Talk:Military history of the United States/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Warbox

This is an attempt to translate the battlebox format to a warbox format for U.S.-related wars. Do not force this box on pages where the users reject it. It is encouraged, but totally optional, and will often not work perfectly with a specific conflict--WWII, for example, would be difficult to fit into this paradigm.

Do not add the warbox to:

Working Example

Military history of North Korea
Military history of South Korea
Military history of the United States
Conflict Korean War
Date 1950–1953
Place Korean peninsula
Result Partition of Korea
Battles of the Korean War
Combatants
Anti-Communist South, U.S., Australia, Canada, UK, other allies Communist North, People's Republic of China, USSR
Strength
unknown unknown
Casualties
44,000 U.S. soldiers 600,000 Koreans

Code

{| border=1 width=300 cellpadding=2 cellspacing=0 align=right style="margin-left:1em;margin-bottom:1em"
|-
|colspan=2|
|-
!colspan=2 bgcolor=#ffff99|[[Military history of North Korea]]<BR>[[Military history of South Korea]]<BR>[[Military history of the United States]]
|-
|Conflict||'''Korean War'''
|-
|Date||1950–1953
|-
|Place||Korean peninsula
|-
|Result||Partition of Korea
|-
!colspan=2|'''[[Battles of the Korean War]]'''
|-
|colspan=2|
{| border=1 width=300 cellpadding=2 cellspacing=0
|-
!colspan=2 bgcolor=#ffff99|Combatants
|-
| width=50%|Anti-Communist South,<br>[[United States of America]], [[Australia]],[[Canada]], [[United Kingdom]], other allies
| width=50%|[[Communist]] North,<br>[[People's Republic of China]], [[Soviet Union]]
|-
!colspan=2|Strength
|-
|unknown
|unknown
|-
!colspan=2|Casualties
|-
|44,000 U.S. soldiers
|600,000 Koreans
|}
|}

Color scheme

Provisional color scheme to be used in the warbox template for U.S.-related conflicts as described at Military history of the United States. This is for WARS only. Specific battles should use the battlebox described at Wikipedia:WikiProject Battles

Notes:

  1. Naval or air war should be used for any war/operation with no land component.
Color Locality Definition Example
bgcolor=#ffcccc North America Alaska, Canada, US, Mexico American Civil War
bgcolor=#FDEEF4 Central America
bgcolor=#ccffcc South America
bgcolor=#ffff99 Asia Including Philippines, see also Oceania Philippine-American War
bgcolor=#cccccc Europe West of the Urals, not Turkey
bgcolor=#eeddbb Africa Incl. Egypt Second Barbary War
bgcolor=#99CC99 Middle East yes Turkey, no North Africa, no Caucasus, no -stans
bgcolor=#DDFFFF Caribbean Operation Urgent Fury
bgcolor=#ffccaa Oceania Aus, NZ, Pacific Islands and Papua New Guinea
bgcolor=#CCCCFF Air war none
bgcolor=#99CCFF Naval war Quasi War
bgcolor=#ffccff Fictitious war
bgcolor=white Other/Unknown/World war War with multiple theaters, wars on the moon, Antarctica, etc. none

Warbox Talk

Should Oceania use the same colour as its battle? That is, swap Middle East or Caribbean for Oceania? Geoff 01:08, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Um, yes? No? Maybe? :) Sorry--could you clarify the question--I'm kinda slow. :) jengod 01:11, Mar 16, 2004 (UTC)
Sorry. In Wikipedia:WikiProject Battles Oceania uses bgcolor=#ffccaa (orange). The warbox colour scheme uses orange for the Middle East and bgcolor=#99CC99 for Oceania. I just thought it would make sense for the battles and wars to use the same colour. Also, is there a definition for the Middle East? I would have prefered a separate colour for that region in the battlebox but couldn't get agreement on where exactly it was. Geoff 01:17, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Duh! My bad. Does it match now. Added definitions. Lemme know whatcha think. jengod 01:32, Mar 16, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks. Once the war colour scheme is settled, I'll incorporate any new ones (Middle East and Caribbean, etc.) into the battlebox colour scheme. Trying to come up with a definition of the Middle East makes me afraid... Geoff 01:42, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Couple of comments. The Central American colour is a bit dark compared to the others (I had this some problem of consistency when doing the battles colours). The best suggestion I can come up with is #ddddaa which is a sort of dirty yellow. Also, is this proposal for US wars only, or can it be adopted by Wikipedia:WikiProject Wars? If it is for general wars, then the "fictitious" colour (#ffccff from Wikipedia:WikiProject Battles) should be included. Just my thoughts. Geoff 02:55, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

