Nicht lieferbar
Andere Kunden interessierten sich auch für
![Better, Faster, Cheaper: Acquisitions in the 21st Century]( "Better, Faster, Cheaper: Acquisitions in the 21st Century")
Better, Faster, Cheaper: Acquisitions in the 21st Century52,99 €![An Analysis of Total System Performance Responsibility in Air Force Acquisitions]( "An Analysis of Total System Performance Responsibility in Air Force Acquisitions")
An Analysis of Total System Performance Responsibility in Air Force Acquisitions52,99 €![Relevance: How the United States Air Force Can Continue to Provide Relevant Space Support to Combatant Commanders]( "Relevance: How the United States Air Force Can Continue to Provide Relevant Space Support to Combatant Commanders")
Relevance: How the United States Air Force Can Continue to Provide Relevant Space Support to Combatant Commanders53,99 €![Back to the Future: Does History Support the Expeditionary Air Force Concept?]( "Back to the Future: Does History Support the Expeditionary Air Force Concept?")
Back to the Future: Does History Support the Expeditionary Air Force Concept?52,99 €
Over the course of time, countries have used different standards to determine if their military units were successful. For a while, America defined success as the annihilation of its opponent's armed forces.1 On the other hand, the North Vietnamese defined success against the United States as avoiding defeat.2 Achieving success in battle can also alter the definition of success for the future. Napoleon's quick victories changed how the world viewed success. Winning quickly was now the standard.