the 19th century, irreverence towards authority was at
its height and for every elegant military gentleman painted by the master-portraitists of the
European courts for example, Gainsborough, Goya and Reynolds, there are the sometimes
affectionate and sometimes savage caricatures of Rowland and Hogarth.
This continued in the 19th century, with publications like Punch in the British Empire and
Le Pre Duchesne in France, poking fun at the military establishment. This extended to
media other print also. An enduring example is the Major-General's Song from the Gilbert

and Sullivan light opera, The Pirates of Penzance, where a senior army officer is satirised
for his enormous fund of irrelevant knowledge.

Colonel John Hayes St. Leger (detail) by Sir Joshua Reynolds

Rowlandson often satirised the military

"A modern major general" (The Pirates of Penzance)

Punch: war reporter, W H Russell, Crimean War

The increasing importance of cinema in the early 20th century provided a new platform for
depictions of military subjects. During the First World War, although heavily censored,
newsreels enabled those at home to see for themselves a heavily sanitised version of life at
the front line. About the same time, both pro-war and anti-war films came to the silver
screen. One of the first films on military aviation, Hell's Angels, broke all box office
records on its release in 1929. Soon, war films of all types were showing throughout the
world, notably those of Charlie Chaplin who actively promoted war bonds and voluntary
enlistment.

The First World War was also responsible for a new kind of military depiction, through
poetry. Hitherto, poetry had been used mostly to glorify or sanctify war. The Charge of the
Light Brigade by Alfred, Lord Tennyson, with its galloping hoofbeat rhythm, is a prime
late Victorian example of this, though Rudyard Kipling had written a scathing reply, The
Last of the Light Brigade, criticising the poverty in which many Light Brigade veterans
found themselves in old age. Instead, the new wave of poetry, from the war poets, was
written from the point of view of the disenchanted trench soldier.
Leading war poets included Siegfried Sassoon, Wilfred Owen, John McCrae, Rupert
Brooke, Isaac Rosenberg and David Jones. A similar movement occurred in literature,
producing a slew of novels on both sides of the Atlantic including notably All Quiet on the
Western Front and Johnny Got His Gun. The 1963 English stage musical Oh, What a
Lovely War! provided a satirical take on World War I, which was released in a cinematic
version directed by Richard Attenborough in 1969.
The propaganda war that accompanied World War II invariably depicted the enemy in
unflattering terms. Examples of this exist not only in posters but also in the films of Leni
Riefenstahl and Sergei Eisenstein.
Alongside this, World War II also inspired films as varied as Bridge on the River Kwai, The
Longest Day, Catch-22, Saving Private Ryan, and The Sea Shall Not Have Them. The next
major event, the Korean War inspired a long-running television series M*A*S*H. With the
Vietnam War, the tide of balance turned and its films, notably Apocalypse Now, Good
Morning, Vietnam, Go Tell the Spartans, Born on the Fourth of July, and We Were
Soldiers, have tended to contain critical messages.
There is even a nursery rhyme about war, "The Grand Old Duke of York", ridiculing a
general for his inability to command any further than marching his men up and down a hill.
The huge number of songs focusing on war include "And the Band Played Waltzing
Matilda" and "Universal Soldier".

Masculinity
This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying
the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original
research should be removed. (March 2013)
The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on
the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (May
2015)

Masculinity and perceptions of masculinity plays an important role in the military. Military
organizations form roles and responsibilities that they expect members to adapt to
especially under adverse and life-threatening conditions. Just like it is used within society,
masculinity is a word that is associated with the military quite often as gender hierarchy
exists in relation to gender subordinated gender constructs.[15] Studies of masculinity within
the military have been conducted with British servicemen and it was determined that

military forces are masculine institutions and the military culture support this.[16] According
to soldiers, toughness, endurance, physical prowess and aggression are requirements to be
an effective soldier.[17] Military unit cohesion is created by social rituals which entails
almost total subordination to the group and a sense of depersonalization.[15] In addition,
military culture is characterized by extremely high levels of social cohesion that is
considered essential to the unit's operational efficiency.[15] This masculine emphasis
separates rather rigidly the male from the female and puts them in conflict with one
another. There have been some attempts of changing this perception late in the 20th century
as women in combat have been portrayed in movies like "G.I. Jane" and "Down Periscope".

Masculine emotional control

Military service offers men unique resources for the construction of a masculine identity
defined by emotional control, overt heterosexual desire, physical fitness, self-discipline,
self-reliance, the willingness to use aggression and physical violence, and risk taking.[18]
Emotional control is a very important part of military training and is incorporated into
operations. Training exercises are designed to elicit strong emotions that one may face on
the battle field. Soldiers are taught to control anger, fear, and grief as to not get in the way
of difficult judgments. This type of training creates the 'warrior mindset', but it comes at a
cost as it leaves many soldiers without a healthy way to process emotions and events faced
by the battle field.[18] Unfortunately, this is believed to be the main cause of the high rate of
suicides amongst soldiers.[15] This masculine imperative for emotional self-control places
men in a prestigious position and superior to women, since women are believed to be more
emotional than men.[19] The presence of women in the military challenges this ideology.

Masculinity in military women

Femininity does have a place within the military, as it does in society, although to a much
lesser extent.[20] The increased number of women in the military undeniably signifies a shift
in policy. However, current debates focusing on women's contributions to war efforts only
serve to consolidate the dominant position of military masculinities within the institution.
Focusing on women's difference and women's ability to contribute to strategic military
objectives, they fail to challenge the very nature of the armed forces and militarism more
widely.[20] Women's role as peace makers and life bearers is thus constructed in opposition
to that of the soldier/combatant. Femininity and women are therefore excluded from this
essentially male and masculine institution[20]
Though women have long served in the Army and currently make up 15% of U.S. forces in
Iraq and Afghanistan and 30% say they served in a combat zone, recent reports attest to
their continued marginalization within Army ranks.[21] Women in the military are
marginalized because they violate one of the premises of military indoctrination and the
myth of an exclusively male-dominated world. As a result of their transgression, not only
are women excluded from key aspects of military life, but they are also subjected to
violence with great frequency.[21] Recent studies indicate that between 4360% of female
enlisted personnel experience some form of physical or sexual harassment or
violence.[citation needed] This physical and sexual abuse attests to the exclusion of women

within the military. Recently the pentagon lifted the ban on military women in combat
roles.[22]

