text:
Talk:RAF Mount Pleasant

Untitled
Despite my nitpicking, I really like this article. Thanks, Astrotrain. - Hephaestos 20:20 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * using google earth, RAF mount pleasant appears to be ~ 30 miles south-west-west of port stanley, though I'm not sure that's the way to write it (which is why I haven't edited it in) 81.102.41.34 23:54, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

"The craters seen (see image in external link) were in fact heaps of earth placed there by the Argentines to make it look as though the runway was damaged.[4] " This seems at odds with other articles here and the book Vulcan 607. Is there any evidence that this might be the case?--Jeffjn 19:33, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

History section needs to be cleared
The section has a lot of propaganda, false assumptions and irrelevant data (e.g. Belgrano has nothing to do with Mount Pleasant). Please check with other well sources articles like Falklands War. --Jor70 (talk) 11:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

The raids obviously were not highly successful due Hercules, Pucaras and Aermacchis MB339 jets continuosly used the runway until June 14. The runway was already "disabled" for fast jets operations before the Vulcan raid, its was simply too short. The FAA didnt care to extend it (mistakenly may be) until they realized that UK will go to war (too late, british SSN already blocked all naval transit to the islands) Please read all sources in Falklands War and Black Buck Operation articles. --Jor70 (talk) 13:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I'm forced to agree, regardless of what the effectiveness of the Black Buck Raids is considered to be, its in no way relevent to the Mount Pleasant Base —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.146.20 (talk) 15:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

What was wrong with my cleanup version ? Why people continue to remove things without creating a consensus first ? I posted in this talk page a request about the history section and having no answer in 5 days I cleaned up. All the other stories are irrelevent here but if someone still have the urge of talking about the sinking of Belgrano we can add a see also. --Jor70 (talk) 20:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

 * There was a lot wrong with the "rewrite", not least due to the fact it removed critical information. Fast jet = fighter, not passenger aircraft in English for one.  Justin talk 08:19, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Could you please show me the critical information related to Mount Pleasant (Black buck??, Mirages??, Belgrano?? ) --Jor70 (talk) 13:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

ould anyone tell me weather the information about flights between Río Gallegos and MPleasant is right or not? Juan Pablo —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luquejp (talk • contribs) 02:04, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I did explain part of what it was above, I really don't have the time to explain every action to you. Continually questioning my good faith edits is starting to get extremely tedious and not to mention rather irritating.  As is your POV push on these articles.    Justin talk 13:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

HMS Invincible mention
HMS Invincible is mentioned in the context of the need to cover the Islands post '82. Fair enough. However, the gratuitous mention of the 30th of May "attack" and supposed damage caused to the vessel has been entirely debunked elsewhere, and is only seen these days as a weak piece of Argentine propaganda and not worthy of Wikipedia. I will remove this reference immediately. If there is any need for discusion on this point, please add below.

Benjym (talk) 19:17, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

 * Please undo your last revision since your removal had nothing to do with the alleged Argentine attack. User:Justin A Kuntz had already removed the material in question, eight minutes before your edit. The Invincible's repair at sea was correct, as stated in the lines you removed. --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 21:50, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

RAF tornado names
The first RAF tornados based here were presumably named ofr the Faith, Hope and Charity of Hal Far Fighter Flight during the Siege of Malta (World War II)? David Underdown (talk) 18:05, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Corridor
Article currently reads in part The world's longest corridor,[clarification needed] half a mile (800 m) long.... The cited source is a Daily Telegraph obituary of Brigadier David Nicholls which does indeed say ''...the Mount Pleasant base has the world's longest corridor linking accommodation and working areas. This half-mile passage was known to his troops as "Death Star Corridor" until Nicholls called in a family friend, the artist Professor Elaine Shemilt who, with colleagues and students from Dundee University, turned it into an attractive, warm thoroughfare now known as the Millennium Corridor.''

