Talk:AirSea Battle

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the AirSea Battle article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

United States: Government C‑class High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of AirLand Battle was copied or moved into AirSea Battle with this edit on 2013-07-16. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

The Schwartz will be with us always[edit]

http://breakingdefense.com/2013/07/16/air-sea-battle-is-more-about-bin-laden-than-beijing-former-csaf-schwartz/

I think The Schwartz is still notable enough to mention. Hcobb (talk) 14:29, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://breakingdefense.com/2013/06/03/dod-document-sheds-first-new-light-on-airsea-battle-warfare-unfettered/

And a media view of the paper. Hcobb (talk) 14:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC) DoD Sheds First Clear Light On AirSea Battle: Warfare Unfettered[reply]

amitai etzioni? anyone willing to give an opinion on whether this guy is sufficiently recognized an expert on military affairs so as to include his evaluation of ASB in this and other articles? my sense is that this is somewhat outside his competencies. however, he is evaluating it from more of a social/peacenik perspective, not conducting a detailed military analysis, so maybe it is fine. what do others think?Happy monsoon day 18:29, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Background" and "history" sections are kinda the same thing, no?[edit]

These two sections are kind of amorphous and overlapping. I don't know what the obvious answer is right now, but something to keep in mind when the article fills out. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 21:10, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The "Doctorine" section[edit]

Uhm, wouldn't a section that actually describes what the doctorine is be useful, rather just discussing its history, who is coordinating it, and a bit of criticism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.53.6.191 (talk) 15:04, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links[edit]

These links have been tagged so are being reviewed per Wikipedia:External_links#Maintenance_and_review. They do not appear to meet the requirements at WP:EL, failing WP:ELNO#1 at least. However, they may be of use to editors wishing to work on the article so they have been moved here. If, after examination, a link is found not to be useful it can be removed from this list. If, however, the link does prove useful, the first approach is to see if appropriate information can be summarised in the article, using the link as a reliable source if it meets the WP:RELIABLE criteria. Be aware that, per WP:ELBURDEN, none of these links should be returned to the article without first gaining consensus that it meets the requirements at WP:EL or Wikipedia:Further reading. SilkTork (talk) 14:26, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The New Line in the Pacific by Richard Halloran
PACAF’s “Vision” Thing by Richard Halloran
AirSea Battle by Richard Halloran
Overview of the Air-Sea Battle Concept from the Air-Sea Battle Office.
Armed Services Committee public hearing on Air-Sea Battle Strategy