Masculine language within the military

Within discussions among military actions and security, they are commonly seen as
gendered and directed towards a masculine approach towards war. Masculinity is seen
within the military through the use of sexual metaphors to discuss actions and missiles.
Within the military, they are commonly seen in relating missiles to phallic imagery and
discussing about warfare. But, it is also apparent through the sanitization of the discussion
to avoid the results of using weapons.[citation needed] Some examples of sexual imagery used
within the military include "Harden the missiles", and "Put missiles in a nice hole."[23]
However, the language shifts away from phallic imagery when talking about a state
involved with weapons. When referring to a state that has released nuclear weapons or
getting involved with them, the state is referred to as a woman, and is considered to have
"lost their virginity".[24] The state is referenced as a woman as there is a patriarchal
belief[citation needed] in which the state has lost its innocence for getting involved with the
taboo; nuclear weapons. By using sexual metaphors, the seriousness of war is reduced
significantly and is no longer seen as dangerous or life-threatening.[23] Using sexual
metaphors help to promote a false sense of excitement, and willingness to support the idea
of weapons used within the military. It is shown as glamourising the concept of military
action through sexual imagery and encouraging others to agree with sexual imagery that
attracts masculinity. There is also an attraction to the belief of sexual dominance within the
military with the use of sexual metaphors. In the international community, the use of sexual
metaphors promotes the idea of "missile" envy, in which by using sexual metaphors,
countries become motivated to develop their nuclear force in order to compete with other
nations.[23] This displays how little moral values are considered within the military and how
the idea of patriarchy remains evident. Feminist critics challenge this masculine
language.[citation needed] By using sexual metaphors, a masculine image is promoted towards
other nations and is displayed as something nations want to strive to be. Feminist critics
argue that there is no evidence that feminist criticism has reached out to the men of the
military and gotten their understanding on how discussions within the military are
gendered.[24]
With discussions regarding weapons, the language used is often abstract. For instance,
"clean bombs" refers to bombs with high amounts of energy used for explosive power,
while "collateral damage" refers to human deaths caused as a result of nuclear
weapons.[citation needed][24] However, using abstract words to discuss the outcomes of war
emphasizes the lack of emotion or concern towards the use of weapons. By using abstract
language to cover up the severity of violence, the association between masculinity and the
military is enforced. Femininity is generally not seen within military negotiations as the use
of male dominated language is seen as normalized within discussions in the military.
Within the military, discussions about non-militaristic topics (emotions, peace talks,
identity, etc.) are considered to be "feminine" values or "fluff".[citation needed][23] There is fear
of appearing feminized towards colleagues within the military and fear about having their
masculinity challenged for expressing their opinions against certain actions.[25]

See also
Military history portal
War portal

Mercenary
Military terminology
Private military company

References
1.
Terra cotta of massed ranks of Qin Shi Huang's terra cotta soldiers
Oxford English Dictionary (2nd edition) Oxford: 1994
Harper, Douglas. "military". Online Etymology Dictionary.
Tucker, T.G. (1985) Etymological dictionary of Latin, Ares publishers Inc., Chicago.
p. 156
Oxford dictionary
"Merriam Webster Dictionary online". Merriam-webster.com. Retrieved 2011-08-01.
Statistics on Americans' opinion about the U.S. being the world's no1 military power,
Gallup, March 2012. Retrieved May 3, 2013.
Dupuy, T.N. (1990) Understanding war: History and Theory of combat, Leo Cooper,
London, p. 67
"The Art of War". Mypivots.com. 2011-06-11. Retrieved 2011-08-01.
"Welcome to the Department of History". westpoint.edu. Retrieved 2011-08-01.
MacHenry, Robert (1993). The New Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia
Britannica, Incorporated. p. 305.
"On War by General Carl von Clausewitz". gutenberg.org. Retrieved 2007-05-31.
Craig Hooper. "Ray Mabus greening the military". Nextnavy.com. Retrieved 2012-0522.
Pyman, Mark (March 2013). "Transparency is feasible". dandc.eu.
Braswell, H; Kushner, H. I. (2012). "Suicide, social integration, and masculinity in the
U.S. Military". Social Science & Medicine 74 (4): 5306.
doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.07.031. PMID 21036443. edit
Gender and the armed forces. research.ncl.ac.uk
Green, Gill (2010). "Exploring the Ambiguities of Masculinity in Accounts of
Emotional Distress in the Military Among Young Ex-servicemen". Social Science &
Medicine 71: 14801488. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.07.015.
Eisold, K. (2010-06-01). The stoism of soldiers. psychologytoday.com
Spade, J.Z. & Valentine, C.G. (2011). The Kaleidoscope of Gender. Pine Forge Press:
CA.

 Guerrina, Roberta. (2012-09-26). Birthing on the front line: A tale of military

femininity. e-ir.info
Hynes, Patricia (2012-01-26) Military sexual abuse: A greater menace than combat.
truth-out.org
Pentagons Lifting of Combat Ban Comes as Role of Military Women Grows.
pewresearch.org. 2013-01-24
Duncanson, Claire; Eschle, Catherine (1 December 2008). "Gender and the Nuclear
Weapons State: A Feminist Critique of the UK Government's White Paper on Trident".
New Political Scienc 30 (4): 545563. doi:10.1080/07393140802518120.
Cohn, Carol (Summer 1987). "Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense
Intellectuals". Signs. Within and Without: Women, Gender, and Theory 12 (4): 687718.
doi:10.1086/494362.
25. Enloe, Cynthia (Jan 2004). "'Gender' is not enough: the need for a feminist
consciousness". International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944
) 80 (1): 9597. doi:10.1111/j..2004.00370.x.

External links

Military Expenditure % of GDP hosted by Lebanese economy forum, extracted

from the World Bank public data
Find more about
military
at Wikipedia's sister projects
Definitions from Wiktionary
Media from Commons
News stories from Wikinews
Quotations from Wikiquote
Source texts from Wikisource
Textbooks from Wikibooks
Learning resources from Wikiversity

Military at DMOZ

Categories:

Military
Military terminology
Defense

Navigation menu

Create account
Log in

Article
Talk

Read
Edit
View history

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction

Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools

What links here

Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export

Create a book

Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages

Alemannisch

Aragons

()

Bosanski
Brezhoneg

Catal
etina
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Espaol
Esperanto
Euskara

Fiji Hindi
Froyskt
Franais
Frysk
Galego
/Hak-k-ng

Hrvatski
Ilokano
Bahasa Indonesia
slenska
Italiano

Basa Jawa

Kiswahili
Latina
Latvieu
Ltzebuergesch

Lietuvi

Bahasa Melayu
Mng-dng-ng
Mirands

Norsk bokml
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan

Piemontis
Plattdtsch
Portugus

Scots

Simple English
Slovenina
Slovenina

/ srpski
Srpskohrvatski /
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog

Trke

Vneto
Ting Vit
Vro
Winaray

Edit links

This page was last modified on 31 May 2015, at 06:35.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License;
additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and
Privacy Policy. Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation,
Inc., a non-profit organization.