It may be true. The K-25 building is about 1,000' by 2,000', and the operators used to ride bicycles down its corridors to read the meters. But half a mile is 2,640'. Andrewa (talk) 07:42, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting the claim is removed? Wee Curry Monster talk 11:37, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, no. The claim is supported by a source that's at least borderline, and it sounds incredible but is quite possible. Or that's my conclusion. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

 * The reason for this section is to save others reinventing the wheel by repeating my research, as the claim does sound incredible at first IMO. Andrewa (talk) 19:53, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

 * It is the "Millennium Corridor" now, after it had been beautied up in 1999. See here https://app.dundee.ac.uk/pressreleases/prdec99/falkback.htm (unfortunately the images don't work, but Google still has them cached at present)...
 * or so they say. The old name was too iconic, and is still used. For a better source than The Failegraph, try https://www.forces.net/operations/falklands/raf-team-trekking-worlds-longest-corridor-charity. 2A02:8071:5BD0:D4C0:0:0:0:7BA0 (talk) 21:34, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Flights to Saint Helena
I have trouble with the idea of flights from Mount Pleasant to St Helena. But it rather depends on whether it means just flights from the Falklands to St Helena or is meant to imply flights from St Helena to the Falklands as well. It's stated to be about 3,812 miles from St Helena to the Falklands. Although the St Helena airport will be "international", the runway will be relatively short. This places considerable restraints on the aircraft that could use it. I haven't been able to find a commercial aircraft that could use St Helena and have the range to reach the Falklands. It is felt that most flights from St Helena will be to mainland Africa. That wouldn't help because, even if an aircraft "hopped" down the west coast of Africa, the distance from Cape Town to the Falklands is even more. It "might" be possible for an aircraft originating in the Falklands to land at St Helena, having expended most of its fuel, but how would it take off again? Incidentally, St Helena's airport will only be able to accommodate two mid-range aircraft at a time. Even the wingspan of a long range aircraft might be too much! The MercoPress news agency is not necessarily so reliable. You will note that I use the term "St Helena" rather than "Saint Helena". Most search engines default to the town of Saint Helena, near San Francisco. Might be worth considering.Agent0060 12:49, 24 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agent0060 (talk • contribs)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on RAF Mount Pleasant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100204033644/http://www.falklands.gov.fk:80/news/2010/01/airbridge-flights/ to http://www.falklands.gov.fk/news/2010/01/airbridge-flights/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 22:14, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Dates need a lot of tidying up
...as well as the lack of references. There is a sentence "currently,,,," with no date, containing what us I believe out-dated information. Further on there is a "Now..." with no date, probably also followed by out-dated information.

Would someone like to give this article a complete overhaul?

Boscaswell  talk  11:04, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Deployment of kosovar security forces to the islands
Should we add the 7 to 9 man force send by Kosovo to the forces deployed? 81.110.70.101 (talk) 23:37, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, provided you have a reliable reference. Gavbadger (talk) 22:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:RAF Mount Pleasant


text:
Jean François Sarrazin

Jean François Sarrazin (c. 1611 – 5 December 1654), or Sarasin, was a French writer.

Biography
Sarrazin was born at Hermanville, near Caen, the son of Roger Sarasin, treasurer-general at Caen.

He was educated at Caen, and later settled in Paris. As a writer of vers de société he rivalled Voiture, but he was never admitted to the inner circle of the hôtel de Rambouillet. He was on terms of intimate friendship with Scarron, with whom he exchanged verses, with Ménage, and with Pellisson. In 1639 he supported Georges de Scudéry in his attack on Corneille with a Discours de la tragédie. He accompanied Léon Bouthillier, comte de Chavigny, secretary of state for foreign affairs, on various diplomatic errands. He was to have been sent on an embassy to Rome, but spent the money allotted for the purpose in Paris. This weakened his position with Chavigny, from whom he parted in the winter of 1643–1644.

