{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Are there other values to defend these 2 can conflict

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: not differ, but the philosophies to not agree Ex. Both scholars (realist and utopian) would defend U.S. intervention in WW2 Utopian: gross human rights abuses to justify intervention Realist – Germany got too strong, must balance against Arnold Wolfers Concerned that the definition of security had become too ambiguous, lost it’s meaning National Security: specifications are needed in order to make the terms useful for “sound political counsel or scientific usage” How do we make this definition more specific? Whose values are being promoted? Needed precision, had lost it’s meaning. What do you think the strategic threats to the United States are? What are the values we are willing to protect and defend? Security Definition – absence of threats to acquired values, this definition doesn’t change, but specifications change/ vary over time For whom? – individual/ state, & international system For which values? – 1. Political independence 2. Territorial integrity Definition of sovereignty (should we open this up? Are there other values to defend? These 2...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}