We have two tags, and . Interestingly, both have already been discussed for merging with other tags in two other meta posts.

They both pretty much mean the same thing: how war is conducted rather than specific wars. Should we synonymize them?


I do not see warfare and military as the same thing at all. War and warfare may make sense in merging, but definitely not war and military. The distinction I would make is that war or warfare is the engagement of opposing forces, while military is more specific to those who are doing the engaging. War would have more to do with battles or consequences, while military would have more to do with troops and their use.

  • I guess it's all a matter of definition, which we are doing here. I would put [warfare] in the same camp as [war], but perhaps it would make more sense to put it with [military]. Dec 3 '12 at 19:30
  • 1
    Exactly; we have a military at all times for one thing, regardless of active war.
    – Ben Brocka
    Dec 8 '12 at 15:14

To me the acid test for separate tags should be that they are typically used separately.

A quick scroll through the tag shows that very few were also tagged or .

Admittedly, if you do it the other way, a large proportion (about 20%) of the tagged questions do also seem to be tagged . So basically what we have here is a situation where one tag is a near subset of another.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .