Although much is known about the political stance of the military at large during the Civil War, the political party affiliations of individual soldiers have received little attention. Drawing on archival sources from twenty-five generals and 250 volunteer officers and enlisted men, John Matsui offers the first major study to examine the ways in which individual politics were as important as military considerations to battlefield outcomes and how the experience of war could alter soldiers’ political views. The conservative war aims pursued by Abraham Lincoln’s generals (and to some extent, the president himself) in the first year of the American Civil War focused on the preservation of the Union and the restoration of the antebellum status quo. This approach was particularly evident in the prevailing policies and attitudes toward Confederacy-supporting Southern civilians and slavery. But this changed in Virginia during the summer of 1862 with the formation of the Army of Virginia. If the Army of the Potomac (the major Union force in Virginia) was dominated by generals who concurred with the ideology of the Democratic Party, the Army of Virginia (though likewise a Union force) was its political opposite, from its senior generals to the common soldiers. The majority of officers and soldiers in the Army of Virginia saw slavery and pro-Confederate civilians as crucial components of the rebel war effort and blamed them for prolonging the war. The frustrating occupation experiences of the Army of Virginia radicalized them further, making them a vanguard against Southern rebellion and slavery within the Union army as a whole and paving the way for Abraham Lincoln to issue the Emancipation Proclamation.

Is terrorism ever morally justified? How should historical and cultural factors be taken into account in judging the morality of terrorist acts? What are the ethical limits of state counter-terrorism?For three decades the Provisional Irish Republican Army waged an 'armed struggle' against what it considered to be the British occupation of Northern Ireland. To its supporters, the IRA was the legitimate army of Ireland, fighting to force a British withdrawal as a prelude to the re-unification of the Irish nation. To its enemies, the IRA was an illegal, fanatical, terrorist organization whose members were criminals willing to sacrifice innocent lives in pursuit of its ideological obsession. At the centre of the conflict were the then unconventional tactics employed by the IRA, including sectarian killings, political assassinations, and bombings that devastated urban centres - tactics that have become increasingly commonplace in the post-9/11 world.This book is the first detailed philosophical examination of the morality of the IRA's violent campaign, and of the British government's attempts to end it. Written in clear, accessible prose, it is essential reading for anyone wishing to acquire a deeper understanding of one of the paradigmatic conflicts of the late 20th century.

The Republican Roman Army assembles a wide range of source material and introduces the latest scholarship on the evolution of the Roman Army and the Roman experience of war. The author has carefully selected and translated key texts, many of them not previously available in English, and provided them with comprehensive commentaries and essays. This wide-ranging survey of documents recreates the social and historical framework in which ancient Roman warfare took place – from the Archaic and Servian period through to the Late Republic. The topics addressed extend beyond the conventional questions of army mechanics such as strategy and tactics, and explore questions such as the army’s influence on Roman society and its economy. Complete with notes, index and bibliography, The Republican Roman Army provides students of Ancient and Military History with an unprecedented survey of relevant materials.

The profoundly sad and bitter story of Irish resistance to Britain’s occupation and administration of the six counties of Northern Ireland extends over 800 years and encompasses suffering on both sides of the conflict. The Catholic Irish, the Protestant Irish, and the British armed forces have, until recently, seemed caught up in an unbreakable cycle of violence and tragedy. Susie Derkins untangles this long history of grievance and retribution, while carefully examining the latest and most promising efforts by all sides to find peace and reconciliation.

Fighting for Ireland? is the first in-depth account of the evolution of Irish Republican strategy. It is highly topical in the light of the faltering peace process and the growing speculation over the IRA's next move: further violence or a new non-violent strategy? This new, updated paperback edition is essential reading for those who wish to disentangle the complex issues and motives behind IRA violence. M.L.R. Smith challenges many assumptions about the IRA, pinpointing the organisation's successes as well as its missed opportunities. He demonstrates the tension the movement has experienced between ideology and strategic reality regarding the use of force, illustrating how doctrinal purity has sometimes hampered the IRA in the pursuit of its goals. Contrary to the Irish Republican movement's vigorous and assertive public face Smith uncovers an organisation characterised more by a sense of chronic insecurity than by certainty and continuity.

This work provides an organizational history of the maneuver brigade and case studies of its employment throughout the various wars. Apart from the text, the appendices at the end of the work provide a ready reference to all brigade organizations used in the Army since 1917 and the history of the brigade colors.

In a searing analysis of the Civil War North as revealed in contemporary letters, diaries, and documents, Gallagher demonstrates that what motivated the North to go to war and persist in an increasingly bloody effort was primarily preservation of the Union.