Military
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the 2003 Indian film, see Military (film).
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (August 2008)
This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it
has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing
more precise citations. (September 2013)
The military are forces authorized to use deadly force, and weapons, to support the
interests of the state and some or all of its citizens. The task of the military is usually
defined as defense of the state and its citizens, and the prosecution of war against another
state. The military may also have additional sanctioned and non-sanctioned functions
within a society, including, the promotion of a political agenda, protecting corporate
economic interests, internal population control, construction, emergency services, social
ceremonies, and guarding important areas. The military can also function as a discrete
subculture within a larger civil society, through the development of separate infrastructures,
which may include housing, schools, utilities, food production and banking.
The profession of soldiering as part of a military is older than recorded history itself. Some
of the most enduring images of the classical antiquity portray the power and feats of its
military leaders. The Battle of Kadesh in 1274 BC was one of the defining points of
Pharaoh Ramesses II's reign and is celebrated in bas-relief on his monuments. A thousand
years later the first emperor of unified China, Qin Shi Huang, was so determined to impress
the gods with his military might that he was buried with an army of terracotta soldiers.[1]
The Romans were dedicated to military matters, leaving to posterity many treatises and
writings as well as a large number of lavishly carved triumphal arches and victory columns.

War
History[show]
Battlespace[show]
Weapons[show]

Tactics[show]
Operational[show]
Strategy[show]
Grand strategy[show]
Organization[show]
Logistics[show]
Related[show]
Lists[show]

v
t
e

Contents

1 Etymology and definitions

2 History
3 Organization
o 3.1 Command
o 3.2 Personnel
o 3.3 Intelligence
o 3.4 Economics
o 3.5 Capability development
o 3.6 Science
o 3.7 Logistics
o 3.8 Operations
o 3.9 Performance assessment
4 In combat
o 4.1 Strategic victory
o 4.2 Operational victory
o 4.3 Tactical victory
5 Technology
6 As part of society
o 6.1 Ideology and ethics
o 6.2 Antimilitarism
7 Stereotypes
o 7.1 In the media
8 Masculinity
o 8.1 Masculine emotional control
o 8.2 Masculinity in military women
o 8.3 Masculine language within the military

9 See also
10 References
11 External links

Etymology and definitions

The first recorded use of the word military in English, spelled militarie, was in 1585.[2] It
comes from the Latin militaris (from Latin miles meaning "soldier") but is of uncertain
etymology, one suggestion being derived from *mil-it- going in a body or mass.[3][4] The
word is now identified as denoting someone that is skilled in use of weapons, or engaged in
military service or in warfare.[5][6]

Soldiers from the Canadian Grenadier Guards in the Kandahar Province of Afghanistan
As a noun the military usually refers generally to a country's armed forces or sometimes,
more specifically, to the senior officers who command them.[5][6] In general it refers to the
physicality of armed forces, their personnel, equipment, and physical area which they
occupy.
As an adjective military originally referred only to soldiers and soldiering, but it soon
broadened to apply to land forces in general and anything to do with their profession.[2] The
names of both the Royal Military Academy (1741) and United States Military Academy
(1802) reflect this. However, at about the time of the Napoleonic Wars, "military" began to
be used in reference to armed forces as a whole[2] and in the 21st century expressions like
"military service", "military intelligence" and "military history" encompass naval, marine
and air force aspects. As such, it now connotes any activity performed by armed force
personnel.

History
Main article: Military history
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (April 2011)
Military history is often considered to be the history of all conflicts, not just the history of
the state militaries. It differs somewhat from the history of war with military history

focusing on the people and institutions of war-making while the history of war focuses on
the evolution of war itself in the face of changing technology, governments, and geography.
Military history has a number of purposes. One main purpose is to learn from past
accomplishments and mistakes so as to more effectively wage war in the future. Another is
to create a sense of military tradition which is used to create cohesive military forces. Still
another may be to learn to prevent wars more effectively. Human knowledge about the
military is largely based on both recorded and oral history of military conflicts (war), their
participating armies and navies and, more recently, air forces.
There are two types of military history, although almost all texts have elements of both:
descriptive history that serves to chronicle conflicts without offering any statements about
the causes, nature of conduct, the ending and effects of a conflict; and analytical history
that seeks to offer statements about the causes, nature, ending and aftermath of conflicts as
a means of deriving knowledge and understanding of conflicts as a whole, and prevent
repetition of mistakes in future, to suggest better concepts or methods in employing forces,
or to advocate the need for new technology.

Organization
In the whole history of humanity, every nation had different needs for military forces. How
these needs are determined forms the basis of their composition, equipment and use of
facilities. It also determines what military does in terms of peacetime and wartime
activities.
All militaries, whether large or small, are military organizations that have official state and
world recognition as such. Organizations with similar features are paramilitary, civil
defense, militia or other which are not military. These commonalities of the state's military
define them.

An example of military command; a map of Argentina's military zones (19751983)

Command
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this
section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
The first requirement of the military is to establish it as a force with the capability to
execute national defence policy. Invariably, although the policy may be created by policy
makers or Policy analyst, its implementation requires specific expert knowledge of how the
military functions and how it fulfils roles.
The first of these skills is the ability to create a cohesive force capable of acting on policy
as and when required, and therefore the first function of the military is to provide military
command. One of the roles of military command is to translate policy into concrete
missions and tasks, and to express them in terms understood by subordinates, generally
called orders.
Military command make effective and efficient military organisation possible through
delegation of authority which encompass organisational structures as large as military
districts or military zones, and as small as platoons. The command element of the military
is often a strong influence on the organisational culture of the forces.

Personnel
See also: Military reserve and War finance

CF-18 Hornet launches a laser-guided bomb

Another requirement is for the military command personnel, often called the officer corps,
to command subordinated military personnel, generally known as soldiers, sailors, marines,
or airmen, capable of executing the many specialised operational missions and tasks
required for the military to execute policy directives.
Just as in the commercial enterprises where there are, in a corporate setting, directors,
managers and various staff that carry out the business of the day as part of business
operations or undertake business project management, the military also has its routines and
projects.
During peacetime, when military personnel are mostly employed in garrisons or permanent
military facilities, they mostly conduct administrative tasks, training and education
activities, and technology maintenance. Another role of military personnel is to ensure a
continuous replacement of departing servicemen and women through military recruitment,
and the maintenance of a military reserve.

Intelligence
The next requirement comes as a fairly basic need for the military to identify possible
threats it may be called upon to face. For this purpose some of the commanding forces and
other military, as well as often civilian personnel participate in identification of these
threats. This is at once an organization, a system and a process collectively called military
intelligence (MI).
The difficulty in using military intelligence concepts and military intelligence methods is in
the nature of the secrecy of the information they seek, and the clandestine nature that
intelligence operatives work in obtaining what may be plans for a conflict escalation,
initiation of combat or an invasion.
An important part of the military intelligence role is the military analysis performed to
assess military capability of potential future aggressors, and provide combat modelling that
helps to understand factors on which comparison of forces can be made. This helps to
quantify and qualify such statements as "China and India maintain the largest armed forces
in the World" or that "the U.S. Military is considered to be the world's strongest".[7]

Guerrilla structure
Although some groups engaged in combat, such as militants or resistance movements, refer
to themselves using military terminology, notably "Army" or "Front", none have had the
structure of a national military to justify the reference, and usually have had to rely on
support of outside national militaries. They also use these terms to conceal from the MI
their true capabilities, and to impress potential ideological recruits.
Having military intelligence representatives participate in the execution of the national
defence policy is important because it becomes the first respondent and commentator on the
policy expected strategic goal compared to the realities of identified threats. When the
intelligence reporting is compared to the policy, it becomes possible for the national
leadership to think about allocating resources over an above the officers and their
subordinates military pay and the expense of maintaining military facilities and military
support services for them.