To restore his fallen fortunes he married a rich widow, but the alliance was of short duration. He joined in the pamphlet war against Pierre de Montmaur, against whom he directed his satire, Bellum parasiticum (1644). He was accused of writing satires on Mazarin, and for a short time gave up the practice of verse. In 1648, supported by the cardinal de Retz and Madame de Longueville, he entered the household of Armand de Bourbon, prince de Conti, whose marriage with Mazarin's niece he helped to negotiate. He died of fever at Pézenas, in Languedoc on 5 December 1654.

His biographers have variously stated on inadequate evidence that his death was caused by the prince de Conti in a moment of passion, or that he was poisoned by a jealous husband. The most considerable of his poems were the epic fragments of Rollon conquérant, la guerre espagnole, with Dulot vaincu and the Pompe funèbre in honour of Voiture. As a poet he was overrated, but he was the author of two excellent pieces of prose narration, the Histoire du siége de Dunkerque (1649) and the unfinished Conspiration de Walstein (1651). The Walstein has been compared for elegance and simplicity of style to Voltaire's Charles XII.

His Œuvres appeared in 1656, Nouvelles Œuvres (2 vols.) in 1674. His Poésies were edited in 1877 by Octave Uzanne with an introductory note. Much of his correspondence is preserved in the library of the Arsenal, Paris. See Albert Mennung's Jean François Sarasins Leben und Werke (2 vols., Halle, 1902–1904).

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Jean François Sarrazin


text:
Talk:Domino theory

2011 Arab World Protests
I'm deleting the Tunisia political cartoon, because I don't think the cartoon is appropriate for this article - Domino Theory is generally referred to in the context of communism and the Cold War, whereas the Arab World Protests are more aptly described as a revolutionary wave. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.137.141.31 (talk) 13:30, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Illustration
I have checked around and failed to find any source that includes China and Korea in the domino theory. The whole point is the countries are next to each other as dominoes are lined up. Since Korea and Vietnam are not next to each other they are not part of the domino theory.

I feel unless you can site a source for the illustration, it should be changed to omit China and Korea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.53.168.194 (talk) 16:55, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

SomeoneAddThisSource
I'm not so good at making wikiedits and following the rules, however i think this quote from Henry Kissinger - a proponent of the "Domino Theory" made 40 years later may be relevant.

As we packed up our gear, I asked Kissinger one last question. Something I really wanted to know. "What if the United States had allowed Vietnam to go communist after World War II?"

"Wouldn't have mattered very much," Kissinger muttered. Lights off. No camera recording what he was saying. "If the Vietnam domino had fallen then, no great loss."

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2002/12/05/kissinger/index1.html

Comments
''This article really does need sources.

Agreed. Sources? Theres alot of bullshit on this page. "in which large-scale attacks are used to intimidate the populace of a country into voting against an administration that advocates aggressive anti-terror policies."

Wait, he suggested that terror hoe attacks... would reduce... support... for anti-terror policy? Explain to me the logic behind that reasoning please? I mean sure Im not a theory theoretican but, Id suspect that the complete opposite would be the reaction (as it indeed WAS in the US post 9/11, patriot law etc etc etc) Until I see a source for the claim that he SAID it I highly recommend removing it.

Can someone please provide proof that Nixon said that the fall of Vietnam would bring about an invasion of the US and the end of freedom of speech, as this article alleges?

I honestly believe the derogatory remark about Chomsky is out of place. Regardless of whether the author agrees or disagrees with him opinion, saying Chomsky was "discredited" is both factually wrong (he is merely controversial) and unprofessional, therefore unfitting for Wikipedia.

WTH? American neoconservatives wanted to invade Iraq to spread liberalism across the Middle East? I'm not sure what is going on but it seems like most edits involving the invasion of Iraq are largely left of NPOV.

Pardon? How can this be LEFT of NPOV? The left wants nothing to do with the clusterfuck in Iraq, being liberal doesnt necessarily mean LEFT you know.

