Example collocations logo

Military in sentence

8691 examples of Military in a sentence

Both sides should commit to an end to assassinations, shelling, bombings, and any other form of attacks on the other side’s military targets and citizens.
Syria’s Balkan TragedyBERLIN – Pacifist doctrines may say otherwise, but combining diplomacy with the threat of military force is a highly effective tactic, as we have just seen in Syria.
It was the credibility of the United States’ threat of military intervention that seems to have led Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to cut a deal brokered by his main allies, Russia and, less directly, Iran.
The deal struck by the US and Russia triggered widespread relief in most Western capitals, where political leaders simply are not prepared for military intervention, even if Syria’s government is killing its own people with poison gas (on this score, the agreement amounts to a confession by Assad).
Military intervention has no visible end point and would only increase chaos.
Of course, there is no denying the dangers associated with a military intervention: regional expansion of the conflict, the deaths of many more innocent people, and the strengthening of extremist forces among the rebels, to name only a few.
But all of this has been happening already, and it will continue to happen, especially without American military intervention.
For Russia, regime change in Syria – its last military outpost in the region – would be another bitter defeat; for Iran, it would mean losing its most important ally in the Arab world, implying even deeper isolation.
Thus, in contrast to the West’s temporizing, the strategy of Assad’s allies is clearly defined: military victory for the regime, backed by ample supplies of weapons and, in the case of Iran, Lebanese proxy troops from Hezbollah on the ground.
Obama committed a fateful error when, for domestic political reasons, he decided to ask the US Congress to agree to a limited punitive military strike.
But, as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey implied when he opened the door to a discussion of a US ground component in the campaign against the Islamic State, US military power cannot be used incrementally and indecisively.
While NATO enlargement did not bring any real security threats toward Russia, it changed the military balance between Russia and the West, fueling the Kremlin’s revisionism.
Obama’s other option – to launch a military attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities – is a non-starter.
As that date approaches, America's military build-up around Iraq continues at a furious pace, with Britain also mobilizing.
Without his determination, backed by a highly credible show of military force and skilful diplomacy, Iraq's military programmes would not now be exposed to a scrutiny more intense than that applied to any other would-be proliferator in the world today.
If in the course of inspections Iraq were exposed as having lied and cheated this would be a confirmation of the effectiveness of the inspections, scarcely a justification for military reprisals.
The best "serious consequences" of which the UN Security Council has warned should Iraq fail to comply with its obligations would be an even more intense effort to destroy its illicit weapons through continuous inspections of the country's offensive military capabilities: inspectors, not invaders.
To make a hostile country comply the threat of military action must be seen as real, the will of the power seeking to deter to follow on its threats must be clear and evident.
Yet even the most enthusiastic advocates of military action against Iraq have to admit that such steps carry considerable risks, and no expert on the region I know shares the view, popular among arm-chair orientologists, that a change of regime in Baghdad will usher in a period of peace and stability all over the Middle East.
Mr. Bush's international credibility, they should emphasize, does not suffer through avoiding a war but gains further through controlling Iraq's hitherto covert military effort.
One might think there would be a revolution, but so far Maduro has been able to keep the military on the regime’s side in part by granting it license to run a massive drug-trafficking operation that exports cocaine around the world, particularly to Europe and the Middle East.
Whether or not the new currency takes root, we can be sure that the Venezuelan military will continue to conduct its operations in $100 bills.
American military intervention is of course a crazy idea, and even the many Latin American leaders who desperately want to see the regime go would never support it.
Europe’s New Mission in AfricaThe EU’s military mission to ensure free and fair elections in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has shown what the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) can achieve in Africa.
Three years later, Operation Artemis, a comparable EU mission in the eastern province of Ituri, again demonstrated Europe’s resolve to use its military capability to underpin a long-term peace process.
For some people, raw military might is the only true measure of power.
But the 16 EU military missions that have now been carried out in support of the ESDP have much more to commend them.
In the early stages of a crisis, European intervention – through political and financial assistance, diplomatic intervention, and even military action – can prevent it from erupting into violence.
In countries that have experienced the horrors of civil war, the arrival of an effective military force from outside is generally welcomed, as was the case in both the 2003 and 2006 Congo operations.
Yet, taken together, the EU countries possess a considerable array of assets, including the military capability needed to conduct decisive operations.
BackNext