Post by South on Aug 5, 2011 2:38:21 GMT -5
Good morning all,
This post is to introduce the "and its influence" in re the 1983 Grenada campaign.
During the Cold War, there were 2 main views, less all out warfare. The 2 views of the US (and allies) was:
1. Containment
and
2. named "Roll Back".
An example of this is the US domestic policy dispute re the Krean War. Does the US "contain" hostile forces so as to protect South Korea or does the US cross the Yalu and enter China to "roll back" enemy gains? This was the question.
Most of us are familiar with the "Containment" policy.
Grenada signified the Reagan policy change to "Roll Back". That is, US action was a direct confrontation of the Cuban forces on the island.
The island was insignificant and the Cubans, even with Soviet support, were nominal.
The message to the world, however, was that the US would consider going beyond containment.
Warm regards,
Bob
This post is to introduce the "and its influence" in re the 1983 Grenada campaign.
During the Cold War, there were 2 main views, less all out warfare. The 2 views of the US (and allies) was:
1. Containment
and
2. named "Roll Back".
An example of this is the US domestic policy dispute re the Krean War. Does the US "contain" hostile forces so as to protect South Korea or does the US cross the Yalu and enter China to "roll back" enemy gains? This was the question.
Most of us are familiar with the "Containment" policy.
Grenada signified the Reagan policy change to "Roll Back". That is, US action was a direct confrontation of the Cuban forces on the island.
The island was insignificant and the Cubans, even with Soviet support, were nominal.
The message to the world, however, was that the US would consider going beyond containment.
Warm regards,
Bob