How about the really pale pink? Is that too gay for a war? :) If you don't like, just drop the dirty yellow in there. And this proposal was originally for U.S. but you are welcome to port it over to Wikipedia:WikiProject Wars if you think they want it! :) There may be additional dispute, etc., etc., both here and there, so we'll have to see. :) jengod 03:29, Mar 16, 2004 (UTC)
I have no problem with pink. I've add the "fictitious" colour. It's been used in a few battle articles so it should at least be made unavailable in the warbox to avoid confusion. I can't imagine this proposal being a problem for the wars project (though I'm not a participant). Geoff 03:47, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Spanish Civil War

Individual Americans volunteered to fight in the Spanish Civil War -- as did citizens of many nations. But, I am not aware of any official involvement of the US government. So I don't think this qualifies it as a US conflict.

Lynching epidemic

OK. Someone explain how the US military was remotely involved with the lynching epidemic in the South? That smells like a cheap slur. --Penta 01:32, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Wasn't meant as a slur. See the intro: " Not all of these events were military, some were not even violent, but together they delineate the reappearance of the martial spirits in the life of the United States." Several of the items on the list aren't military, but were local conflicts. Removal makes sense tho. jengod 01:29, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)

Missing links

should link to Military History and list of wars possibly to History as well as to the United States of America as well as foreign relations of the United States and the central Military of the United states entry...Dwarf Kirlston 20:56, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Format

I think the current format of this article, a very comprehensive list, is not something that can be expanded. Despite being a COTW, there have been no serious edits to this article beteeen Sunday and Thursday. I will move this current list to List of military actions of the United States. I propose this article be organized by theme, e.g. "Role within the government". 119 21:48, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

  • Good. I was under the impression that all the good military history articles are by theme, not lists. Too bad about the lack of edits. --Dmcdevit 23:12, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • I was under the impression that this article was being rewritten at Military history of the United States/Temp. Shouldn't something of substance created there before you relocate this entire article? Furthermore, if you want to organize this article by theme, there's no reason that can't be done at the top of this article, above the list of conflicts and wars. jengod 01:54, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
    • Um... It's only been copied, not relocated, see for yourself at List of military actions by or within the United States.--Dmcdevit 00:56, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
      • Yep. Thanks. jengod 01:09, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Page overhaul

I've done some extensive overhauling of this page by combining various "temp" files created by others into this main article; and by moving the list to a separate page. It needs LOTS of work. Now, I hope folks can feel free to add to and modify this article. DAVODD 03:52, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

NPOV

Also totally lacking in citation, actual supported facts instead of broad generalizations: The Military history of the United States spans a period of less than two and a half centuries. Over the course of those years, the United States grew from an alliance of thirteen British colonies without a professional military, to the world's preeminent military superpower.

The origins of the United States military lies in civilian frontiersmen, armed for hunting and basic survival. These were organized into local militias for small military operations, mostly against Native American tribes but also to resist possible raids by the small military forces of neighboring European colonies. They relied on the support of the British regular army and navy for any serious military operation.

With the independence of the United States established, military efforts then focused on ensuring a dominate role on the continent. The Indian Wars became more offensive rather than defensive. The Mexican-American War was one of conquest, to promote America's "Manifest Destiny". These efforts were successful; the United States felt there were no significant local threats. It became traditional to almost completely disband the military after a war was over.

The American Civil War caught both sides unprepared. Not only did the military have to be recreated after the war had started, but it was found that no quick drive to gain some territory would end the war. This was a war for existence, and the vast resources of the new America would consumed before the issue was decided. This is sometimes called "the first modern war" due to the use of mass conscription, military railroads, trench warfare, submarines and ironclads, but mostly because it introduced the modern world to the horrors of total war.

