Talk:V Corps (United States)
Military history: North America / United States / American Civil War / World War I / World War II / Cold War Start‑class | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It seems to me that there's essentially no continuity between the Civil War corps and the 20th Cen. corps. For instance, the V Corps website says 'America's "Victory Corps" Birthday - July 7, 1918'. Is there any objection to splitting them, say by creating V Corps (ACW)? —wwoods 09:30, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I would not object. (I was the one who beefed up the ACW topic in this article.) Hal Jespersen 15:27, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
MP Dominance on this page
Astonishing. I had no idea until I read this that the key elements of V Corps when we invaded Iraq was a couple of MP companies. (This is my sarcastic voice.) We sure as heck didn't know it at Corps headquarters. 138.162.128.53 (talk) 17:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree that the very large section 'From Kuwait to Baghdad' entirely about only one brigade within the corps, needs modification. I am certainly not the one to do this but it would be nice to see it changed to include the goings-on of the other brigades and elements within the corps.
Joshua278 (talk) 19:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Eh. I was there and with a few exceptions, I don't think V Corps contributed much to the fight. The OPORD they built was overly complex, riddled with flaws, and discarded shortly after the divisions crossed the LD. The real work was done by 3 ID and the Marines while V Corps generated PowerPoint Slides at Camp Virginia. The CG knew the deal and when he wasn't in a VTC holding Rummy's hand he left the staff in their do loop for the battlefield in his mobile CP doing the GEN Patton thing (to his credit). The article completely fails to mention that USAREUR deactivated V Corps in the years after OIF I, forgetting that they had to stand up a Corps HQ in Afghanistan the following year. So after they transferred or threw away the Corps equipment and PCS'd all the troops they had to stand up a new V Corps from scratch. Of course, the alternative was the hidebound Cold War relics in Heidelberg deploying and they couldn't have THAT... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.139.51.70 (talk) 07:48, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Is it really going to disband?
Still active as on 2011. So what's with the line it will be disbanded?Other dictionaries are better (talk) 15:41, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
"Inactivation"
Is that the correct term? Shouldn't it be "deactivation"? -- 24.212.139.102 (talk) 23:01, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Start-Class military history articles
- Start-Class North American military history articles
- North American military history task force articles
- Start-Class United States military history articles
- United States military history task force articles
- Start-Class American Civil War articles
- American Civil War task force articles
- Start-Class World War I articles
- World War I task force articles
- Start-Class World War II articles
- World War II task force articles
- Start-Class Cold War articles
- Cold War task force articles