0
Why do some argue that jomini represents the scientific view of war and strategy?
Wiki User
∙ 11y agoWant this question answered?
Be notified when an answer is posted
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Did Romulus and Remus argue about where to build their city?
Yes, Romulus and Remus did argue to build their city
How can you use the map to argue that Alexander was no great document A?
How can you use the map to argue that Alexander was great?
In what way was the Emancipation Proclamation a part of Lincoln's military strategy?
Many people argue that in addition to being a human rights issue, the Emancipation Proclamation was also part of Lincoln's military strategy. Freeing the slaves would not only cause less chance of riot and rebellion on their part, but also provide more able bodies for his own army needs.
What did The Federalist argue about the constitution?
About Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson
What did Henry George argue in progress and poverty?
yes
Why did nativists use scientific ideas to argue?
That whites were superior to other races
What did nativist scientific ideas to argue?
They argued that white was the superior race. And that immigrants would destroy the country
Why did scientists argue against Wegener's continental drift hypothesis?
Because he didnt have enough "scientific" eviedence
What can you learn from scientific argumentation?
With scientific argumentation comes knowing about something you believe is true. When you argue about things you not only try to prove what you believe but you can change your point of veiw by what some one else says.
What research has been done on aura therapy?
Skeptics argue that there are no scientific studies documenting the benefits of aura therapy or the existence of a human biofield.
What did nativists use scientific ideas to argue?
They argued that white was the superior race. And that immigrants would destroy the country
Dr. lanyon and Dr. jekll argue over?
Dr. Lanyon and Dr. Jekyll argue over Jekyll's scientific experiments and their ethical implications. Jekyll believes in pushing the boundaries of science and embracing new discoveries, while Lanyon is more cautious and concerned about the potential consequences of Jekyll's work. Their disagreement reflects a larger debate about the responsibility of scientists and the ethics of scientific innovation.
Has the theory about the bible being the most scientific book changed?
Please see the related link below.Many scientists today do not believe in the Bible, and would argue that it is not scientific. However, there are still some scientists who believe the Bible is true. The chart in the related link shows scientific facts from the Bible.
Why didnt he argue with me but argue with my friend?
Argue about what. Be more specific.
Is this true the national military strategy of the unite states today includes three principal elements deterrence inflexible response and forward strategy?
To the extent that one can argue that the United States has a coherent military strategy at all, yes, that sounds about right. No. Those are not the three principals of the National Military Strategy. According to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in his briefing to the Joint Chiefs, The National Military Strategy of the United States of America: A Strategy for Today, A Vision for Tomorrow, the NMS (National Military Strategy) supports the National Security Strategy (NSS) and implements the National Defense Strategy (NDS). The NMS is, basically; to protect the United States against external attacks and aggression; prevent conflict and surprise attack; and prevail against adversaries. To read the unclassified briefing paper, see the link below.
Which is the best hunter- the lion or the cheetah and why?
If you want to argue for the lions, you talk about their coordinated efforts, general strategies, etc. If you want to talk about the cheetah, you can talk about their physical might (speed, endurance, etc.). I think if you want to argue for the lions, you argue that they are the more intelligent and therefore the more /skilled/ hunter, while if you want to argue for the cheetah, you argue that they are /physically/ stronger than a lion. Though, I'm not sure if this is a very scientific approach... Maybe if you bolster your case with statistics and the size of the animals the lion/cheetah hunt in relation to its own size? :D
What is the Hebrew word for argue?
to argue = hitvake'akh (??????)