The scope of the Civil War was as great as many of those in Europe, and the United States now began to see itself as potential player on the world stage. With the country now stretching to the Pacific, eyes turned to overseas. The drives behind the Spanish-American War and US involvement in the Boxer Rebellion were a mixture of attempts to dismantle European colonial empires, and attempts to create an American Empire to rival them.

But it was the United States growing commercial, rather than colonial, strength that led to American being dragged reluctantly into World War I. Although initially dismissive of the United States military, the European powers were forced to admit that it could be a significant force even in European affairs. While victorious in battle, the United States gained little from the war, except a deepened sense of war's futility. The US resumed its standard peace-time policy of severe military reductions.

The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor shocked the United States. Virtually overnight, the US went from isolationist to the driving force of the Western Allies in World War II. Struggling to fight a massive two-front war in Europe and the Pacific simultaneously, US military industrial might eventually exceeded all expectations. At war's end, the former major powers of Europe and Asia were left devastated, while the United States was stronger than ever.

The United States became a superpower, and assumed the role of international guardian of freedom, to counter the threats of the rebuilding USSR. Determined to never again be caught unprepared in war, US military might did not wane to previous peace-time levels, but instead kept ready for war at a moment's notice. This lead to the Cold War, a war fought with the economic intensity of a real war, but without a direct confrontation between the two main superpowers. The threat of mutual assured destruction by nuclear warfare limited the actual combat of the Cold War to campaigns against allies of the USSR, such as the unsuccessful Korean War and Vietnam War.

After the collapse of the USSR under economic pressure, the United States became the world's only superpower, and the sole target of any general dissatisfaction of the current world status. Like Pearl Harbor, the 9/11 attacks galvanized the United States to a rapid military response, triggering the ongoing War on Terrorism.

  • I agree with the POV-ness of the sections you've highlighted, go ahead and change them. (maybe "American leaders believed...") --Dmcdevit 06:02, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Sorry for the POV problems. I was working slowly, basically alone on (I thought) a forgotten article, but suddenly it's COTW. This moves a lot faster than I'm used to. I intended this just as just a general introduction, to be supported and referenced later in the article. It would have taken weeks to months for me to finish this, a bit at a time. Others have taken this and gone beyond that now, which is a good thing. Feel free. --A D Monroe III 13:06, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • I removed the NPOV tag from the main article since all the issues raised about User:A D Monroe III's original text have been addressed. DAVODD 21:09, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Latin American and other interventions

Mention should be made of US military interventions in Nicaragua, Guatemala, Grenada, Panama, El Salvador etc. See here for details. AndyL 03:49, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I didn't see your request but I added the significant military operations of the Cold War era. I'm not sure each of the interventions/occupations above merits its own paragraph (in an article of this scope); they could all be summarized together. They were much more significant politically than militarily. --Dhartung | Talk 21:47, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Bush carrier speech

Surely there's a better image to illustrate the military history of the US than this PR event which took place thousands of miles from the conflict? --Dhartung | Talk 21:51, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I replaced the Bush image with one showing tanks in Baghdad. I considered several battle photographs but these had several failings (perhaps indicating choices the Pentagon makes for what is available), such as showing too little context (a soldier with a gun), or damage only (no American presence), or broadly just a lovely photograph of a helicopter against a sunset. None of these seemed really appropriate, but the one I chose shows American occupation duties, which is quite appropriate, while showing both American equipment and an unambiguously Iraqi setting. --Dhartung | Talk 04:13, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)\

good choice. i agree. Bonus Onus 04:41, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

Bosnia, etc

this article goes right from the gulf war to the war on terror. we were certainly involved in other military incidents in between '92 and '01. we should include the (NATO?) operation in bosnia, as well as, perhaps, the continued sorties over iraq, no-fly zone, etc. Those are the only two militarily related things i remember, as i was quite young at the time. Also, there was prolly some CIA stuff, which we should consider adding. hopefully someone who knows more about these things (and who was not a kid at the time) could write about them. Bonus Onus 04:45, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)