Talk:Containment

WikiProject Military history

(Rated 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. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Additional information... This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: criterion not met Associated task forces (general topics): Military science and technology task force

Article is not historically accurate

Though the term containment used today, most often refers to actions taken during the Cold War, its true definition fits such an example into a broader historical perspective. This being said, "containment" was a strategy discussed by Basil Liddell Hart during the 1930s and referred to a plan to prevent German hegemony over the continent by means of "collective security" and "limited liability" (see Azar Gat, A History of Military Thought (2001) pp.696-784). Therefore, containment is a policy by which one nation prevents another from achieving complete hegemony (or an unacceptable degree of influence or military presence) over a continent or territory. As a result, it can be seen that this concept stretches much further than the article would suggest. I would be happy to amend the introduction to the current article if others feel as I do. The article itself is not factually wrong, it merely requires a more accurate introductory definition that places the word's later uses in their proper context.--Dio free 05:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Reagan's role in the fall of the Soviet Union

This (mentioned at the end of the article) is heavily disputed by many political scientists and historians. Opposing viewpoints are also absent. As such, this article presents a Non-neutral point of view, and possibly a false assumption.

Yah. The article is also inappropriately dismissive of Carter's foreign policy -- as if he had somehow abandoned containment, which is false. --Dhartung | Talk 21:33, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Carter did not abandon Containment; upon taking office Carter did proclaim a new priority in American foreign policy, Human Rights, with Containment second. Before leaving office, Carter was convinced by his advisors, in and out of government, and American allied powers, and opposition critics, that this was a mistake. Hence Carter reversed himself with the Carter Doctrine, putting the Carter Administration back on the same song sheet with Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Ford. This is the consensus analysis of American foreign policy observers and experts, Zbigniew Brzezinski included, as to American Foreign Policy in the 1977-1979 period.Nobs01 22:20, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Um, please learn Wikipedia wikilink style standards before editing articles. It isn't our job to guess what he did, if someone believes he abandoned containment, it needs to be sourced. --Dhartung | Talk 06:10, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Um, from Wikipedia.org, Jimmy Carter,

"Carter promoted his foreign policy as being one that would place human rights at the forefront." Nobs01 14:34, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

And how, logically, is that the same thing? --Dhartung | Talk 16:07, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

The reference to "abandoned", with the response that Carter made it the second priority (which is not "abandonment"), has been made twice now. Nobs01 16:17, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

"Later developments"

In fact, this entire section may be irrelevant to the main topic.

That's possible, although again it goes to far in asserting that containment was somehow turned on its head instead of being finessed. There isn't a "History of foreign policy in the Cold War" article, yet, though. --Dhartung | Talk 21:33, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Various Edits

Good edits. nobs 02:57, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Fixed up a couple spots, added to the end of the overview and at the end of the article about the aftermath.User:Davidizer13 9:51 AM, 9-1-05

I've removed the sentence "contrary to the hopes of the George H.W. Bush administration". As the George H.W. Bush administration had no intention to oust Saddam at the end of the Gulf war. See George H.W. Bush's book A World Transformed 83.228.208.81 (talk) 01:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Origin of the use of the word containment

I know that Kennan is credited with the concept of containment. But the origin of that particular policy is not clear by reading the Long Telegram. It becomes more clear in the Clifford-Elsey Report which uses the terms "restrain" and "confine". Shortly after the Truman Doctrine speech, the word "contain" starts to show up. The X article uses the word containment. So what am I saying? I think that the background summarizing the Long Telegram (2/46), Clifford-Elsey Report (9/46), Truman speech (3/47) and X article (7/47) would add nicely to this article. Clifford's work played a large role in Cold War policy but it is mostly overlooked because the report didn't go beyond President Truman's desk. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 02:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Use of containment as word

Containment, as referred to in the beginning of the article, is allegedly to contain Soviet expansion. It does not seem applicable to a policy of containing belligerent nations in the Middle East in Asia when the threat of Soviet communism no longer exists, except in the form of Kremlin pressure. Why, then, is it used in reference to Bush's policy in Iraq? Ykerzner (talk) 01:02, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

US policy as main article

Why is the US policy the main article? When one hears the word "containment," does one think of US foreign policy? Dude1818 (talk) 19:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)