Write My Essay We are the most trusted essay writing service. Get the best essays delivered by experienced UK & US essay writers at affordable prices.
We can work on Outright “cyber war”
What does outright âcyber warâlook like to you and do you believe that there is a risk of it occurring in the near future? What would differentiate cyber war from other forms of conflict and statecraft?
Sample Solution
Brenden Simms eludes to when he states that âThe Grande armee was not bled to death by a thousand cuts, worn down by British sponsored guerrillas (in Spain) or starved into submission by the Royal Navy: it was totally destroyed at great cost in Russia in 1812â â Brendan Simms, Napoleon a political life- This argument has much validity to it as we know that Napoleon lost an estimated half a million men, thousands of horses and one thousand cannons in a single failed campaign. This loss is arguably one of the main reasons for the downfall of Napoleon at Waterloo, Napoleon himself recognised that âIn most battles the Guard artillery is the deciding factorâ¦â Previously â⦠French gunners dominated Europeâs battlefields in the 19th century because of their aggressive tactics, imaginative leaders and their raw courageâ and so without their actual cannons any remaining experienced French gunners were rendered almost useless due to a lack of actual cannons in the French army. General Blücher later privately reflected that âagainst that fellow [Napoleon] you need cannons and lots of themâ and so it only seems appropriate that Napoleon felt similarly towards Wellington and Blücher hence why this loss of artillery resulted in his ultimate downfall. Jonathan Riley argues that âIt is ironic that, having succeeded in so many campaigns on the basis of just enough, just in time, he failed in Russia after the most extensive preparations undertaken in the history of warfare up to that point.â â How Good Was Napoleon? â By Jonathon Riley Britten-Austin agrees when he writes that âThe biggest, most spectacular army Europe had ever raisedâ was decimated in a matter of months through an unwillingness to abandon all Napoleon had conquered in Russia without concessions from the Tsar. Despite this astounding loss of men, an estimated 20,000 returned from the original 600,000 that left for Russia, it was the loss of horses and cannons that damaged him most. Britten-Austen tells us that âmen could be easily replaced, not horsesâ and that âit was because of his lack of cavalry that Napoleon was eventually defeated by Austria, Prussia, Sweden and Russia, in 1813.â This became evident in the Waterloo campaign of 1815 as after more than twenty years of warfare the number of horses available for military use had been significantly eroded across the continent and this meant that at Waterloo the British had access to the finest contemporary cavalry units which was arguably a deciding factor in the Emperorâs>
60
SHARES
Share on Facebook
Tweet
Follow us
Share
Share
Share
Share
Share
Brenden Simms eludes to when he states that âThe Grande armee was not bled to death by a thousand cuts, worn down by British sponsored guerrillas (in Spain) or starved into submission by the Royal Navy: it was totally destroyed at great cost in Russia in 1812â â Brendan Simms, Napoleon a political life- This argument has much validity to it as we know that Napoleon lost an estimated half a million men, thousands of horses and one thousand cannons in a single failed campaign. This loss is arguably one of the main reasons for the downfall of Napoleon at Waterloo, Napoleon himself recognised that âIn most battles the Guard artillery is the deciding factorâ¦â Previously â⦠French gunners dominated Europeâs battlefields in the 19th century because of their aggressive tactics, imaginative leaders and their raw courageâ and so without their actual cannons any remaining experienced French gunners were rendered almost useless due to a lack of actual cannons in the French army. General Blücher later privately reflected that âagainst that fellow [Napoleon] you need cannons and lots of themâ and so it only seems appropriate that Napoleon felt similarly towards Wellington and Blücher hence why this loss of artillery resulted in his ultimate downfall. Jonathan Riley argues that âIt is ironic that, having succeeded in so many campaigns on the basis of just enough, just in time, he failed in Russia after the most extensive preparations undertaken in the history of warfare up to that point.â â How Good Was Napoleon? â By Jonathon Riley Britten-Austin agrees when he writes that âThe biggest, most spectacular army Europe had ever raisedâ was decimated in a matter of months through an unwillingness to abandon all Napoleon had conquered in Russia without concessions from the Tsar. Despite this astounding loss of men, an estimated 20,000 returned from the original 600,000 that left for Russia, it was the loss of horses and cannons that damaged him most. Britten-Austen tells us that âmen could be easily replaced, not horsesâ and that âit was because of his lack of cavalry that Napoleon was eventually defeated by Austria, Prussia, Sweden and Russia, in 1813.â This became evident in the Waterloo campaign of 1815 as after more than twenty years of warfare the number of horses available for military use had been significantly eroded across the continent and this meant that at Waterloo the British had access to the finest contemporary cavalry units which was arguably a deciding factor in the Emperorâs>
Is this question part of your Assignment?
We can help
Our aim is to help you get A+ grades on your Coursework.
We handle assignments in a multiplicity of subject areas including Admission Essays, General Essays, Case Studies, Coursework, Dissertations, Editing, Research Papers, and Research proposals