![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
why on earth is this only the yank ones? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.76.135 ( talk) 17:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Who put the "jargon" template on the article? Jargon is the topic itself. Silliness. O.M. Nash ( talk) 06:38, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
OK (sorry for the jargon there), but I still agree w/Mr. Nash. The jargon template in this case is profoundly silly. Terry J. Carter ( talk) 15:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
If these are code words, why would anyone want to put them on the internet for all to see? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.122.45.208 ( talk) 20:30, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't this page be considered classified, since it refers to codewords in military operations and such? (In fact, a lot of things on the internet should be classified, such as satellite photos of military bases, the exact numbers of troops and jets at every base, etc.) Why do you need spies when you have wikipedia? I have a friend of mine stationed in Alaska and he says he can't tell me the exact number of jets and such at his base, because he says it's confidential, but yet I can go on wiki and find it quite easily. *sigh* This entire article along with the information of numbers and such should be deleted because if servicemen can't talk about them under penalty of discharge and prison, then they shouldn't be on the Internet for all to see. -- 68.207.156.253 ( talk) 23:51, 5 December 2008 (UTC)Reggie
Two things: First, any seemingly telling information that you can find on Wikipedia is already somewhere else on the internet. Control is impossible and pointless to pursue. Second, I don't care what the number for active jets in AK is; the true number sure as hell isn't on Wikipedia. What the military tells us and what is actually the case are very often two (or more) different things. For instance, do you really think they filled in all of those perfectly good nuclear silos in Italy? 137.229.183.144 ( talk) 22:40, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Multiservice tactical brevity code. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
https://www.doctrine.usmc.mil/restrictedpubs/r325b.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:07, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
In this article from The Drive, former F-15 pilot Cesar “Rico” Rodriguez mentions the term "Millertime:"
That term doesn't appear in this article or in the FM 1-02.1 OPERATIONAL TERMS document. The term may be specific to US Air Force operations, and/or may be an older term no longer used. Dafydd2277 ( talk) 15:37, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Is the "ASW" in Bloodhound referring to anti-surface or anti-submarine warfare? Faith15 16:53, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
why on earth is this only the yank ones? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.76.135 ( talk) 17:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Who put the "jargon" template on the article? Jargon is the topic itself. Silliness. O.M. Nash ( talk) 06:38, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
OK (sorry for the jargon there), but I still agree w/Mr. Nash. The jargon template in this case is profoundly silly. Terry J. Carter ( talk) 15:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
If these are code words, why would anyone want to put them on the internet for all to see? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.122.45.208 ( talk) 20:30, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't this page be considered classified, since it refers to codewords in military operations and such? (In fact, a lot of things on the internet should be classified, such as satellite photos of military bases, the exact numbers of troops and jets at every base, etc.) Why do you need spies when you have wikipedia? I have a friend of mine stationed in Alaska and he says he can't tell me the exact number of jets and such at his base, because he says it's confidential, but yet I can go on wiki and find it quite easily. *sigh* This entire article along with the information of numbers and such should be deleted because if servicemen can't talk about them under penalty of discharge and prison, then they shouldn't be on the Internet for all to see. -- 68.207.156.253 ( talk) 23:51, 5 December 2008 (UTC)Reggie
Two things: First, any seemingly telling information that you can find on Wikipedia is already somewhere else on the internet. Control is impossible and pointless to pursue. Second, I don't care what the number for active jets in AK is; the true number sure as hell isn't on Wikipedia. What the military tells us and what is actually the case are very often two (or more) different things. For instance, do you really think they filled in all of those perfectly good nuclear silos in Italy? 137.229.183.144 ( talk) 22:40, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Multiservice tactical brevity code. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
https://www.doctrine.usmc.mil/restrictedpubs/r325b.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:07, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
In this article from The Drive, former F-15 pilot Cesar “Rico” Rodriguez mentions the term "Millertime:"
That term doesn't appear in this article or in the FM 1-02.1 OPERATIONAL TERMS document. The term may be specific to US Air Force operations, and/or may be an older term no longer used. Dafydd2277 ( talk) 15:37, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Is the "ASW" in Bloodhound referring to anti-surface or anti-submarine warfare? Faith15 16:53, 28 April 2023 (UTC)