Talk:Exercise Valiant Shield

Military history: North America / United States Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Nature of exercise

This article is vaguely worded, specifically as regards what went on. Did ships sail around, did planes fly, was ammunition discharged and bombs dropped on the water or various targets, what? Or is this a secret? Badagnani 18:47, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine what went on was typical of most wargames. I also image that they wouldn't be showing off any American secrets in front of the PRA. freshofftheufo ΓΛĿЌ 19:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We showed North Korea thru their sugar daddy China that even while engaged in Afganistan and Iraq we still have enough conventional forces to kick their ass. It's a quite standard show of force. Called rattling the sabers, sometimes. It is also a means of training the troops. But with two war theatres in operation, you can guess what the most important of the two objectives was. WAS 4.250 02:29, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military Ties With China

Someone should consider revising or expanding this statement:

"Military ties between the United States and China have not been close ever since WWII."

For one thing, have military ties between the two nations ever been close, other than in WWII? And second, we fought a long, grueling war with communist China in the Korean War. That calls for stronger languages than saying that military ties have not "close."

Linking to News Stories

I recommend linking to wire reports or some such, rather than to yahoo news articles. The yahoo links will soon go dead, but the wire links are usually more permanent.

"Propaganda" Term

Beware, there is a certain user who will probably consider Valiant Shield a "propaganda" term and give it a meaningless generic name. Haizum 04:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it pretty standard for us to use military operation names for the articles, unless some more common name is in use? I mean Operation Barbarossa doesn't look to be moving anytime soon... --Delirium 07:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]