THE CITADEL THE MILITARY COLLEGE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ANNUAL REPORT 1992-1993

South Carolina laws require that each state agency submit an annual accountability report to the Governor and General Assembly that contains the agency's or department's mission, objectives to accomplish the mission, and performance measures that show the degree to which objectives are being met.

THE CITADEL THE MILITARY COLLEGE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ANNUAL REPORT 1993-1994

South Carolina laws require that each state agency submit an annual accountability report to the Governor and General Assembly that contains the agency's or department's mission, objectives to accomplish the mission, and performance measures that show the degree to which objectives are being met.

THE CITADEL THE MILITARY COLLEGE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ANNUAL REPORT 1994-1995

South Carolina laws require that each state agency submit an annual accountability report to the Governor and General Assembly that contains the agency's or department's mission, objectives to accomplish the mission, and performance measures that show the degree to which objectives are being met.

Catalogue of articles on exhibition at the second annual fair of the South-Carolina Institute, at the Military hall, November, 1850

This document contains a catalogue of the articles on exhibition at the 1850 annual fair of the South Carolina Institute. It includes 337 items exhibited at the fair in Charleston at the Military Hall.

Environmental pressures and impacts of public sector organizations: the case of the Portuguese Military

Progress in Industrial Ecology, An International Journal, nº 4(5), p. 363-381

Developing and implementing an environmental performance index for the Portuguese military

Business Strategy and the Environment nº 15, p. 71–86

A cyber security architecture for military networks using a cognitive network approach

Cyber security is one of the main topics that are discussed around the world today. The threat is real, and it is unlikely to diminish. People, business, governments, and even armed forces are networked in a way or another. Thus, the cyber threat is also facing military networking. On the other hand, the concept of Network Centric Warfare sets high requirements for military tactical data communications and security. A challenging networking environment and cyber threats force us to consider new approaches to build security on the military communication systems. The purpose of this thesis is to develop a cyber security architecture for military networks, and to evaluate the designed architecture. The architecture is described as a technical functionality. As a new approach, the thesis introduces Cognitive Networks (CN) which are a theoretical concept to build more intelligent, dynamic and even secure communication networks. The cognitive networks are capable of observe the networking environment, make decisions for optimal performance and adapt its system parameter according to the decisions. As a result, the thesis presents a five-layer cyber security architecture that consists of security elements controlled by a cognitive process. The proposed architecture includes the infrastructure, services and application layers that are managed and controlled by the cognitive and management layers. The architecture defines the tasks of the security elements at a functional level without introducing any new protocols or algorithms. For evaluating two separated method were used. The first method is based on the SABSA framework that uses a layered approach to analyze overall security of an organization. The second method was a scenario based method in which a risk severity level is calculated. The evaluation results show that the proposed architecture fulfills the security requirements at least at a high level. However, the evaluation of the proposed architecture proved to be very challenging. Thus, the evaluation results must be considered very critically. The thesis proves the cognitive networks are a promising approach, and they provide lots of benefits when designing a cyber security architecture for the tactical military networks. However, many implementation problems exist, and several details must be considered and studied during the future work.

An exploration of intergenerational exchanges between grandparents and their older grandcildren

Changes within the family unit have resulted in changes in interactions between grandparents and older grandchildren. Existing research indicates that these relationships can result in positive outcomes. A relevant task for researchers is to continue to explore th~se intergenerational relationships. This qualitative phenomenological study explores the question: What functional patterns exist when grandparents interact with older grandchildren? Six grandparent-older grandchild pairs agreed to be involved. Kennedy's (1992) formulation of grandparent-older grandchild activity clusters was reviewed and revised. Activities were clustered related to socialization, companionship, support, entertainment, and education. Findings unique to this study indicate that shared activities were mutually chosen with consideration of activity tolerance, and were consistently evaluated as enjoyable. Partners were chosen because of a comfortable relationship established through frequent past and present interactions, and not because of family lineage preferences. Both grandparents and older grandchildren stated a desire to have a generation peer share activities with them. Exploration of dimension concepts for the "McMaster Model of Family Functioning" indicated that these relationships have potential to contribute to healthy family functioning. The implications for practice, theory development and further research are suggested.