Economics
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this
section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)

Map of military expenditures as a percentage of GDP by country, CIA figures.

Military spending in 2007, in USD, according to the Stockholm International Peace

Research Institute.
More commonly referred to as defence economics, this is the financial and monetary efforts
made to resource and sustain militaries, and to finance military operations including war.

The process of allocating resources is conducted by determining a military budget which is

administered by a military finance organisation within the military. Military procurement is
then authorised to purchase or contract provision of goods and services to the military,
whether in peacetime at a permanent base or in a combat zone from local population.

Capability development
Capability development, which is often referred to as the military "strength", is arguably
one of the most complex activities known to humanity because it requires determining:
Strategic, operational and tactical capability requirements to counter the identified threats;
Strategic, operational and tactical doctrines by which the acquired capabilities will be used;
identifying concepts, methods and systems involved in executing the doctrines; creating
design specifications for the manufacturers who would produce these in adequate quantity
and quality for their use in combat; purchase the concepts, methods and systems; create a
forces structure that would use the concepts, methods and systems most effectively and
efficiently; integrate these concepts, methods and systems into the force structure by
providing military education, training, and practice that preferably resembles combat
environment of intended use; create military logistics systems to allow continued and
uninterrupted performance of military organisations under combat conditions, including
provision of health services to the personnel and maintenance for the equipment; the
services to assist recovery of wounded personnel and repair of damaged equipment; and
finally post-conflict demobilisation and disposal of war stocks surplus to peacetime
requirements.
Development of military doctrine is perhaps the more important of all capability
development activities because it determines how military forces were, and are used in
conflicts, the concepts and methods used by the command to employ appropriately military
skilled, armed and equipped personnel in achievement of the tangible goals and objectives
of the war, campaign, battle, engagement, action or a duel.[8] The line between strategy and
tactics is not easily blurred, although deciding which is being discussed had sometimes
been a matter of personal judgement by some commentators, and military historians. The
use of forces at the level of organisation between strategic and tactical is called operational
mobility.

Science
Main article: Military science
Because most of the concepts and methods used by the military, and many of its systems
are not found in commercial branches. Much of the material is researched, designed,
developed and offered for inclusion in arsenals by military science organisations within the
overall structure of the military. Military scientists are therefore found to interact with all
Arms and Services of the armed forces, and at all levels of the military hierarchy of
command.

Although concerned with research into military psychology, and particularly combat stress
and how it affect troop morale, often the bulk of military science activities is directed at
military intelligence technology, military communications and improving military
capability through research. The design, development and prototyping of weapons, military
support equipment, and military technology in general is also an area in which lots of effort
is invested it includes everything from global communication networks and aircraft
carriers to paint and food.

Logistics
Main article: Military logistics

The Kawasaki C-1 is a tactical military transport of the Japan Air Self-Defence Force.
Possessing military capability is not sufficient if this capability cannot be deployed for, and
employed in combat operations. To achieve this, military logistics are used for the logistics
management and logistics planning of the forces supply "tail", the consumables and capital
equipment of the troops.
Although mostly concerned with the military transport as a means of delivery using
different modes of transport from military trucks to container ships operating from
permanent military base, it also involves creating field supply dumps in the rear of the
combat zone, and even forward supply points in specific unit's Tactical Area of
Responsibility.
These supply points are also used to provide military engineering services such as the
recovery of defective and derelict vehicles and weapons, maintenance of weapons in the
field, the repair and field modification of weapons and equipment, and in peacetime the
life-extension programs undertaken to allow continued use of equipment. One of the most
important role of logistics is the supply of munitions as a primary type of consumable, their
storage and disposal.

Operations
Main articles: Military strategy and Military tactics
While capability development is about enabling the military to perform its functions and
roles in executing the defence policy, how personnel and their equipment are used in
engaging the enemy, winning battles, successfully concluding campaigns, and eventually
the war, is the responsibility of military operations. Military operations oversees the policy
interpretation into military plans, allocation of capability to specific strategic, operational
and tactical goals and objectives, change in posture of the armed forces, the interaction of

Combat Arms, Combat Support Arms and Combat Support Services during combat
operations, defining of military missions and tasks during the conduct of combat,
management of military prisoners and military civil affairs, and the military occupation of
enemy territory, seizure of captured equipment, and maintenance of civil order in the
territory under its responsibility. Throughout the combat operations process, and during the
lulls in combat combat military intelligence provides reporting on the status of plan
completion and its correlation with desired, expected and achieved satisfaction of policy
fulfilment.

Performance assessment
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this
section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
The last requirement of the military is for military performance assessment and learning
from it. These two functions are performed by military historians and military theorists who
seek to identify failures and success of the armed force and integrate corrections into the
military reform with the aim of producing an improved force capable of performing
adequately should there be a national defence policy review.

In combat
The primary reason for the existence of the military is to engage in combat, should it be
required to do so by the national defence policy, and to win. This represents an
organizational goal of any military, and the primary focus for military thought through
military history.
The "show" of military force has been a term that referred as much to military force
projection, as to the units such as regiments or gunboats deployed in a particular theatre, or
as an aggregate of such forces. In the Gulf War the United States Central Command
controlled military forces (units) of each of the four military services of the United States.
How victory is achieved, and what shape it assumes is studied by most, if not all, military
groups on three levels.

Strategic victory
Main article: Strategic victory
Military strategy is the management of forces in wars and military campaigns by a
commander-in-chief employing large military forces either national and allied as a whole,
or the component elements of armies, navies and air forces such as army groups, fleets and
large numbers of aircraft. Military strategy is a long-term projection of belligerents' policy
with a broad view of outcome implications, including outside the concerns of military
command. Military strategy is more concerned with the supply of war and planning, than

management of field forces and combat between them. The scope of Strategic military
planning can span weeks, but is more often months or even years.[8]

Dutch civilians celebrating the arrival of the I Canadian Corps in Utrecht as the Canadian
Army liberates the Netherlands from Nazi occupation

Operational victory
Operational mobility is, within warfare and military doctrine, the level of command which
coordinates the minute details of tactics with the overarching goals of strategy. A common
synonym is operational art.
The operational level is at a scale bigger than one where line of sight and the time of day
are important, and smaller than the strategic level, where production and politics are
considerations. Formations are of the operational level if they are able to conduct
operations on their own, and are of sufficient size to be directly handled or have a
significant impact at the strategic level. This concept was pioneered by the German army
prior to and during the Second World War. At this level planning and duration of activities
takes from one week to a month, and are executed by Field Armies and Army Corps and
their naval and air equivalents.[8]

Tactical victory
Main article: Tactical victory
Military tactics concerns itself with the methods for engaging and defeating the enemy in
direct combat. Military tactics are usually used by units over hours or days, and are focused
on the specific, close proximity tasks and objectives of squads, companies, battalions,
regiments, brigades and divisions and their naval and air equivalents.[8]
One of the oldest military publications is The Art of War by the Chinese philosopher Sun
Tzu.[9] Written in the 6th century BCE, the 13-chapter book is intended as military
instruction and not as military theory, but has had a huge influence on Asian military
doctrine, and from the late 19th century, on European and United States military planning.

