A conflict characterized by use of means short of sustained military action is called?
494239
Incursion\n\n"the act of entering some territory or domain (often in large numbers)"  http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=incursion
256567
Violence: Physical force with perpose of damaging or abusing,one.or thing.
1084377
By definition if a war is "never-ending" then it can't possibly be won.  Or lost for that matter.  Simple logic dictates this conclusion.
81144
Total war is when a country uses all of its resources in fighting the war. This means that all a lot of workers will be working for the military , Most of the countries money will go for fighting the war and it will use whatever neccesasary that it has in fighting it.  And a limited war is a small scale war when the countries citizens are basically going throguh life as usual and absolute war is just another word for total war.
121214
A Mexican standoff is a slang term defined as a stalemate or impasse, a confrontation that neither side can win. In popular culture, the Mexican standoff is usually portrayed as two or more opposing men with guns drawn and ready, creating a very tense situation. Exacerbating the tension is that neither side wants to put down its weapons for fear that its opponents will shoot them. This situation forces the participants to resolve the situation either by diplomacy, surrender, or a pre-emptive strike
1005204
its a conflict in terms i guess. a oxymoronic idea but isnt all war moronic anyhow
771734
B/\n\nof ignorance; or feelings of inadequacy\n\nhurt feelings\n\ncultural conflict\n\nunnecessary wars
578472
In a way your right, but not in the military definition.\n\n"Combined Arms" means, militarily, the combining of infantry, field artillery, armor, etc, etc., to make a more effective combat team.  Each branch of the service has those items that will make it more combat effective.  The Army has aircraft and water vessels, the Air Force and Navy have ground forces.  This makes them able to sustain themselves if they have to enter a hostile environment.\n\n"Land, sea, air" is what you are thinking of.  This is intertwining the branches of the service to be able to work together.  At one point in time, the branches of the services didn't talk to each other, and this made combat more difficult.  Today's military, however, has learned their lessons, and are the world's premiere fighting forces.
574454
A civil war is a war in which parties within the same culture, society or nationality fight for political power or control of an area. Some civil wars are also categorized as revolutions when major societal restructuring is a possible outcome of the conflict. An insurgency, whether successful or not, is likely to be classified as a civil war by some historians if, and only if, organized armies fight conventional battles. Other historians state the criteria for a civil war is that there must be prolonged violence between organized factions or defined regions of a country (conventionally fought or not).\n\nUltimately the distinction between a "civil war" and a "revolution" or other name is arbitrary, and determined by usage. The successful insurgency of the 1640s in England which led to the (temporary) overthrow of the monarchy became known as the English Civil War. The successful insurgency of the 1770s in British colonies in America, with organized armies fighting battles, came to be known as the American Revolution. In the United States, and in American-dominated sources, the term 'the civil war' almost always means the American Civil War, with other civil wars noted or inferred from context.\n\nWhat is generally agreed upon is that factors such as nationalism, religion, and ideology, played little role in pre-modern civil wars. While it is quite common for nationalists to read past revolts, such as those of Scotland against England as early stirrings of nationalism, this is a somewhat suspect notion. Religion is more contentious, there are some civil wars that can be seen as fueled by religion in early years, such as the Jewish Revolts against Rome, but these can also be seen as revolts by a servile people against their oppressors or uprisings by local notables in an attempt to gain independence.\n\nCivil wars fought over religion have tended to occur more frequently in monotheistic societies than in polytheistic societies; this has been explained as being due to the fact that the latter tend to be more "flexible" in terms of dogma, to allow for some latitude in belief. In Europe through the Middle Ages, the Christianity of the great bulk of the population was influenced by pagan tradition. With the great majority of the population illiterate, access to the Bible was limited and led to a significant amount of syncretism between Christian and pagan elements. With religion so loosely applied, it was rare for people to feel particularly oppressed by it. There were periodic appearances of heresies, such as that of the Albigensians, which led to violence, but historians tend to view these to be the product of peasant revolts rather than themselves motivators of a civil war.\n\nAs religions tended to become more rigidly defined and understood by their followers, inter-religious tensions generally increased. The rise of Islam witnessed a rash of uprisings against non-Islamic rulers soon after its appearance. Subsequent Islamic history has been marked by repeated civil conflicts, mostly stemming out of the Shi'ite-Sunni divide. In Europe the Protestant Reformation had a similar effect, sparking years of both civil and international wars of religion. Civil wars between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism consumed France in the Wars of Religion, the Netherlands during the Eighty Years' War, Germany during the Thirty Years' War, and more recently, The Troubles of Northern Ireland. Religious disputes among Protestant sects also played an important role in the English Civil Wars, while official persecution of Catholics during the French Revolution spurred the Revolt in the Vendée.\n\n[edit]\nRevolutions\nA revolution is generally seen as a civil war fought over issues of ideology, over how power should be organized and distributed, not merely over which individuals hold it. The classic example of a revolution, and by some arguments the first is the French Revolution, which is seen to hav
914716
The following often result in conflict.\nCompetition\nClash of interests\nDifferent goals\nAggression\nFrustration
535158
From a law enforcement perspective use of force is using any means necessary to bring a volatile situation to a more manageable and/or resolved state.  This means using both lethal and non-lethal types of force.  Lethal tending to be an excessive amount of force, as well as severe man handling during arrest that seems unnecessary.  Non-lethal uses of force, including Pepper Spray, Bean Bag guns, Tazers, etc can sometimes be considered excessive, however since they are non-lethal they can be seen as reasonable use of force.  These are uses of force in regards to law enforcement.\n\nFrom any other perspective, use of force, is using force to get what you want, to move something, open something, etc.
154776
Wars will be of limited extent and not worldwide.
597661
For a definition, read the news about Afghanistan and Iraq from sources like:  http://www.alternet.org/ and http://buzzflash.com/\n\nThe US occupation of these two countries is a textbook example of an occupying military and the consequences.
947675
Type these words into the search engine of your choice.\n\nWorld War Two.\n\nIf you can ask that question on here you can do your own homework. Stop being so lazy.
1016090
The Constitution does not give any specific method by which war is declared.  No particular wording is required.  It simply says:\n\n     "The Congress shall have Power...\n          (...a bunch of other powers...)\n     To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal...\n          (...more other powers...)"\n\nThis question has come up many times in recent politics because a vote to "authorize military force" can be described to constituents as either a vote in favor of, or one opposed to, a war.  Politicians from both parties see this as being safer, politically, than using the phrase, "declare war."\n\nIn the legal sense, this question can't be definitively answered unless the Supreme Court, or a Constitutional amendment, lays out specific wording.  However, by the principals of precedent, and common law, since this war HAS been authorized, it has been declared.
961113
agression is to act in a hostile way towards something.
980758
No. friendly fire is where someone is killed in combat by their own side. Misadventure is where someone has done something reckless which endangered themselves by their own actions