|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{subpages}} | | {{subpages}} |
|
| |
|
| == Ambiguity? ==
| | {{subpages}} |
| | |
| AEF is well enough accepted as a term specific to the [[First World War]], but I'm wondering if we may need either a hierarchically higher, or at least disambiguation article for the various kinds of expeditionary forces.
| |
| | |
| For example, the [[U.S. Marine Corps]] calls its various levels of [[Marine Air-Ground Task Force]] "Marine Expeditionary Unit", "Marine Expeditionary Brigade", and "Marine Expeditionary Force". During its post-WWII colonial period, however, French military forces in Indochina were designated as the French Expeditionary Force. Later, when U.S. Marine units were in Vietnam, the term "Marine Amphibious Force" was adopted because "Expeditionary Force" had strongly negative connotations for the South Vietnamese; the usage changed back after the war.
| |
| | |
| The [[United States Air Force]] has adopted the "expeditionary" term for yet another doctrine. Previously, units of "wing" size, comparable to a land forces brigade in size, had one basic aircraft type: bomber, fighter, transport, etc. As response capability became more flexible, "expeditionary wings" were formed, having comparable size but a combination of aircraft types. For example, one expeditionary wing is designed to be independently deployable to a country where it is desirable to establish an air defense and offensive counter-air capability. Other expeditionary wings, however, are tailored to the support of specific large ground forces that would be deployed as units; they would stress air transport and close air support over air defense and independent air offense. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 11:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
| |