Domino theory in the Middle East
Ok, so, when someone thinks "Domino Theory", apparently people think of Iraq. I'm really not sure about this at all. Does the invasion of Iraq constitute a nation invading another soverignty to prevent the spread of a particular ideology? I don't think so. --Shanoyu 22:34, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * For me, and probably for most who remember the Soviet Union, "Domino Theory" means the danger of communism spreading through Southeast Asia. A few have begun using it in reference to the spread of democracy in the Middle East; thus the mention in the article.  The second meaning is not, as far as I can tell, predominant or even very common.  But it's common enough to warrant a mention.

 * As for your question "Does the invasion of Iraq constitute a nation invading another soverignty to prevent the spread of a particular ideology?" -- no, but the term "domino theory" is about encouraging the spread of an ideology, and always has been. --Yath 23:04, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I disagree. Either way, something needs to be changed.  If you want to go with that, then the first paragraph of the article needs to be changed to reflect what Domino Theory is also. --Shanoyu 23:17, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * You disagree with what? I've made several assertions.  And if you've found a logical inconsistency in the article, edit away. --Yath 23:22, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I disagree that's what Domino theory is. I see it as completely related to the spread of communism as per the first paragraph.  I would throw in the other definition into the first pagraph just so it doesn't look like the invasion of Iraq has anything to do with communism, except i'm not exactly clear on the definition now.  Gonna look for primary sources that argue it as a theory rather than a reason for a course of action. --Shanoyu 23:29, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree that the original meaning was about the spread of communism and nothing else. But, given that it's a propaganda term, it should be allowed to take on the meaning that any sufficiently large group of users choose to assign to it.  I don't sense that its meaning has changed just yet, but it is in the process of changing, and it may soon have the broader meaning of the spread of any ideology.  The Iraq/democracy connection should be mentioned as a minor new development. --Yath 23:47, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

article
This article is dripping with POV. This is not a one or two word job but one dripping with POV in every sentence. If anyone likes the previous one, a lot of work will have to be done on this.

The main editor of this article appears to be DanTD, who is a rabid anti-communist. His viewpoint appears to completely DOMINO-ate the article, and I agree, it is ridiculously biased. I might upload criticism of the theory if I didn't think he would delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.139.53.178 (talk) 03:32, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

My "The aggressive momentum..." sentence is a mirror image of the sentence that existed here. As to whether its POV, its only POV if the other sentence was. Feel free to remove it if you dislike it. Ruy Lopez 14:15, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I agree. This article acts as if the domino theory has not been falsified by history when it was. At least to most historians and most writers on the subjetc. --Dr. CRT (talk) 00:24, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Third agree. This article is one of the most biased articles I’ve ever seen on Wikipedia (the winner of most biased is Ronald Reagan).  Interestingly, this article suffers from the same problems as the Reagan article, namely, it is written from the primary POV of status quo hegemony, and fails to highlight the post-Cold War historical issues that became known post-Pentagon Papers.  The entire article, therefore, requires a rewrite, just as the Reagan article does. Viriditas (talk) 06:16, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

The domino theory turned out false, right?
I'm surprised to see nothing in the article about how the theory faired under the test of time (sounds fancy, but is that good English? :) ). Not only did the Vietnamese win, first in the North and then in the South, and did Cambodia become socialist (or communist if you wish, though that's a misnomer), and then .... nothing! No spread of 'communism'. In stead, Vietnam, Cambodia and China started fighting amongst themselves. And China and the USSR haven't quite been the best of friends either. No international conspiracy, just local politics and wars of liberation (not unlike the revolutions in the USA and France, by the way). In such a short article (surely, more can be said about the subject?) it would go to far to explore the details of all this, but there should at least be some mention of this. I'll give it a go, see if anyone else picks it up. Or has something similar been removed? I see the history is as long as the article is short. There must have been a lot of deletions. I hope my edit doesn't get deleted as well then :) . DirkvdM 13:49, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Unsurprisingly, all the points you made are highly disputed, but they are significant to the arguments of the critical side in the controversy section. They should not however, be presented as fact in the lead. Christopher Parham (talk) 15:10, 2005 August 3 (UTC)

