English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

This memorandum provides a brief summary on thoughts concerning `Strategic Withholding` (or perhaps, `Nuclear Parsimony`). It is chiefly meant to further support the view that there should be other significant doctrines besides `Brute-Force Retaliation`. The basic doctrinal argument is that it may be broadly disadvantageous to fire one`s missiles in equal, or `total` retaliation. It may be better to reply only softly, or not at all. The basic justification rests on an assumption of extended war, and on a logic addressed to what`s best for the surviving population and capability at any given point. In most strategic wargame exercises, it is rarely apparent that this principle is taken into account. The essential point of argument is that an extended war is not so different from peacetime posturing

Brief summary concerning strategic withholding (nuclear parsimony)