It has even been used to formulate business tactics, and can even be applied in social and
political areas[where?].

Battle formation and tactics of Macedon[10]

The Classical Greeks and the Romans wrote prolifically on military campaigning. Among
the best-known Roman works are Julius Caesar's commentaries on the Gallic Wars and the
Roman Civil war written about 50 BC.
Two major works on tactics come from the late Roman period: Taktike Theoria by Aelianus
Tacticus and De Re Militari ("On military matters") by Vegetius. Taktike Theoria examined
Greek military tactics, and was most influential in the Byzantine world and during the
Golden Age of Islam.
De Re Militari formed the basis of European military tactics until the late 17th century.
Perhaps its most enduring maxim is Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum (let he
who desires peace prepare for war).
Due to the changing nature of combat with the introduction of artillery in the European
Middle Ages, and infantry firearms in the Renaissance, attempts were made to define and
identify those strategies, grand tactics and tactics that would produce a victory more often
than that achieved by the Romans in praying to the gods before the battle.
Later this became known as military science, and later still would adopt the scientific
method approach to the conduct of military operations under the influence of the Industrial
Revolution thinking. In his seminal book On War the Prussian Major-General and leading
expert on modern military strategy Carl von Clausewitz defined military strategy as "the
employment of battles to gain the end of war."[11] According to Clausewitz
strategy forms the plan of the War, and to this end it links together the series of acts which
are to lead to the final decision, that is to say, it makes the plans for the separate campaigns
and regulates the combats to be fought in each.[12]
Hence, Clausewitz placed political aims above military goals, ensuring civilian control of
the military. Military strategy was one of a triumvirate of "arts" or "sciences" that governed
the conduct of warfare, the others being: military tactics, the execution of plans and
manoeuvring of forces in battle, and maintenance of an army.

The meaning of military tactics has changed over time from the deployment and
manoeuvring of entire land armies on the fields of ancient battles, and galley fleets, to
modern use of small unit ambushes, encirclements, bombardment attacks, frontal assaults,
air assaults, hit-and-run tactics used mainly by guerrilla forces and, in some cases, suicide
attacks on land and at sea. Evolution of aerial warfare introduced its own air combat tactics.
Often, military deception, in the form of military camouflage or misdirection using decoys,
is used to confuse the enemy as a tactic.
A major development in infantry tactics came with the increased use of trench warfare in
the 19th and 20th century. This was mainly employed in World War I in the Gallipoli
campaign and the Western Front. Trench warfare often turned to a stalemate, only broken
by a large loss of life, because in order to attack an enemy entrenchment soldiers had to run
through an exposed "no man's land" under heavy fire from an entrenched enemy.

Technology

Arrow-head. Bronze, 4th century BC. From Olynthus, Chalcidice.

Main article: Military technology and equipment
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
As with any occupation, since the ancient times the military has been distinguished from
other members of the society by their tools, the military weapons and military equipment
used in combat. When Stone Age humans first took a sliver of flint to tip the spear, it was
the first example of applying technology to improve the weapon.
Since then, the advances made by human societies and that of weapons has been
irretrievably linked. Stone weapons gave way to Bronze Age weapons, and later the Iron
Age weapons. With each technological change was realised some tangible increase in
military capability, such as through greater effectiveness of a sharper edge in defeating
leather armour, or improved density of materials used in manufacture of weapons.
On land the first really significant technological advance in warfare was the development of
the ranged weapons and notably the sling. The next significant advance came with the
domestication of the horses and mastering of equestrianism.

Mounted armored knight. Armor and cavalry dominated the battlefield until the invention
of firearms.
Arguably the greatest invention that affected not just the military, but all society, after
adoption of fire, was the wheel, and its use in the construction of the chariot. There were no
advances in military technology until, from the mechanical arm action of a slinger, the
Greeks, Egyptians, Romans, Persians, Chinese, etc. development the siege engines. The
bow was manufactured in increasingly larger and more powerful versions to increase both
the weapon range and armour penetration performance. These developed into the powerful
composite and/or recurve bows, and crossbows of Ancient China. These proved particularly
useful during the rise of cavalry, as horsemen encased in ever-more sophisticated armour
came to dominate the battlefield.
Somewhat earlier in medieval China, gunpowder had been invented, and was increasingly
used by the military in combat. The use of gunpowder in the early vase-like mortars in
Europe, and advanced versions of the long bow and cross bow, which all had armourpiercing arrowheads, that put an end to the dominance of the armoured knight. After the
long bow, which required great skill and strength to use, the next most significant
technological advance was the musket, which could be used effectively with little training.
In time the successors to muskets and cannon, in the form of rifles and artillery, would
become core battlefield technology.
As the speed of technological advances accelerated in civilian applications, so too warfare
became more industralised. The newly invented machine gun and repeating rifle redefined
firepower on the battlefield and, in part, explains the high casualty rates of the American
Civil War. The next breakthrough was the conversion of artillery parks from the muzzle
loading guns to the breech loading guns, and in particular the highly mobile, recoilless,
field-gun, the French Soixante-Quinze, in the late 19th century.
The development of breech loading had the greatest effect on naval warfare, for the first
time since the Middle Ages altering the way weapons are mounted on warships, and
therefore naval tactics, now divorced from the reliance on sails with the invention of the
internal combustion. A further advance in military naval technology was the design of the
submarine and its weapon, the torpedo.
Main battle tanks and other heavy equipment such as AFVs, Military aircraft and ships are
characteristic to organised military forces.

During World War I the need to break the deadlock of the trenches saw the rapid
development of many new technologies, particularly the tanks and military aviation.
Military aviation was extensively used, and particularly the bombers during the World War
II, which marked the most frantic period of weapons development in history. Many new
designs and concepts were used in combat, and all existing technologies were improved
between 1939 and 1945.
During the war significant advances were made in military communications through use of
radio, military intelligence through use of the radar, and in military medicine through use of
penicillin, while in the air the missile, jet aircraft and helicopters were seen for the first
time. Perhaps the most infamous of all military technologies was the creation of the atomic
bomb, although the effects of radiation were unknown until the early 1950s. Far greater use
of military vehicles had finally eliminated the cavalry from the military force structure.