 * Actually, it didn't for two reasons. 1)Many communist leaders outside of Indochina saw the war as the model for all other communist wars. Che Guevara, who supported Ho Chi Minh, opnely stated that he wanted to create "two, three, many Vietnams." 2)Communist armies, and their sympathizers were emboldened at first by the phony Paris Peace Accords of 1973, and then by the Fall of Saigon, just as radical islamists were emboldened by our pulling out of Lebanon in 1984, and Somalia ten years later. Those that didn't overthrow governments and turn them into communist regimes certainly tried. Even non-communists were encouraged by the Fall of Saigon. Even since then, all anybody has to do is shout "Vietnam" at any US military intervention as a buzzword for American defeat. DanTD 12:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

This section is not for debating how politics should be run. 24.143.86.181 (talk) 05:06, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

 * I don't think you can say the theory was false, just simplistic. Across East Asia, the Communists were contending for power after World War 2. The Communists did take power in China, North Korea, and North Vietnam.  Military intervention by America and other western powers undoubtably stopped Communism spreading to Taiwan and South Korea, and defeated a Communist insurgency in Malaya. A powerful Communist movement was crushed in Indonesia in 1965, and Communists and other leftists were repressed in Singapore.  Meanwhile there was a series of Communist insurgencies in the Phillipines. On the other hand, the eventual defeat of America and its allies in Vietnam in 1975 led to the spread of Communism to South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.--Jack Upland (talk) 03:36, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree with the criticism about the Domino Theory having been proven wrong. This article acts as if the predictions of the domino theory were correct. They were not. At least as pertaining to its original meaning. Communism did not extend to all of the countries in Indochina, much less to India, which was the biggest fear at the time. As every theory has to be taken in toto and not in parts this theory has therefore been falsified, as some or most of its predictions were wrong. It is either this or we are talking about an unfalsifiable theory. But if it is a theory that is not falsifiable why call it "a theory" in the first place? either it is a falsifiable theory or it is not, there is no in-between. This is clear to most historians and most writers on the subject.--Dr. CRT (talk) 00:33, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

This is a disappointing article. It is quite small, and the topic is large. There is no section on arguments against the Domino Theory, of which there have been several, including while the theory was being promulgated. There is no mention of Khruschev's doctrine of "peaceful coexistence" or the momentous Sino-Soviet Split in 1965. The fact that Indonesia's communist movement was destroyed in 1965-66 is given a few lines. All three circumstances weakened the rationale for the theory even at the time, and were in place *before* substantial American involvement in Vietnam. The article is very unbalanced and seems to be subtly advocating for the fearmongering that characterized the early 1960s and the supposed eventual spread of communism all over the world, despite its self-destruction in the 1980s. I can also see that there has been little activity on this article for ten or more years challenging the handful of early contributors!

 * There was a section about arguments against it, but for some unexplained reason, somebody eliminated that. -User:DanTD (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Reference to Khmer Rouge communist takeover of Cambodia added
I added a paragraph on the Khmer Rouge and the killing fields. I found it very surprising there was no reference to it.

There are two thiongs I don't understand in the article. The first is there was no further spread of the ideology in the region, which both critics and supporters alike argued proved their view of the theory was correct. How can this be an argument for the supporters of the theory?