The Falkland Islands War of 1982: a legal, diplomatic and strategic evaluation

The Falkland Islands War of 1982 was fought over competing claims to sovereignty over a group of islands off the east coast of South America. The dispute was between Argentina and the United Kingdom. Argentina claims the islands under rights to Spanish succession, the fact that they lie off the Argentine coast line and that in 1833 Great Britain took the islands illegally and by force. The United Kingdom claims the islands primarily through prescription--the fact that they have governed the islands in a peaceful, continuous and public manner since 1833. The British also hold that the population living on the islands, roughly eighteen hundred British descendants, should be able to decide their own future. The United Kingdom also lays claim to the islands through rights of discovery and settlement, although this claim has always been challenged by Spain who until 1811 governed the islands. Both claims have legal support, and the final decision if there will ever be one is difficult to predict. Sadly today the ultimate test of sovereignty does not come through international law but remains in the idea that "He is sovereign who can defend his sovereignty." The years preceding the Argentine invasion of 1982 witnessed many diplomatic exchanges between The United Kingdom and Argentina over the future of the islands. During this time the British sent signals to Argentina that ii implied a decline in British resolve to hold the islands and demonstrated that military action did more to further the talks along than did actual negotiations. The Argentine military junta read these signals and decided that they could take the islands in a quick military invasion and that the United Kingdom would consider the act as a fait accompli and would not protest the invasion. The British in response to this claimed that they never signaled to Argentina that a military solution was acceptable to them and launched a Royal Navy task force to liberate the islands. Both governments responded to an international crisis with means that were designed both to resolve the international crisis and increase the domestic popularity of the government. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was facing an all-time low in popularity for post-War Prime Ministers while Argentine President General Galtieri needed to gain mass popular support so he could remain a viable President after he was scheduled to lose command of the army and a seat on the military junta that ran the country. The military war for the Falklands is indicative of the nature of modern warfare between Third World countries. It shows that the gap in military capabilities between Third and First World countries is narrowing significantly. Modern warfare between a First and Third World country is no longer a 'walk over' for the First World country.

The law of the sea: the United States, Canada and the deep seabed

The Falkland Islands War of 1982 was fought over competing claims to sovereignty over a group of islands off the east coast of South America. The dispute was between Argentina and the United Kingdom. Argentina claims the islands under rights to Spanish succession, the fact that they lie off the Argentine coast line and that in 1833 Great Britain took the islands illegally and by force. The United Kingdom claims the islands primarily through prescription--the fact that they have governed the islands in a peaceful, continuous and public manner since 1833. The British also hold that the population living on the islands, roughly eighteen hundred British descendants, should be able to decide their own future. The United Kingdom also lays claim to the islands through rights of discovery and settlement, although this claim has always been challenged by Spain who until 1811 governed the islands. Both claims have legal support, and the final decision if there will ever be one is difficult to predict. Sadly today the ultimate test of sovereignty does not come through international law but remains in the idea that "He is sovereign who can defend his sovereignty." The years preceding the Argentine invasion of 1982 witnessed many diplomatic exchanges between The United Kingdom and Argentina over the future of the islands. During this time the British sent signals to Argentina that ii implied a decline in British resolve to hold the islands and demonstrated that military action did more to further the talks along than did actual negotiations. The Argentine military junta read these signals and decided that they could take the islands in a quick military invasion and that the United Kingdom would consider the act as a fait accompli and would not protest the invasion. The British in response to this claimed that they never signaled to Argentina that a military solution was acceptable to them and launched a Royal Navy task force to liberate the islands. Both governments responded to an international crisis with means that were designed both to resolve the international crisis and increase the domestic popularity of the government. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was facing an all-time low in popularity for post-War Prime Ministers while Argentine President General Galtieri needed to gain mass popular support so he could remain a viable President after he was scheduled to lose command of the army and a seat on the military junta that ran the country. The military war for the Falklands is indicative of the nature of modern warfare between Third World countries. It shows that the gap in military capabilities between Third and First World countries is narrowing significantly. Modern warfare between a First and Third World country is no longer a 'walk over' for the First World country.

Letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting documents containing the information required by the resolution of Mr. Wright, on the 22d inst. relative to the execution of the act fixing the military peace establishment. --

14th Congress, 1st session, 1815-1816. House. Document no. 33.

Letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting a return of the arms and military stores furnished to the respective states, under the provisions of the law of one thousand eight hundred and twelve.

At head of title: [107].

Report of the Committee on Military Affairs, on the differences that exist, between the United States and some of the individual States, respecting the relative powers of the general and state governments over the militia.--

February 28, 1815. Printed by order of the Senate of the United States.