Example collocations logo

Military in sentence

8691 examples of Military in a sentence

September 1939 taught every Pole that military power must be real to be effective.
Beyond the amped-up military and the powerful security services, there is now the National Guard of the Russian Federation, or Rosgvardiya, a contingent of some 340,000 personnel created by Putin in 2016 that answers directly to him.
The roots of failure lie in the US and Israeli governments’ belief that military force and financial repression can lead to peace on their terms, rather than accepting a compromise on terms that the Middle East, the rest of the world, and, crucially, most Israelis and Palestinians, accepted long ago.
Although Israel formally withdrew from Gaza, its complete control over the borders, infrastructure, transport, and taxation, together with its regular military incursions in response to shelling from Gaza and its killings and capture of senior Hamas officials, left Palestinians there desperate.
The Rise of Mid-Level PowersThe security environment since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States has clearly demonstrated the limits of the United Nations, or even the US as the world’s sole military superpower, to maintain international security.
Such practical proposals address key global issues, including international terrorism, strengthening of mechanisms for arms control, arms reduction, and non-proliferation, efforts to contain attempts by North Korea and Iran to develop nuclear weapons, encouraging transparency in China’s military, restraining Russia’s imperial ambitions, and building a global ballistic missile defense network against missiles that could be launched by rogue regimes.
The US, for example, currently spends around $450 billion each year on its military, but less than $15 billion to help the world's poorest countries fight disease, educate their children, and protect the environment.
This is a mistake, because military approaches alone cannot make America safe.
This regional stasis may worsen as a result of growing nationalism; an increase in social divisions within states; weapons proliferation and an increase in military spending; and environmental degradation.
Yet Arafat’s replacement, Mahmoud Abbas, was a colorless, not particularly strong figure with no real political or military base of his own.
In both Algeria and Egypt, secular forces were incapable of stemming political Islam’s rise, which could be cut short only by a military takeover.
The Algerian military coup eventually ushered in a bloody civil war that is estimated to have taken more than 200,000 lives.
After having failed to reverse Hamas’s electoral victory by military means, the PLO agreed with its Islamist rivals on a plan for national reconciliation; but this pact remains a dead letter.
The demise of military dictatorships and the spread of democratic regimes throughout Latin America (except for Cuba) means that even severe economic, class, ethnic, and other tensions now more often manifest themselves politically, in struggles for votes and influence.
Indeed, adopting a hardline stance has enabled her to whitewash some inconvenient family history: Her father, the dictator Park Chung-hee, collaborated with the Japanese military while Korea was under colonial rule.
Military reforms have stalled, as if Russia had all the time in the world to rationalize and modernize its defenses.
With so many former military officers serving in Trump’s cabinet or as advisers, even as Trump cozies up to Russian President Vladimir Putin and anchors an informal alliance of dictators and authoritarians around the world, it is likely that the US will spend more money on weapons that don’t work to use against enemies that don’t exist.
A unilateral military strike would carry potentially dire consequences.
The zone should also enforce economic and political sanctions on states that choose to remain outside, and – again, supported by the Security Council’s permanent members – impose military sanctions on those that try to develop WMDs.
Peace Through DevelopmentNew York – American foreign policy has failed in recent years mainly because the United States relied on military force to address problems that demand development assistance and diplomacy.
America vastly overspends on the military compared with other areas of government.
For the coming 2010 fiscal year, Obama’s budget calls for $755 billion in military spending, an amount that exceeds US budget spending in all other areas except so-called “mandatory” spending on social security, health care, interest payments on the national debt, and a few other items.
Indeed, US military spending exceeds the sum of federal budgetary outlays for education, agriculture, climate change, environmental protection, ocean protection, energy systems, homeland security, low-income housing, national parks and national land management, the judicial system, international development, diplomatic operations, highways, public transport, veterans affairs, space exploration and science, civilian research and development, civil engineering for waterways, dams, bridges, sewerage and waste treatment, community development, and many other areas.
This preponderance of military spending applies to all ten years of Obama’s medium-term scenario.
By 2019, total military spending is projected to be $8.2 trillion, exceeding by $2 trillion the budgeted outlays for all non-mandatory budget spending.
US military spending is equally remarkable when viewed from an international perspective.
According to the Swedish International Peace Research Institute, total military spending in constant 2005 dollars reached roughly $1.4 trillion in 2007.
It is easy to see how the persistence of instability in Iraq, Iranian influence, and al-Qaeda’s presence will lead American policymakers to take the “safe” route of continued military involvement.
Some opponents of the Iraq War, including me, believe that a fundamental – and deeply misguided – objective of the war from the outset has been to create a long-term military base (or bases) in Iraq, ostensibly to protect oil routes and oil concessions.
The problem is that a US military response is essentially useless under these conditions, and can easily inflame the situation rather than resolve it.
BackNext