AIM-7 Sparrow medium range air-to-air missile from an F-15 Eagle

After World War II, with the onset of the Cold War, the constant technological
development of new weapons was institutionalised as participants engaged in a constant
arms race in capability development. This constant state of weapons development continues
into the present, and remains a constant drain on national resources, which some blame on
the military-industrial complex.
The most significant technological developments that influenced combat have been the
guided missiles which are used by all Services. More recently, information technology, and
its use in surveillance, including space-based reconnaissance systems, have played an
increasing role in military operations.
The impact of information warfare that focuses on attacking command communication
systems, and military databases has been coupled with the new development in military
technology has been the use of robotic systems in intelligence combat, both in hardware
and software applications.
Recently, there has also been a particular focus towards the use of renewable fuels for
running military vehicles on. Unlike fossil fuels, renewable fuels can be produced in any
country, creating a strategic advantage. The US military has already committed itself to
have 50% of its energy consumption come from alternative sources.[13]
The MIRV, ICBM and the Tsar Bomb are considered the most destructive weapons
invented.

As part of society
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (October 2014)
For much of military history the armed forces were considered to be for use by the heads of
their societies, until recently, the crowned heads of states. In a democracy or other political
system run in the public interest, it is a public force.
The relationship between the military and the society it serves is a complicated and everevolving one. Much depends on the nature of the society itself and whether it sees the
military as important, as for example in time of threat or war, or a burdensome expense
typified by defence cuts in time of peace.
One difficult matter in the relation between military and society is control and transparency.
In many countries only few information on military operations and budgeting is accessible
for the public. However transparency in the military sector is crucial to fight corruption.
This showed the Government Defence Anti-corruption Index Transparency International
published in 2013.[14]
These relationships are seen from the perspective of political-military relations, the
military-industrial complex mentioned above, and the socio-military relationship. The last
can be divided between those segments of society that offer support for the military, those
who voice opposition to the military, the voluntary and involuntary civilians in the military
forces, the populations of civilians in a combat zone, and of course the military's selfperception.
Militaries often function as societies within societies, by having their own military
communities, economies, education, medicine and other aspects of a functioning civilian
society. Although a "military" is not limited to nations in of itself as many private military
companies (or PMC's) can be used or "hired" by organisations and figures as security,
escort, or other means of protection where police, agencies, or militaries are absent or not
trusted.

Ideology and ethics

Main article: Militarism
Militarist ideology is the society's social attitude of being best served, or being a
beneficiary of a government, or guided by concepts embodied in the military culture,
doctrine, system, or leaders.
Either because of the cultural memory, national history, or the potentiality of a military
threat, the militarist argument asserts that a civilian population is dependent upon, and
thereby subservient to the needs and goals of its military for continued independence.

Militarism is sometimes contrasted with the concepts of comprehensive national power,

soft power and hard power.
Most nations have separate military laws which regulate conduct in war and during
peacetime. An early exponent was Hugo Grotius, whose On the Law of War and Peace
(1625) had a major impact of the humanitarian approach to warfare development. His
theme was echoed by Gustavus Adolphus.
Ethics of warfare have developed since 1945 to create constraints on the military treatment
of prisoners and civilians primarily by the Geneva Conventions, but rarely apply to use of
the military forces as internal security troops during times of political conflict that results in
popular protests and incitement to popular uprising.
International protocols restrict the use, or have even created international bans on weapons,
notably weapons of mass destruction. International conventions define what constitutes a
war crime and provides for war crimes prosecution. Individual countries also have
elaborate codes of military justice, an example being the United States' Uniform Code of
Military Justice that can lead to court martial for military personnel found guilty of war
crimes.
Military actions are sometimes argued to be justified by furthering a humanitarian cause
such as disaster relief operations or in defence of refugees. The term military humanism is
used to refer to such actions.

Antimilitarism
Main article: Antimilitarism
Antimilitarism is the society's social attitude opposed to war between states, and in
particular countering arguments based on militarism. Following Hegel's exploration of the
relationship between history and violence, antimilitarists argue that there are different types
of violence, some of which can be said to be legitimate others non-legitimate. Anarchosyndicalist Georges Sorel advocated the use of violence as a form of direct action, calling it
"revolutionary violence", which he opposed in Reflections on Violence (1908) to the
violence inherent in class struggle. Sorel thus followed the International Workingmen's
Association theorization of propaganda of the deed.
War, as violence, can be distinguished into war between states, and civil war, in which case
class struggle is, according to antimilitarists theorists, a primordial component. Hence,
Marx's influence on antimilitarist doctrine was not surprising, although making Marx
accountable for the antimilitarist tradition is a large overstatement. The belief in the eternal
antimilitarist spirit, present in all places and time, is however a myth because the modern
military as an institution is a historic achievement formed during the 18th and 19th
centuries, as a by-product of the modern nation-states. Napoleon's invention of conscription
is a fundamental progress in the organization of state armies. Later, Prussian militarism
would be exposed by 19th century social theorists.

Stereotypes
A military brat is a colloquial term for a child with at least one parent who served as an
active duty member (vice reserve) in the armed forces. Children of armed forces members
may move around to different military bases or international postings, which gives them an
unusual childhood. Unlike common usage of the term brat, when it is used in this context,
it is not necessarily a derogatory term.

In the media
Main article: Military in the media
Soldiers and armies have been prominent in popular culture since the beginnings of
recorded history. In addition to the countless images of military leaders in heroic poses
from antiquity, they have been an enduring source of inspiration in war literature. Not all of
this has been entirely complementary and the military have been lampooned or ridiculed as
often as they have been idolised. The classical Greek writer Aristophanes, devoted an entire
comedy, Lysistrata, to a strike organised by military wives where they withhold sex from
their husbands to prevent them from going to war.
In Medieval Europe, tales of knighthood and chivalry, the officer class of the period,
captured the popular imagination. Writers and poets like Taliesin, Chrtien de Troyes and
Thomas Malory wrote tales of derring-do featuring Arthur, Guinevere, Lancelot and
Galahad. Even in the 21st century, books and films about the Arthurian legend and the
Holy Grail continue to appear.
A century or so later, in the hands of writers such as Jean Froissart, Miguel Cervantes and
William Shakespeare, the fictional knight Tirant lo Blanch and the real-life condottieri John
Hawkwood would be juxtaposed against the fantastical Don Quixote and the carousing Sir
John Falstaff. In just one play, Henry V, Shakespeare provides a whole range of military
characters, from cool-headed and clear-sighted generals, to captains, and common soldiery.

