Talk:Amphibious warfare

message: I know there are different types of amphibious operations (Assaults, Demonstrations, Raids and Withdrawals); however, I don't have an accessible source for this information, does anybody with more expertise know where to look?  The fact this article dosn't discuss the strategic concept of amphibious warfare (only the highlights, 'First', 'Biggest' etc.) is a major weakness. Inane Imp 00:04, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Types of Amphibious operations

message: Some claim Sicily, others Normandy.  I guess it depends on what and who you count.Beanbatch 22:44, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It was Normandy by a wide margin. That is why this was necessary:  - there were in fact two of them, 'A' and 'B'. This is 'B'.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.220.121 (talk) 20:06, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Biggest?

message: If I remember my American Military Experience course from last fall right, the Siege of Veracruz led by General Winfield Scott during the Mexican-American War was the first major joint amphibious operation between the US Navy and US Army. I don't have my copy of my textbook (For the Common Defense - ) on me to expand upon this any further than memory, but perhaps someone else can add it to this article? 
Also, I was planning on trying to write an article on littoral warfare, but maybe that's really just another name for this subject. If so, this link might be of some use. — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 10:33, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Siege of Veracruz 

message: 15000 = fifteen hundred??
:Fixed. CeeWhy2 11:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  contradiction 

message: Result - No clear consensus, little discussion, and too wordy to even decipher which way the consensus was leaning, no discussion here since November. - BillCJ (talk) 06:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Those claims about the primacy of airlift were bugging me so have removed them from intro and moved to a comparison section. Kept the claims about the displacement by airmobilty as the prime means of projecting power, but have added a context to these claims. Might be useful to think in terms of air assault operations (against a hostile landing zone) and airbridge operations (reinforcement into a friendly airfield), and equally of amphibious assault, and amphibious reinforcement. KTo288 01:47, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger to landing operation

message: What about Operation Albion? Large, successfull landing and no mention at all.
:Please feel free to add it. Nick-D (talk) 03:07, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not only Allies conducted amphibious assaults in WWI 

message: IMO, the Battle of Marathon cited in the article was not an "amphibious operation", but rather a standard off-loading of an invading army followed by a standard land-battle upon the beach where the Persians were backed up to the sea, but in this respect is no different than any other number of battles throughout history where one side had its back "against a wall" (or mountain, cliff, river, whatever).  I feel the reference should be removed, but as I'm not a naval historian do not feel comfortable making this edit myself, so instead I put it up for discussion.Rezdave (talk) 19:25, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marathon not really an Amphibious Operation 

message: Why I replaced an image in the post-WW2 section (Falklands). We already have a couple of pictures of post-WW2 US forces (we had two pictures of modern USMC on exercise - kept one at top), so makes it a little more international. And the Falklands War was one of the most significant amphibious ops post WW2. Chwyatt (talk) 10:42, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image replacement 

message: Some will argue that of most western nations, no opposed major amphibious operation will ever again occur. The first paragraph lacks a reference as to if projection of "power" transport method from the sea to the land of the combatant is via helicopter or other aerial vehicle- is that still an amphibious warfare/assault or something different by definition? (Could a qualified / knowledgeable USMC or Royal Marine answer the question by their definitions?)
For United States of America- most assault craft are of a design that only a small percentage of the worlds coastline is a manageabl beachhead. For the LCAC- hovercraft - their design increases this percentage quite a bit. 
Wfoj2 (talk) 00:41, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defination and the Future 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Amphibious warfare. 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/20010706183629/http://www.dstan.mod.uk:80/data/02/706/00000100.pdf to http://www.dstan.mod.uk/data/02/706/00000100.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:44, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Amphibious warfare. 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/20110902182446/http://ww2lct.org/history/stories/tin_armada.htm to http://ww2lct.org/history/stories/tin_armada.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090509234950/http://www.first-team.us:80/journals/1stndx03.html to http://www.first-team.us/journals/1stndx03.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:45, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Amphibious warfare. 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/20140220033559/http://www.history.army.mil/books/OpArt/us3.htm to http://www.history.army.mil/books/OpArt/us3.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090509234950/http://www.first-team.us/journals/1stndx03.html to http://www.first-team.us/journals/1stndx03.html
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) 05:57, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified