Talk:Truman Doctrine

message: In paragraph 3 of "Regional Crisis," The article states: "In February 1946, Kennan, an American diplomat in Moscow, sent his famed 'Long Telegram'..." I am confused when reading this. Was he in 
Moscow, Russia? Or Moscow, USA... there are three Moscows in 
my area alone. Could you specify which one as to remove confusion? It would be much appreciated. Thanks!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.155.97.158 (talk) 22:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I'm niether a historian nor an economist so this may be completely out of line and the more knowledgable wikiens should feel free to slap me.  With that disclaimer, there are several references which imply to communism is a form of government when it is actually an economic system. (R.I.P. Mr. Buck) I'm wondering if the "communism" being refered to is really some authoritarian rule via fascist dictators, etc. Does anyone have an informed historical perspective which might illuminate the details more clearly? 
movement that wishes to implement that system. In the context of this article, the reference would be to said political movement. --Hench 06:40, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
Actually, "communism" in this context was intended to refer to the Soviet Union and its various client states.  Although this is a somewhat careless shorthand, it was an extremely common usage in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, especially in the United States.  This usage is still fairly frequently encountered today.  As annoying as it may be to those who are intent on precise use of language, it is firmly entrenched in common parlance. Paul (talk) 03:32, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Hench is mistaken (the economics involved is called "socialism"); The political usage is standard among scholars: Comrades!: A History of World Communism by Robert Service (2010) is about politics, not economics. Likewise 
"Communist" was part of the official name of the party--see for example The French and Italian Communist Parties: Comrades and Culture (Totalitarianism Movements and Political Religions) by Cyrille Guiat (2002) Rjensen (talk) 03:44, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Communism

message: I deleted this 
:The joint U.S-South African financing of the Renamo resistance movement in Mozambique can be seen as an example of Truman's legacy at work. Policymakers in Washington feared that a reasonably successful Communist state in the heartland of sub-Saharan Africa would cause neighbouring countries to adopt the socialist development model.
from the text, becuase the Renamo resistence movement was only founded in 1975, and as such is completely anachronistic and off-topic. If you wanted to discuss case studies, you would be better served mentioning US actions in support of Greece, Turkey, Rhee Syngman in South Korea, or of the French in Viet Nam that are more immediatly connected to the Truman Doctrine.--Francisx 07:57, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Renamo Reference

message: "Military spending in 2007, in USD. The Truman Doctrine outlined the foreign policy of the United States, in which right-wing, totalitarian governments are actively supported, and unfriendly or uncooperative governments are overthrown via direct invasions by the military forces or CIA operations."
This accompanied a graph showing the military expenditures of various countries in 2007.  I question the relevance of such a graph and would also like to suggest that the subsequent statement isn't a fair and accurate portrayal of the Truman Doctrine in a sentence.  I deleted it.
Teapot24 (talk) 19:43, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The First Graphic

message: I suppressed "ALBET IS GAY". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.214.103.69 (talk) 19:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: If someone would like to add a picture there are some at trumanlibrary, but the copyright status is unknown so they cant be uploaded to commons:
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/photographs/view.php?id=14684
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/photographs/view.php?id=14687
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/photographs/view.php?id=14697
Vints 06:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: The semiotic analysis by Ivies is relatively insignificant as far as a line of inquiry into the Truman doctrine, so I am removing the metaphor section. If it returns, it should be brief and fully attributed to Ivies rather than stated as fact.  AlexeiSeptimus 22:45, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Metaphor Section

message: the Original research tag at the beginning of the article :
the "was clearly at the heart of truman'sthoughts" is a qote from Chafe, William H., The Unfinished Journey: America Since World War II, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. I think  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.54.37.17 (talk) 19:50, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Original Research

message: I don't have the following book in front of me, but I seem to recall Neil Sheehan in A Bright Shining Lie saying U.S. aid to the French in their campaign against the Viet Minh began basically as soon as the French reoccupied the country in late 1945/early 1946, not "shortly after the start of the Korean War" as the article currently states. This issue is worth looking into especially since the doctrine of containment was often cited as a reason for later U.S. involvement in Vietnam.
Krazychris81 (talk) 22:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Vietnam Connections

message: Added para on Turkey, previously missing despite Turkey being original subject of Truman Doctrine! And added to Greece re history of the period in question ie the civil war. Note that in Greece & Turkey some military coups were against a rightist government, ie one formed by the more right of the two parties Hugo999 (talk) 02:22, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Turkey, and Greece

message: Page sysop protected due to edit warring. Tan  |  39 15:38, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Page protected

message: "...stated that the Communists planned for world domination. While this was likely an aim of Lenin...". There is a huge confusion on what world domination means here. World domination is usually linked to imperialism (a country tries to dominate others). The goal of Lenin was the inverse: preventing all imperialism. But he thought this could be done only by spreading communism worldwide. The world domination of communism (that has no link with nationalism) is not to confuse with Bonaparte world domination (that is clearly nationalist) for instance.
The sentence starting with "while this was likely an aim of Lenin" should be removed.
User:RomainBrasselet 17:18, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Stalin did indeed establish a stranglehold on the Comintern and changed the direction from one of world domination to a Soviet centered sphere of influence in 1926 (see Comintern#From the Fifth to the Seventh World Congress and Socialism in one country).  Regardless, lacking cited sources, the sentence is nothing but editorial opinion so I have removed it.  Cheers. L0b0t (talk) 17:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusion on world domination

message: Hello. I have recently tagged the page as having possible factual inaccuracies. In a recent edit, it was shown that the date was wrong in which the doctrine was instated. I then proceeded to correct the dates in several different areas of the article. However, I am not sure about this section:
:"In March 1947, President Truman appeared before Congress and used Kennan's warnings in the "Long Telegram" as the basis for what became known as the Truman Doctrine."
Is the date supposed to be February or March? In previous editions of the article, it said that the doctrine was created in March, but that particular address was made in February. However, there was an address in March. I'm not sure if they're the same one or not. Considering that most of the references are books, it was hard for me to verify. Hopefully someone who knows a bit more of this can look into it. I'd look more, but I've got to leave. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 03:31, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Factual inaccuracies

message: The audio from the "Special Message to Congress..." plays contains plays 0.1 seconds of static before ending. Tested in latest versions of Safari, Chrome and Firefox. Can someone who knows what they're doing fix this? Maxterpiece (talk) 09:15, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Special Message to Congress on Greece and Turkey (corrupted audio)

message: This is an important historical article, yet the reader of the substantial introductory section still has no idea when the Truman Doctrine was issued. This information should be in the first sentence. 67.0.165.7 (talk) 02:46, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date? 

message: [copied ex talk page of rjensen]
I made the edits that you just reverted on the Truman Doctrine page. From your biography, I fail to see how you can dispute the grammatical changes I made. The 'only' was clearly in the wrong place. The Soviet Union would only respond to force? It wouldn't be doing anything else at all? And so forth.
If you think it was Soviet imperialism, that's fine, but this is supposed to be an objective resource, and there are reasonable arguments that it was not imperialism. It certainly didn't call itself imperialism, as British imperialism did. I fail to see why, given that this is supposed to be an objective resource, 'expansionism' is unsatisfactory. It communicates the same meaning without being tendentious. /s/ User:SpottedToad
:::"expansionism" has the same objectivity as "imperialism" but is much less accurate in this regard. Check the dictionary, Merriam-Webster defines imperialism as a policy or practice by which a country increases its power by gaining control over other areas of the world.  Random House Dictionary defines it: the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies. It seems to me that that definition covers the satellite countries of Eastern Europe which we're actually talking about here. "Expansionism," [Merriam-Webster = a policy of increasing a country's size by expanding its territory] on the other hand, focuses on how the USSR annexed territory (which it did in the case of the Baltic states and Ukraine, East Prussia, etc.) That expansionism was not at issue for the Truman Doctrine. Rjensen (talk) 04:30, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was it Soviet imperialism or Soviet expansionism that troubled Harry Truman? 

message: The lead section claims that Truman's address to Congress about this doctrine took place on March 29, yet the article's "Truman's address" section says that it happened on March 12. Which one is it??? MarqFJA87 (talk) 04:07, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of address? 

message: — Assignment last updated by Camillemcleod (talk) 19:47, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Capstone Course in American Politics