The Achievements of Generals and the Achievements of Diplomats - Essay Example

The achievements of Generals are in the long run more decisive than the achievements of diplomats. This paper compares the efficiency of generals in obtaining achievements than the diplomats in the United States between the year periods 1800-1825. This is through the expression of the various techniques employed by the generals as opposed to the diplomats that ensured their better achievement of results. This further supports relevant case events that occurred during that time period. Diplomats are individuals appointed by states to carry out diplomacy with other states or international organizations to achieve a mutual understanding on some issue.

The main functions of such diplomats are to find ways round to the protection and representation of the interests of their state and at the same time to promote and foster communication and friendly relations. Generals, on the other hand, are general state officers of the highest military rank usually belonging to the army or the air force. Such a general’s main function is the use of military force and regulations to enforce their nation’s interests and representation. This is more often than not through war tactics (smith, 1980).

According to Smith (1980), the use of generals in the achievement of objectives during the times was considered to be a more sure mode of action and fairly quicker than diplomatic tactics. Where diplomat's tactics dragged on for long periods of time, most generals' military tactics would take much shorter time periods provided the availability of the required access of resources such as during the period of the trail of tears. The “casualties” were immense but, the objectives of the general’s orders were subsequently met, and thus the land was obtained.

Taking the example of U.S generals Andrew Jackson and William Henry who went to war against Britain in the year 1812, they won against states that used diplomatic means to face them and where some of the U.S diplomats had failed. After the carrying out of various diplomatic resolutions to solve the American problems at sea and to end Indian raids in the west, the state decided to finally employ the services of the generals. Though employing the techniques of invasions and divisions of alliances, they were able to achieve their objectives.

They repulsed invasions by the British and broke off alliances between the British and the Indians and hence made the enemies weaker to suppress. The federalists and diplomats who were against the war to the extent of trading and threatening succession with the enemy were devastated by the U.S general’s triumphant ending of the war. As a result, the U.S sea interests and the west were protected. Through the use of the military general’s services, the U.S was able to obtain control of vital resources that diplomatic actions had failed to achieve.

The Louisiana Purchase of 1803 provided Western farmers the central Mississippi River waterway evicting the presence of the French from the United States western border. Further war rose due to control and the permit of a trade by the two states of the river which brought about the destruction of the French navy in 1805 at the battle of Trafalgar. Diplomats' attempt to try and find mutual agreement on the interests of utilizing the waterway could not achieve its objectives and even brought about the eruption of conflicts and issue of threats by other states militaries (smith, 1980).

Through the various discussions, it is evident that the use of generals by the U.S was surer of the achievement of results than the diplomats. More often it has been the case that generals brought into service upon the evident failure of the diplomats to reach a conclusive understanding and achieve set objectives. It is also historically represented that more issues are conclusively dealt with and achieved through the use of the military general’s rule over diplomatic tactics. Over time, military actions and war have received humanitarian criticism and people in the state have embraced democracy whose most trusted mode of action is the use of diplomatic tactics.