The other is what starts with ''Many supporters, however, attempt to explain this...". I don't see the connection with the preceding text. Explain what and how? The two paragraphs are about differnt things. And they're both about the view of the supporters, so the 'however' looks odd. DirkvdM 15:04, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Good points both. The sentence you bring up first is trying to explain that, when Communism solidified in Cambodia, Vietnam, and Laos as a block, but then spread nowhere else, the supporters said, "look, the secured Communists in Vietnam helped finish off the revolution in neighboring Cambodia, we were right" and the opponents said "it didn't spread to Indonesia or Thailand, so you were wrong." The point is that it spread a little bit but not a lot and both sides interpret what happened as supporting their position.
 * I think I've fixed the second issue you raise; that paragraph refers to the one that starts "the primary evidence against..." I've placed these next to each other which hopefully will solve the problem; they were together originally but appear to have been split up over time. Christopher Parham (talk) 15:55, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

 * On second look the whole controversy section is pretty poorly structured. Christopher Parham (talk) 15:56, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree, and you might want to find a way to point out that both the Khmer Rouge and Pathet Lao were originally part of the Viet Minh. DanTD 19:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Kennan, containment, and the Truman Doctrine
How about writing something about Kennan, containment, and the Truman Doctrine in the background section? I guess that was the background to the Domino theory, only the name wasn't used before Eisenhower. Vints 09:49, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't it? I thought the Mr. X Article apeared before Eisenhower used the term...

 * In the X article "containment" not "Domino theory" was introduced Vints 19:11, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, many consider the foundation of the domino theory to be Dean Acheson's "rotten apple" theory of 1947. The United States was supporting the Greek economic royalists against the Greek Communists supported by Tito of Yugoslavia. Acheson, then Undersecretary of State to George Marshall, informed Congress that there was a "great polarization in the world. If Greece went Communist, it would be like a rotten apple in the barrel, infecting the rest." Here, Acheson implied "the rest" to be the Near East, India, China, and Japan. B lav 03:14, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.42.129.146 (talk) 13:41, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Butterfly effect?
I don't understand the reference to the butterfly effect in the beginning of the article. The Domino theory is essentially about one takeover leading to another leading to another in a very visible way. The butterfly effect is about how small variations in a system can produce large variations in the long term in a way that is often not easily foreseen. The only thing in common with the terms at all is that they both deal with cause:effect situations, although in completely different ways. I'm taking the reference out. Smooth Nick 22:19, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

What?
This the second stupidest thing I have ever hear any real life or fiction policy. This is fictional right? (The whole domino theory can't possibly be worthy to call itself a theory)

 * Sorry, but there's too much evidence that it's true. Among other facts mentioned in the article, as well as some other points I brought up, Che Guevara vowed to create more communist wars similar to Vietnam in other parts of the globe. Vietnam was viewed by communist leaders as the model for all communist wars. DanTD 23:32, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

"Actually, it didn't for two reasons. 1)Many communist leaders outside of Indochina saw the war as the model for all other communist wars. Che Guevara, who supported Ho Chi Minh, opnely stated that he wanted to create "two, three, many Vietnams." 2)Communist armies, and their sympathizers were emboldened at first by the phony Paris Peace Accords of 1973, and then by the Fall of Saigon, just as radical islamists were emboldened by our pulling out of Lebanon in 1984, and Somalia ten years later. Those that didn't overthrow governments and turn them into communist regimes certainly tried. Even non-communists were encouraged by the Fall of Saigon. Even since then, all anybody has to do is shout "Vietnam" at any US military intervention as a buzzword for American defeat. DanTD 12:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)"

-- 1) Sorry, perception of "many" (5 leaders? 2000 leaders? How many communist leaders did you have with such a limited amount of communist countries? Can we even measure them in parts per million? Or parts per billion?) doesnt constitute true, just because you want to believe it. So point 1 moot.

2) I dont think you "pulled out of" Somalia mate :P I think you were sorta pushed out... (and you started using the word "our" pulling out) I think you should lay off the american hegemony dogma and face up to the fact that the US didnt stop the communists in any real way and despite your stupendous failure there didnt pop up a billion little communist countries all over the world.

To clarify. Your claim that US dominy theory was correct or that their strategy prevailed because the communists presumed ideas to expand communism worldwide supposedly failed seems abit... presumptious...