Emperor Augustus Caesar in a martial pose (1st century)

The Flight of Pompey after Pharsalus, by Jean Fouquet

Medieval view: Richard II of England meets rebels

Sir John Hawkwood (fresco in the Duomo, Florence)

Shakespeare's Sir John Falstaff by Eduard von Grtzner

"The Cruel Practices of Prince Rupert" (1643)

The rapid growth of movable type in the late 16th century and early 17th century saw an
upsurge in private publication. Political pamphlets became popular, often lampooning
military leaders for political purposes. A pamphlet directed against Prince Rupert of the
Rhine is a typical example. During the 19th century, irreverence towards authority was at
its height and for every elegant military gentleman painted by the master-portraitists of the
European courts for example, Gainsborough, Goya and Reynolds, there are the sometimes
affectionate and sometimes savage caricatures of Rowland and Hogarth.
This continued in the 19th century, with publications like Punch in the British Empire and
Le Pre Duchesne in France, poking fun at the military establishment. This extended to
media other print also. An enduring example is the Major-General's Song from the Gilbert

and Sullivan light opera, The Pirates of Penzance, where a senior army officer is satirised
for his enormous fund of irrelevant knowledge.

Colonel John Hayes St. Leger (detail) by Sir Joshua Reynolds

Rowlandson often satirised the military

"A modern major general" (The Pirates of Penzance)

Punch: war reporter, W H Russell, Crimean War

The increasing importance of cinema in the early 20th century provided a new platform for
depictions of military subjects. During the First World War, although heavily censored,
newsreels enabled those at home to see for themselves a heavily sanitised version of life at
the front line. About the same time, both pro-war and anti-war films came to the silver
screen. One of the first films on military aviation, Hell's Angels, broke all box office
records on its release in 1929. Soon, war films of all types were showing throughout the
world, notably those of Charlie Chaplin who actively promoted war bonds and voluntary
enlistment.

The First World War was also responsible for a new kind of military depiction, through
poetry. Hitherto, poetry had been used mostly to glorify or sanctify war. The Charge of the
Light Brigade by Alfred, Lord Tennyson, with its galloping hoofbeat rhythm, is a prime
late Victorian example of this, though Rudyard Kipling had written a scathing reply, The
Last of the Light Brigade, criticising the poverty in which many Light Brigade veterans
found themselves in old age. Instead, the new wave of poetry, from the war poets, was
written from the point of view of the disenchanted trench soldier.
Leading war poets included Siegfried Sassoon, Wilfred Owen, John McCrae, Rupert
Brooke, Isaac Rosenberg and David Jones. A similar movement occurred in literature,
producing a slew of novels on both sides of the Atlantic including notably All Quiet on the
Western Front and Johnny Got His Gun. The 1963 English stage musical Oh, What a
Lovely War! provided a satirical take on World War I, which was released in a cinematic
version directed by Richard Attenborough in 1969.
The propaganda war that accompanied World War II invariably depicted the enemy in
unflattering terms. Examples of this exist not only in posters but also in the films of Leni
Riefenstahl and Sergei Eisenstein.
Alongside this, World War II also inspired films as varied as Bridge on the River Kwai, The
Longest Day, Catch-22, Saving Private Ryan, and The Sea Shall Not Have Them. The next
major event, the Korean War inspired a long-running television series M*A*S*H. With the
Vietnam War, the tide of balance turned and its films, notably Apocalypse Now, Good
Morning, Vietnam, Go Tell the Spartans, Born on the Fourth of July, and We Were
Soldiers, have tended to contain critical messages.
There is even a nursery rhyme about war, "The Grand Old Duke of York", ridiculing a
general for his inability to command any further than marching his men up and down a hill.
The huge number of songs focusing on war include "And the Band Played Waltzing
Matilda" and "Universal Soldier".

Masculinity
This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying
the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original
research should be removed. (March 2013)
The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on
the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (May
2015)

Masculinity and perceptions of masculinity plays an important role in the military. Military
organizations form roles and responsibilities that they expect members to adapt to
especially under adverse and life-threatening conditions. Just like it is used within society,
masculinity is a word that is associated with the military quite often as gender hierarchy
exists in relation to gender subordinated gender constructs.[15] Studies of masculinity within
the military have been conducted with British servicemen and it was determined that

military forces are masculine institutions and the military culture support this.[16] According
to soldiers, toughness, endurance, physical prowess and aggression are requirements to be
an effective soldier.[17] Military unit cohesion is created by social rituals which entails
almost total subordination to the group and a sense of depersonalization.[15] In addition,
military culture is characterized by extremely high levels of social cohesion that is
considered essential to the unit's operational efficiency.[15] This masculine emphasis
separates rather rigidly the male from the female and puts them in conflict with one
another. There have been some attempts of changing this perception late in the 20th century
as women in combat have been portrayed in movies like "G.I. Jane" and "Down Periscope".

Masculine emotional control

Military service offers men unique resources for the construction of a masculine identity
defined by emotional control, overt heterosexual desire, physical fitness, self-discipline,
self-reliance, the willingness to use aggression and physical violence, and risk taking.[18]
Emotional control is a very important part of military training and is incorporated into
operations. Training exercises are designed to elicit strong emotions that one may face on
the battle field. Soldiers are taught to control anger, fear, and grief as to not get in the way
of difficult judgments. This type of training creates the 'warrior mindset', but it comes at a
cost as it leaves many soldiers without a healthy way to process emotions and events faced
by the battle field.[18] Unfortunately, this is believed to be the main cause of the high rate of
suicides amongst soldiers.[15] This masculine imperative for emotional self-control places
men in a prestigious position and superior to women, since women are believed to be more
emotional than men.[19] The presence of women in the military challenges this ideology.

Masculinity in military women

Femininity does have a place within the military, as it does in society, although to a much
lesser extent.[20] The increased number of women in the military undeniably signifies a shift
in policy. However, current debates focusing on women's contributions to war efforts only
serve to consolidate the dominant position of military masculinities within the institution.
Focusing on women's difference and women's ability to contribute to strategic military
objectives, they fail to challenge the very nature of the armed forces and militarism more
widely.[20] Women's role as peace makers and life bearers is thus constructed in opposition
to that of the soldier/combatant. Femininity and women are therefore excluded from this
essentially male and masculine institution[20]
Though women have long served in the Army and currently make up 15% of U.S. forces in
Iraq and Afghanistan and 30% say they served in a combat zone, recent reports attest to
their continued marginalization within Army ranks.[21] Women in the military are
marginalized because they violate one of the premises of military indoctrination and the
myth of an exclusively male-dominated world. As a result of their transgression, not only
are women excluded from key aspects of military life, but they are also subjected to
violence with great frequency.[21] Recent studies indicate that between 4360% of female
enlisted personnel experience some form of physical or sexual harassment or
violence.[citation needed] This physical and sexual abuse attests to the exclusion of women

within the military. Recently the pentagon lifted the ban on military women in combat
roles.[22]

