THE PRACTICE OF ARGUMENT - READING THE CONDITION OF CIVIL-MILITARY RELATIONS

Dauber approaches the question of civil-military relations from the pe rspective of argument studies. Viewed as an argument formation, the We inberger Doctrine functions as a template that privileges technical ar gumentation in considerations of possible uses of force. As a result, public forms of argument, centered more on the value of the potential intervention than the methodology, becomes more difficult. The accepta nce of the Weinberger Doctrine in the public forum, therefore, indepen dent of whether or not the various services officially subscribe to th e doctrine, produces a situation where civil-military relations are di storted. The military side of the ledger, determining the possible cos t of an intervention, trumps the civil side, determining whether the c ost is worthwhile. The result is an argument within which it is almost impossible to successfully defend interventions on purely humanitaria n grounds.