A tese aborda o chamado poder de guerra nos Estados Unidos da América buscando compreender a dinâmica institucional da decisão sobre a utilização das forças armadas no exterior à luz das regras constitucionais e da experiência histórica daquele país. A controvérsia basicamente estabelecida é sobre quem, afinal, seria o soberano dos poderes de guerra, ou seja, se o Poder Legislativo ou o Poder Executivo possuiriam o poder de levar o país à guerra. Com esse objetivo, a tese analisa a denominada Cláusula da Guerra que assegura ao Congresso o poder de declarar a guerra, e também a Cláusula do Comandante-em-Chefe, que dá ao presidente o comando das forças militares do país. Nossa hipótese principal de trabalho assevera de que há, à luz do intento original, uma prevalência dos poderes de guerra do presidente dos Estados Unidos, representado, por sua vez, em seu controle da soberania sobre a decisão da guerra, que desafia a Constituição e seu sistema de checks and balances levando a uma hipertrofia do Poder Executivo. No esforço de compreender essa inflexão realizamos uma análise da decisão da Guerra da Coreia em 1950. A Coreia é compreendida como um caso paradigmático que expressa a institucionalização dos poderes de guerra do presidente, com a autonomização da Cláusula do Comandante-em-Chefe em relação à Cláusula da Guerra. Constatamos que a dinâmica de decisão encontrada na Guerra da Coreia faz parte de um processo ainda em andamento de fortalecimento do poder presidencial, prejudicando o cumprimento da Cláusula da Guerra. Constatamos que a dinâmica de decisão encontrada na Guerra da Coreia faz parte de um processo ainda em andamento de fortalecimento do poder presidencial, prejudicando o cumprimento da Cláusula da Guerra. Outra hipótese da tese é a de que decisões para o uso da força originadas de organizações multilaterais como o Conselho de Segurança da ONU e a OTAN têm favorecido a prevalência do poder de guerra do presidente dos Estados Unidos, uma vez que elas têm sido interpretadas como substitutas de decisões de autorização que teriam que ser tomadas apenas pelo Congresso. / This thesis addresses the so-called war power in the United States, seeking to understand the institutional dynamics of the decision on the use of armed forces abroad in the light of the constitutional provisions and the historical experience of the country. The established controversy is on who, after all, is invested by the sovereign powers of war, ie, whether it is the legislature or the executive who would possess the power to take the country to war. With this objective, this thesis analyzes the so-called War Clause which ensures to Congress the power to declare war, and also the Commander in Chief Clause, which gives the President the command of the military forces of the country. Our working hypothesis asserts that there is, in the light of the original intent, a prevalence of war powers of the President of the United States, represented by its turn, in its sovereign control over the decision of war that defies the Constitution and its system of checks and balances, leading to the hypertrophy of the Executive Branch. In an effort to understand this shift we conducted a study about the decision of the Korean War in 1950. Korea is understood as a paradigmatic case that expresses the institutionalization of the war powers of the president, with the empowerment of the Commander in Chief Clause vis-à-vis the War Clause. We observe that the dynamics of the decision found in the Korean War is part of a still ongoing process of strengthening of presidential power, hampering the use of the War Clause. Another hypothesis of the thesis is that the decisions to use force originating from multilateral organizations such as the UN Security Council and NATO have favored the prevalence of the power of war of the President of the United States, as they have been interpreted as a substitute for authorization decisions that would have to be taken only by Congress.

The AEGIS Cruiser Air-Defense Simulation is a program that models the operations of a Combat Information Center (CIC) team performing the ADC duties in a battle group using Multi-Agent System (MAS) technology implemented in the Java programming language. Set in the Arabian Gulf region, the simulation is a top-view, dynamic, graphics-driven software implementation that provides a picture of the CIC team grappling with a challenging, complex problem. Conceived primarily as a system to assist ships, waterfront training teams, and battle group staffs in ADC training and doctrine formulation, the simulation was designed to gain insight and understanding into the numerous factors (skills, experience, fatigue, aircraft numbers, weather, etc.) that influence the performance of the overall CIC team and watchstanders. The program explores the team's performance under abnormal or high intensity/stress situations by simulating their mental processes, decision-making aspects, communications patterns, and cognitive attributes. Everything in the scenario is logged, which allows for the reconstruction of interesting events (i.e. watchstander mistakes, chain-of-error analysis) for use in post-scenario training as well as the creation of new, more focused themes for actual CIC team scenarios. The simulation also tracks various watchstander and CIC team performance metrics for review by the user. / Lieutenant, United States Navy

The diploma thesis deals with problems of collaboration of the Integrated Rescue System at coordination of its units intervention in larger traffic accidents, to be specific in coach traffic accidents with a bigger number of the injured and the dead. In the thesis two significant traffic accidents and cooperation training of the units of the Integrated Rescue System are compared at intervals of last five years. Following the analysis it is possible to monitor not only the increasing level of technical and material equipment of single units, but also the increasing level of coordination of their activities. The main aim of the thesis is evaluation of the current level of collaboration of the units of the Integrated Rescue System in a larger traffic accident, eventually a proposal of possible adjustment or modification of currently already used type activities of the units of the Integrated Rescue System.

The current study investigates changing attitudes to militarism within Israeli society since the tumultuous decades following 1948. Events leading to the current state of Israeli society will be traced in order to illustrate the way in which change occurs. The shifts in Israeli history and society during these decades will be examined alongside developments in Israeli literature. Accordingly, eight works of fiction have been selected to lie at the heart of the study. These works, all of which centre around the Israeli military experience, convey an erosion of personal, national, and ideological certainties. The analysis of these works demands three areas of exploration: the depiction of the soldier in the civilian setting, the depiction of the soldier as he interacts with other soldiers in the military sphere, and ‘post-Zionist’ military fiction produced in recent decades. These three areas of exploration entail an interrogation of gender, nationalism, and ‘post-Zionism’ in contemporary Israel. The works examined in the third chapter contain commentary not only upon the social reality of their authors, but also upon the way in which Israeli literature engages with the issues that inform its existence. (For complete abstract open document)