Masculine language within the military

Within discussions among military actions and security, they are commonly seen as
gendered and directed towards a masculine approach towards war. Masculinity is seen
within the military through the use of sexual metaphors to discuss actions and missiles.
Within the military, they are commonly seen in relating missiles to phallic imagery and
discussing about warfare. But, it is also apparent through the sanitization of the discussion
to avoid the results of using weapons.[citation needed] Some examples of sexual imagery used
within the military include "Harden the missiles", and "Put missiles in a nice hole."[23]
However, the language shifts away from phallic imagery when talking about a state
involved with weapons. When referring to a state that has released nuclear weapons or
getting involved with them, the state is referred to as a woman, and is considered to have
"lost their virginity".[24] The state is referenced as a woman as there is a patriarchal
belief[citation needed] in which the state has lost its innocence for getting involved with the
taboo; nuclear weapons. By using sexual metaphors, the seriousness of war is reduced
significantly and is no longer seen as dangerous or life-threatening.[23] Using sexual
metaphors help to promote a false sense of excitement, and willingness to support the idea
of weapons used within the military. It is shown as glamourising the concept of military
action through sexual imagery and encouraging others to agree with sexual imagery that
attracts masculinity. There is also an attraction to the belief of sexual dominance within the
military with the use of sexual metaphors. In the international community, the use of sexual
metaphors promotes the idea of "missile" envy, in which by using sexual metaphors,
countries become motivated to develop their nuclear force in order to compete with other
nations.[23] This displays how little moral values are considered within the military and how
the idea of patriarchy remains evident. Feminist critics challenge this masculine
language.[citation needed] By using sexual metaphors, a masculine image is promoted towards
other nations and is displayed as something nations want to strive to be. Feminist critics
argue that there is no evidence that feminist criticism has reached out to the men of the
military and gotten their understanding on how discussions within the military are
gendered.[24]
With discussions regarding weapons, the language used is often abstract. For instance,
"clean bombs" refers to bombs with high amounts of energy used for explosive power,
while "collateral damage" refers to human deaths caused as a result of nuclear
weapons.[citation needed][24] However, using abstract words to discuss the outcomes of war
emphasizes the lack of emotion or concern towards the use of weapons. By using abstract
language to cover up the severity of violence, the association between masculinity and the
military is enforced. Femininity is generally not seen within military negotiations as the use
of male dominated language is seen as normalized within discussions in the military.
Within the military, discussions about non-militaristic topics (emotions, peace talks,
identity, etc.) are considered to be "feminine" values or "fluff".[citation needed][23] There is fear
of appearing feminized towards colleagues within the military and fear about having their
masculinity challenged for expressing their opinions against certain actions.[25]

See also
Military history portal
War portal

Mercenary
Military terminology
Private military company

References
1.
Terra cotta of massed ranks of Qin Shi Huang's terra cotta soldiers
Oxford English Dictionary (2nd edition) Oxford: 1994
Harper, Douglas. "military". Online Etymology Dictionary.
Tucker, T.G. (1985) Etymological dictionary of Latin, Ares publishers Inc., Chicago.
p. 156
Oxford dictionary
"Merriam Webster Dictionary online". Merriam-webster.com. Retrieved 2011-08-01.
Statistics on Americans' opinion about the U.S. being the world's no1 military power,
Gallup, March 2012. Retrieved May 3, 2013.
Dupuy, T.N. (1990) Understanding war: History and Theory of combat, Leo Cooper,
London, p. 67
"The Art of War". Mypivots.com. 2011-06-11. Retrieved 2011-08-01.
"Welcome to the Department of History". westpoint.edu. Retrieved 2011-08-01.
MacHenry, Robert (1993). The New Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia
Britannica, Incorporated. p. 305.
"On War by General Carl von Clausewitz". gutenberg.org. Retrieved 2007-05-31.
Craig Hooper. "Ray Mabus greening the military". Nextnavy.com. Retrieved 2012-0522.
Pyman, Mark (March 2013). "Transparency is feasible". dandc.eu.
Braswell, H; Kushner, H. I. (2012). "Suicide, social integration, and masculinity in the
U.S. Military". Social Science & Medicine 74 (4): 5306.
doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.07.031. PMID 21036443. edit
Gender and the armed forces. research.ncl.ac.uk
Green, Gill (2010). "Exploring the Ambiguities of Masculinity in Accounts of
Emotional Distress in the Military Among Young Ex-servicemen". Social Science &
Medicine 71: 14801488. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.07.015.
Eisold, K. (2010-06-01). The stoism of soldiers. psychologytoday.com
Spade, J.Z. & Valentine, C.G. (2011). The Kaleidoscope of Gender. Pine Forge Press:
CA.

 Guerrina, Roberta. (2012-09-26). Birthing on the front line: A tale of military

femininity. e-ir.info
Hynes, Patricia (2012-01-26) Military sexual abuse: A greater menace than combat.
truth-out.org
Pentagons Lifting of Combat Ban Comes as Role of Military Women Grows.
pewresearch.org. 2013-01-24
Duncanson, Claire; Eschle, Catherine (1 December 2008). "Gender and the Nuclear
Weapons State: A Feminist Critique of the UK Government's White Paper on Trident".
New Political Scienc 30 (4): 545563. doi:10.1080/07393140802518120.
Cohn, Carol (Summer 1987). "Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense
Intellectuals". Signs. Within and Without: Women, Gender, and Theory 12 (4): 687718.
doi:10.1086/494362.
25. Enloe, Cynthia (Jan 2004). "'Gender' is not enough: the need for a feminist
consciousness". International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944
) 80 (1): 9597. doi:10.1111/j..2004.00370.x.

External links

Military Expenditure % of GDP hosted by Lebanese economy forum, extracted

from the World Bank public data
Find more about
military
at Wikipedia's sister projects
Definitions from Wiktionary
Media from Commons
News stories from Wikinews
Quotations from Wikiquote
Source texts from Wikisource
Textbooks from Wikibooks
Learning resources from Wikiversity

Military at DMOZ

Categories:

Military
Military terminology
Defense

Navigation menu

Create account
Log in

Article
Talk

Read
Edit
View history

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction

Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools

What links here

Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export

Create a book

Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages

Alemannisch

Aragons

()

Bosanski
Brezhoneg

Catal
etina
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Espaol
Esperanto
Euskara

Fiji Hindi
Froyskt
Franais
Frysk
Galego
/Hak-k-ng

Hrvatski
Ilokano
Bahasa Indonesia
slenska
Italiano

Basa Jawa

Kiswahili
Latina
Latvieu
Ltzebuergesch

Lietuvi

Bahasa Melayu
Mng-dng-ng
Mirands

Norsk bokml
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan

Piemontis
Plattdtsch
Portugus

Scots

Simple English
Slovenina
Slovenina

/ srpski
Srpskohrvatski /
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog

Trke

Vneto
Ting Vit
Vro
Winaray

Edit links

This page was last modified on 31 May 2015, at 06:35.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License;
additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and
Privacy Policy. Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation,
Inc., a non-profit organization.