 * You're wrong, Npovorpov. Go read some of Che Guevara's speeches, and see for yourself. This "american hegemony dogma" that you accuse me of is a load of crap, and communist dictatorships did pop up all over the globe after we gave up on Vietnam. And in places where they didn't, red armies carried out their own bloody terror campaigns all over the world. And we did pull out of Soamilia, because the anti-war movement kept blaming Clinton for the murders by Al-Qaida puppet Mohammed Farah Aidid, and he didn't want to be seen as being another Johnson. DanTD 14:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

DarkNiGHTs 21:47, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
This article has so much bull, it needs some serious work. I've done some, and I'll try and find sources for some of the things. the domino theory is very useful thanks for havifn some information on this! i'm glad you had it helpes me study for my history final friday thanks again climbingal —Preceding unsigned comment added by Climbingal (talk • contribs) 00:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Terrorist incidents paragraph
There's a paragraph detailing terrorist incidents by left-wing and Communist groups in the Western world. Though it's well-researched, I think it should be removed. I don't see the relevance to the domino theory - all it proves is that some people wanted Communist revolutions in other countries. These were homegrown groups, though, and they had no obvious connections to existing Communist countries. Korny O'Near 12:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Don't be so sure of that. The Red Brigades of Western Europe were linked to the Warsaw Pact, and in the Western Hemisphere, the F.A.L.N. the Revolutionary Action Movement, and F.L.Q. were linked to Cuba. Plus, there's the Communist Party USA, which was always close to Moscow, not to mention the Worker's World Party who are known Stalinists, and created their share of phony anti-war groups, a tactic that both the Revolutionary Communist Party and Communist Worker's Party(both Maoists) are familiar with. Groups like these are no different than the Viet Cong, Khmer Rouge, Sandinistas, or New People's Army. They simply were established in more affluent parts of the world. DanTD 22:14, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Well, really what I should have said is, none of these acts of terrorism had any chance of overthrowing a government. The point is not whether Communist governments were interested in seeing Western countries turn Communist (I'm sure they did). The key for this article is whether they were capable of achieving that. In other words, to connect a terrorist attack to the domino theory, you'd have to show four things: (1) that the attack was aided in some way by the success of a Communist uprising elsewhere in the world, (2) that it was intended to convert its target country to Communism, (3) that the attack had some chance of success, and (4) that its ultimate failure was somehow related to U.S. foreign policy. I think all of the attacks listed miss at least two of these, and in some cases all four. Korny O'Near 00:41, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Did you read the parts about their support for and by other left-wing terrorist abroad? The paragraph is relevant. It shouldn't have been deleted. DanTD 22:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

 * You mean, the part in your comments? That looks like original research to me. There's nothing in this article (or in their respective articles) tying, say, the Red Brigades or the Weather Underground, both cited in the article, to any Communist regime. Also, as I wrote before, you'd have to at least have some evidence that Communist countries funded these groups with the aim of regime change. Korny O'Near 23:01, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

 * You could've fooled me.

East Block Support:

The Red Brigades primary support came from the Czechoslovak StB and the Palestine Liberation Organization. Soviet and Czechoslovakia small arms and explosives came from the Middle East via heroin traffickers along well established smuggling routes. Logistic support and training were carried out directly by the Czechoslovak StB both in Prague and at remote PLO training camps in North Africa and Syria.

Aware of the involvement and fearing retaliation due to their own involvement with the KGB, the Italian Communist Party lodged several complaints with the Soviet ambassador in Rome regarding Czechoslovak support of the Red Brigades, but the Soviets were either unwilling or unable to stop the StB. This was one of several contributing factors in ending the covert relationship that the Italian Communist Party had with the KGB culminating with a total break in 1979.

