scholarly journals Support the Troops: Gulf War Homecomings and a New Politics of Military Celebration

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
David Fitzgerald

The celebrations that took place in the aftermath of the Persian Gulf War of 1991 stood out as the largest seen in the United States since the end of World War II, as hundreds of thousands of troops marched in triumphant parades in almost every major American city and in hundreds of small towns. But the pageantry did not simply celebrate American military and technological prowess. Spectators at these parades also engaged in a novel form of patriotism that emphasized unquestioning support for the troops. Representing a crucial moment in the American public's deepening veneration for U.S. soldiers and veterans, the Gulf War celebrations marked a turning point when the Vietnam-era image of the soldier as a broken or rebellious draftee was finally and purposefully eclipsed by the notion of the volunteer service member as hero.

2013 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 557-558

Volker Janssen of California State University, Fullerton reviews, “America's Economic Way of War: War and the US Economy from the Spanish-American War to the Persian Gulf War” by Hugh Rockoff. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Explores the economic causes and consequences of the wars that the United States fought in the twentieth century. Discusses a century of war; the economics of war; the Spanish-American War; the Philippine-American War; World War I; World War II; the Korean War; the Cold War; the Vietnam War; the Persian Gulf War; and the American economic way of war. Rockoff is Professor of Economics at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey.”


The Drone Age ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 27-54
Author(s):  
Michael J. Boyle

Chapter 2 provides an overview of the history of the development of drones. It shows that drone prototypes were in existence at the turn of the twentieth century and that their gradual development and use—either as missiles, target practice, or later, modern surveillance drones—proceeded in fits and starts. In the United States, this creation of drones was possible due to sustained investment by military and intelligence agencies, who took a risk on supporting unmanned platforms when the funds could have been devoted to manned aircraft or satellites. It reviews the history of the use of drones in World War II, the Cold War, and Vietnam, and shows how drones became used in combat in the Persian Gulf War and the Balkans. Finally, it discusses the birth of the armed Predator drone, which could play a central role in the counterterrorism campaigns of the post 9/11 era.


2019 ◽  
pp. 131-148
Author(s):  
أ.م.د.سطام حسين علوان

Since the end of World War II, the United States of America began to look at the Gulf States and Iraq due to the possession of huge quantities of oil, after taking the American oil depletion in order to tighten control over the oil of these countries, has pursued various means, political and military, in the framework of its strategy So that it could achieve this control, which focused on control of production and prices, for the conviction that those who control oil impose control over the political decision of the countries of the world.


2021 ◽  
pp. 108-151
Author(s):  
Rebecca Lissner

This chapter studies the Persian Gulf War. Prior to the Persian Gulf War, the United States was focused primarily on Europe, where rapid changes to the regional security order provided early signals of the nation’s dawning preeminence, but few indications of what a “new world order” would entail. Beyond the Soviet Union, there were no clear threats to U.S. global interests, and emergent American grand strategy envisioned a world where economic and diplomatic power would predominate, resulting in some measure of multipolarity. Yet the shock and awe of the war revealed that the United States stood alone as the world’s sole superpower, backed by international political support—including from a surprisingly deferential Russia—as well as unprecedented military preponderance. Washington therefore moved toward a more militarily assertive form of hegemony, characterized by the discretionary use of force to enforce the terms of the “new world order.” The war also inaugurated the preoccupation with Iraq and nonproliferation as central focuses of post–Cold War foreign policy.


Author(s):  
Crystal Mun-hye Baik

Korean immigration to the United States has been shaped by multiple factors, including militarization, colonialism, and war. While Koreans migrated to the American-occupied islands of Hawai’i in the early 20th century as sugar plantation laborers, Japanese imperial rule (1910–1945) and racially exclusive immigration policy curtailed Korean migration to the United States until the end of World War II. Since then, Korean immigration has been shaped by racialized, gendered, and sexualized conditions related to the Korean War and American military occupation. Although existing social science literature dominantly frames Korean immigration through the paradigm of migration “waves,” these periodizations are arbitrary to the degree that they centralize perceived US policy changes or “breaks” within a linear historical timeline. In contrast, emphasizing the continuing role of peninsular instability and militarized division points to the accumulative effects of the Korean War that continue to impact Korean immigration. With the beginning of the American military occupation of Korea in 1945 and warfare erupting in 1950, Koreans experienced familial separations and displacements. Following the signing of the Korean armistice in 1953, which halted armed fighting without formally ending the war, the American military remained in the southern half of the Peninsula. The presence of the US military in South Korea had immediate repercussions among civilians, as American occupation engendered sexual intimacies between Korean women and US soldiers. Eventually, a multiracial population emerged as children were born to Korean women and American soldiers. Given the racial exclusivity of American immigration policy at the time, the US government established legislative “loopholes” to facilitate the migrations of Korean spouses of US soldiers and multiracial children adopted by American families. Between 1951 and 1964 over 90 percent of the 14,027 Koreans who entered the United States were Korean “war brides” and transnational adoptees. Since 1965, Korean spouses of American servicemen have played key roles in supporting the migration of family members through visa sponsorship. Legal provisions that affected the arrivals of Korean women and children to the United States provided a precedent for US immigration reform after 1950. For instance, the 1952 and 1965 Immigration and Nationality Acts integrated core elements of these emergency orders, including privileging heterosexual relationships within immigration preferences. Simultaneously, while the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act “opened” the doors of American immigration to millions of people, South Korean military dictatorial rule and the imminent threat of rekindled warfare also influenced Korean emigration. As a result, official US immigration categories do not necessarily capture the complex conditions informing Koreans’ decisions to migrate to the United States. Finally, in light of the national surge of anti-immigrant sentiments that have crystallized since the American presidential election of Donald Trump in November 2016, immigration rights advocates have highlighted the need to address the prevalence of undocumented immigrant status among Korean Americans. While definitive statistics do not exist, emergent data suggests that at least 10 percent of the Korean American population is undocumented. Given this significant number, the undocumented status of Korean Americans is a critical site of study that warrants further research.


2000 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 53-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. J. Fenrick

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member states conducted a bombing campaign, referred to as Operation Allied Force, against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) from 24 March to 9 June 1999. The conduct of the bombing campaign has been subjected to a degree of outside scrutiny, particular by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the Office of the Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (OTP ICTY). This outside scrutiny process is not unprecedented. In particular, following the Gulf Conflict of 1990–91, Human Rights Watch produced a study entitled ‘Needless Deaths in the Gulf War’ and Greenpeace produced ‘On Impact: Modern Warfare and the Environment, A Case Study of the Gulf War.’ In addition, the United States Department of Defence (USDOD), which was not an outside scrutineer, produced a Report to Congress on the Conduct of the Persian Gulf War which included an Appendix O on ‘The Role of the Law of War.’


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document