ScottD Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I got a feeling we are going to see people get confused between the two categories.... KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) Any subject by markings from 1946 till 1991 Example: M1A1 in Germany 1986 (when the first M1A1's hit in country) would be posted cold war M1A1 AIM in Iraq 2004 would be posted in modern T-55AM in East Germany 1970's: Cold War T-55AM in Yugoslavia 1993: Modern And so on, so forth... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HOLMES Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 bump. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HeavyArty Posted December 5, 2011 Share Posted December 5, 2011 (edited) Actually, it's not as simple as above. Why not further break the forum down into Korean War ('50-'53), Vietnam War ('64ish-'75), Operation Desert Storm ('90-'91), Middle East Wars, Central/South American Conflicts (Falklands '82, Grenada '83, Panama '89, Nicaragua, Honduras, etc...)....? All of these were definitely hot (or shooting) wars, not part of the "Cold War" which was mainly a war of words and opposing sides standing off against eachother across borders in Europe. That is why most sites either don't break it down so far or use "modern" for everything post WWII. The Cold War is not a good sub-forum since so many other, unrelated events happened during it's 50+ year period. Edited December 5, 2011 by HeavyArty Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Fishwelding Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Actually, it's not as simple as above. Why not further break the forum down into Korean War ('50-'53), Vietnam War ('64ish-'75), Operation Desert Storm ('90-'91), Middle East Wars, Central/South American Conflicts (Falklands '82, Grenada '83, Panama '89, Nicaragua, Honduras, etc...)....? All of these were definitely hot (or shooting) wars, not part of the "Cold War" which was mainly a war of words and opposing sides standing off against eachother across borders in Europe. That is why most sites either don't break it down so far or use "modern" for everything post WWII. The Cold War is not a good sub-forum since so many other, unrelated events happened during it's 50+ year period. "Cold War Era" may be more appropriate. As for wars that are entirely unrelated, the "era" addition would suffice. More to the point, historians and political scientists increasingly consider the Korean War, Vietnam, Afghanistan (1980s) to be Cold War conflicts, because they don't consider the Cold War merely a war of words anymore. The superpowers did fight the Cold War, or paid other people to fight it in the developing world. Nuclear deterrence and the standoff in Central Europe were important, but there's a compelling case that they were ultimately less consequential for subsequent history. In terms of blood, treasure, and politics at the time, and later developments throughout the globe, the proxy-wars fought in Africa, Asia, and Central America, which occasionally involved superpower combatants but equally as often involved only money and weapons from the big guys were every bit as "Cold War" as USAREUR exercises. In this light, even the Mid-East Wars were often proxy conflicts, with both sides pouring equipment, money, and advisors into either side. That much of the same equipment is still in service doesn't hold up much anymore either. After all, the Ma Deuce dates from before WWII. It's tough seeing the "Cold War" as no longer modern, as it makes me feel old! But hey, I can't escape my old man's curmudgeonly prejudice that Strykers aren't "real" armored vehicles, either. (You can keep your organic, gluten-free, low-cal APCs. I think real armor rolls on tracks). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.