為什麼布衣小子不喜歡馬總統的原因?(第四篇)

ROC.jpg   馬英九

國家承諾下的傳統武力?

四月八日二零一二年/台灣窮小子

感想概論:

序言:國家承諾;

簡單來說,重整國家的傳統軍事能力來擊敗,極端歷史暴力和恐怖主義,強調的分化,挑撥,甚至,顛覆的安全威脅

國家承諾下的傳統武力

理由開始:

依據長期以來的研讀經驗來看:國家面對非傳統安全威脅,僅是,小案例;

反而是,在許多事件下,極端歷史暴力和恐怖主義打擊,和非國家的威脅持續地出現挑戰;

簡單來說,我們應該重新承認它們是非傳統的對手;

在歷史直線下,國家所面臨的威脅是相對可預測性和有充分理由的理解;

但是,極端歷史暴力和恐怖主義是非國家行為者;

所以,我們必須重整國家的傳統軍事能力來擊敗其最強調的分化,挑撥,甚至,顛覆的威脅;

因為國家只有一個;

是以,重整國家的傳統軍事能力的關鍵問題是重新強化傳統的軍事能力;

來面對非傳統的安全威脅挑戰;

換句話說,重整國家軍事優勢來超越任何可能性競爭者的戰略部署;

簡單來說,重整國家軍事優勢來面對國家政治的不確定性;

特別是,國防部長有言中肯,尤其是,(空一格)馬總統所強調的國家承諾;

相對於過去,我們現在應該考慮的是未來的國家承諾下的傳統武力來面對不確定性的安全挑戰;

特別是,有效組合傳統武力的嚇阻關係;

國家承諾說明許多政策問題,特別是,重整傳統武力;

換句話說,它不僅是投資,更也是安全保障和持續性安全夥伴關係;

然而,這類不相關於老掉牙歷史,狹隘文化和不倫不類的哲學,等等;

簡言之,國家優勢;

所以,誰說的呢?美國有言正確!

或如:

一,傳統武力的嚇阻關係,似乎是,政治,軍事和經濟條件下的夥伴關係;

二,傳統武力的嚇阻關係,維持一個穩定的夥伴關係;

三,雖然,嚇阻關係,可能有軍事衝突考量,但是,其能夠意識到誤解等意外,進而,共同的避免;

總之,傳統武力的嚇阻關係,有助於夥伴關係的決策能力,同時,可以有穩定危機,避免衝突

可能,布衣小子的眼睛又給喇仔肉糊到?

National commitment of conventional forces.

Foreword:

National commitment - simply put,we have to redintegrate national traditional military capabilities to defeat Violent historical-extremism,and Terrorism,which they are forcing secure threats of disunion,instigation,even,subversion.
Reason is beginning:
In accordance with study experience,in a longer-term,has shown that nation meets non-traditional secure threats is only small case,instead,in many of affairs,Violent historical-extremism,and Terrorism attacks non-nations threats,which continuely to show challenges - simply put,we should re-acknowledge them which are non-traditional antagonists.
The threats confronting the nation are comparatively predictable,and have full of explanatorily understood.
Because Violent historical-extremism,and Terrorism are non-nation actors,so,we have to redintegrate national traditional military capabilities to defeat its most forcing threats of disunion,instigation,even,subversion.
Because nation is only one we have owned.
So,as a key of national traditional military capabilities to redintegrate,in which,in order to re-intensify traditional military capabilities to meet non-traditional secure threats of challenge.
In other words,to redintegrate national military superiority over any potential antagonists of strategic deployment.
Simply put,national military superiority to redintegrate,which meet national politico-uncertainty.
In particular,mnister of dfence explanation was right,and especially,Mr.President.Ma has emphasized that it would be national commitment.
Relative to the past,we,now,should consider that the future of national commitment of conventional forces,in order to meet uncertain of secure challenge,in particular,the most effective mix conventional forces of deterrent relationship.
National commitment has shown many of policy issues,especially, re-intensify traditional military capabilities.
National commitment has shown many of policy issues,especially, re-intensify traditional military capabilities.
In other words,it is not only investment,even,as secure promise,and secure partnership of sustainability.Yet,they are not related to very oldest of history,and narrow-minded of culture,and non-descript of philosophy,so on.
In short,it will be national superiority.
So,whose said? The expalnation of the U.S. is exactly right.
Such as followed:
1,Traditional military capabilities of deterrent relationship has seemed
political,military,and economic conditions in the partnership.
2,Traditional military capabilities of deterrent relationship is maintaining a stable partnership.
3,Although,deterrent relationship may have military conflict of concern,but its can awake to misperception,or accident,and than,we are working together to avoid them.
To sum up,traditional military capabilities of deterrent relationship will help partnership of strategic capabilities.Meanwhile,they may have stable crises,and avoid conflicts.
Perhaps that 布衣小子's eyes have also driven insane,or not?

 

    文章標籤

    國家承諾

    全站熱搜

    台灣窮小子 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()