Talk:Swarming (military)

message: Can someone please add something on this, or find a place for this, or tell me where to put it? I think it is very important.
On January 7 this year the explicit, named concept of military swarming entered world  consciousness--and that of the headline writers--more than ever before, IMO. A sample news report, this from the NYTimes, is here. (The WikiNews account of it is late and is about a video of the incident, not the uncident per se.) The term "swarm doctrine" was repeatedly used in relation to this incident; a Google search on "iran us navy swarm" will turn up a huge number of hits. Apparently the US Navy had already performed a large simulation of a swarm attack against it in the Strait of Hormuz. 
Also from the Times, in a different article:There is a reason American military officers express grim concern over the tactics used by Iranian sailors last weekend: a classified, $250 million war game in which small, agile speedboats swarmed a naval convoy to inflict devastating damage on more powerful warships.
A final quotation, this time from a named source: 
"Iran still states that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps will employ swarming tactics in a conflict," U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence spokesman Robert Althage said.
A white paper from December 21, 2006, "Iran's Doctrine of Asymmetric Naval Warfare" by Fariborz Haghshenass, published by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, deals extensively with this swarming doctrine of Iran.
::Thanks for the interest! You already have me rethinking some headings, as while you are talking about asymmetrical warfare, you are talking about high-intensity warfare. Two places come to mind: a new section 4.3, or something in section 6.  It also might be appropriate to mention the more coordinated Japanese kamikaze attacks, especially the kikisui plan at the Battle of Okinawa and, perhaps, the plans for defense of Japan against invasion, in Operation Downfall. The Somali attacks in Operation Gothic Serpent/the Battle of Mogadishu might qualify as an example of swarming, without the people doing it consciously calling that.Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 14:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Iran swarming/US Navy incident 

message: Every source used in this section is by the same author and are published on the Web site of a company that's attempting to sell the "small military aircraft" mentioned in the section.
This does not appear to be a neutral source and I would propose this section be deleted if a more objective source is not available.
ttu103  —Preceding undated comment added 04:47, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  All sources for "A 1987 proposal" appears to be some sort of stealth advertising 

message: Is the Invasion of Normandy considered "swarming", at least in military terms? If so--or even if it isn't (given the "Blitzkrieg is not swarming" section)--I feel that maybe something should be said about it, seeing as the Invasion of Normandy is possibly the best and most well-known example of swarming in human history... But that's just what I think! -- 66.92.0.62 (talk) 07:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so. If you have WP:Reliable sources describing the battle as swarming it can be mentioned. Binksternet (talk) 15:10, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invasion of Normandy? 

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:43, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: " networks needed to make swarming routine will be available around 2010-2011"
so... does anyone know if this happened? If yes, can we update the abstract? If not, can we remove the line, or at the very least source it? 87.110.86.38 (talk) 04:25, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Swarming (military). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060927012543/http://www.acfnewsource.org/science/swarm_war.html to http://www.acfnewsource.org/science/swarm_war.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120224225003/http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2006-06/winning-and-losing-first-wired-war? to http://www.popsci.com/popsci/technology/1b1a2fe0df34b010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.quad-a.org/chapters/Drum/blue_force_tracker_and_army_avia.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071128125328/http://www.metatempo.com/huntingthesleepers.pdf to http://www.metatempo.com/huntingthesleepers.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071218232327/http://www.nanog.org:80/mtg-0410/kristoff.html to http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0410/kristoff.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070713210655/http://www.nps.navy.mil/ctiw/files/substate_conflict_dynamics.pdf to http://www.nps.navy.mil/ctiw/files/substate_conflict_dynamics.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:56, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified