Between Threats and War

I’m working on a Political Science exercise and need support.

Please read Zenko’s Between Threats and War and answer the following:

1. How might we critique Zenko’s coding of success for DMOs?

2. Propose a different rubric (i.e. analytical framework!) for defining and assessing the success of military intervention.

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE FOR THE ANSWER ( DOES NOT HAVE TO BE A WHOLE PAGE) SHORT, CLEAR AND STRAIGHT TO THE POINT. PLEASE DON’T COPY IT.

How might we critique Zenko’s coding of success for DMOs?

I thought that DMOs meant carrying out top-secret military operatives but its more than that, he defines it as “a single or serial physical use of kinetic military force to achieve a defined military and political goal by inflicting casualties or causing destruction, without seeking to conquer an opposing army or to capture or control territory.” (2) In my opinion, it seems that each DMO has its own different results depending on its surroundings. With different factors (human coordination, intel nature, weapon maintenance, geographical location, etc.) that can result in different outcomes, it is hard to determine when the event will result in success.

2. Propose a different rubric (i.e. analytical framework!) for defining and assessing the success of military intervention.

The factors that can consist of different analytical framework for success could be the motives for using deterrence, coercion, and punishment and how much force should be used. Also, analyzing the benefits of achieving these types of goals for political and military motives beforehand could improvise a strategy for a successful military intervention rather than just counting corpses.

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get a Discount!