The Weather Underground describes themselves as "a fifth-column for the Viet Cong and "fifth column" of the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army"(check the article on Kathy Boudin for that quote), and when the communist wars in Central America were breaking out during the late-1970's and 1980's, they used to fight on behalf of the Sandinistas, the F.M.L.N. in El Salvador, and other parts of Central America. The Front de libération du Québec, F.A.L.N., and Robert F. Williams' Revolutionary Action Movement were all Cuban-backed. Williams had a falling out with Castro when he realized Fidel didn't know jack about the true nature of race-relations in the Southeastern US. Castro insisted that working-class whites would be on their side, and he knew that wasn't true. DanTD 00:59, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Here's more on Soviet puppet dictatorships backing red terrorists in the west:

External Aid

Basically self-sustaining, but during Baader-Meinhof period received some support from Middle Eastern terrorist groups; some ties may still exist. The RAF received logistic support, sanctuary, and training from the German Democratic Republic during the early 1980s. The RAF appears to be developing closer ties to GRAPO in Spain.

That sure sounds like evidence of an attempt by the USSR-Warsaw Pact to back expand communism to me. DanTD 01:20, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Okay, great; this is the kind of stuff that belongs in the article. If there's no explanation that there was Communist state backing, the whole paragraph just looks like a non sequitur. The second half of the evidence needed, though, is showing that these groups had the goal of Communist revolution in their own countries, and not just more limited goals (e.g., ending the Vietnam War, independence for Puerto Rico, killing their perceived enemies). (Let's forget for the moment the idea that it was only U.S. foreign policy that blocked these groups from achieving this supposed goal.) Korny O'Near 02:17, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

 * I don't know if you're unwilling to discuss this on the talk page, but: for a terrorist action to be listed here, there has to be some evidence that it was done with the goal of regime change. The fact that it "sounds like evidence" of that to you is not good enough. In the case of actions in the U.S., the stated goals were much more limited than that, and thus I don't think any of them belong. This is an article about the domino theory, not a generic page about bad things done by Communists. Korny O'Near 18:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Are you aware of the history of these groups and their origins? Have you listened to their speeches? If you had, you'd realize that they dohave regime change in mind. International A.N.S.W.E.R. isn't the first anti-war front established by the Workers World Party, you know, and the WWP isn't the only communist faction to create anti-war fronts that evolved into communist terrorist groups. DanTD 19:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Better yet... . DanTD 19:12, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

 * All well and good, but there still needs to be at least a single piece of evidence that any of this terrorism had to do with Communist countries attempting to bring about revolution(s) in the West. Even speculation, as long as it's from a notable source. Anything. (On a technical note, don't use "ref" tags in the Talk page; they're not clickable.) Korny O'Near 20:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Got it about the references. But check this info on the Workers World Party:

Initially the WWP was confined to the Buffalo, New York area, where it had constituted the Buffalo and other smaller branches of the SWP, like Youngstown, Ohio, but expanded in the 1960s. During the Civil Rights Movement the WWP had a youth movement, "Youth Against War and Fascism", which opposed the Vietnam War. Workers World and YAWF were also notable for their consistent defense of the Black Panthers and the Weather Underground along with Vietnam Veterans Against the War and the Puerto Rican Independence movement.

As I had mentioned earlier, the FALN was backed by Cuba. And you do realize that the Soviet Union admitted in 1990 that the Communist Party USA took orders from Moscow, and that the Students for a Democratic Society which spawned the Weathermen originated in a youth faction of the League for Industrial Democracy don't you? - DanTD 00:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Find some evidence directly (not indirectly) linking a U.S. terrorist group to a Communist country, and then facts about that group can go into the article. Korny O'Near 01:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

 * What do you think Cuba is? DanTD 01:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Fine; we can add FALN to the page, with a citation showing that they received aid from Cuba. Korny O'Near 05:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Nazis
There seems to have been a similar use of the theory in WW2 propaganda, when successive invasions of Austria, Poland, the Netherlands, France and Denmark were presented as evidence of a Nazi domino strategy for the rest of the world. ADM (talk) 04:26, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Good call. I've always felt past experience with the Third Reich, and the Axis in general fueled belief in the domino theory, and gave it credence. The true difference was that the attempted communist takeover of the globe by Moscow, Beijing, and Havana, was never as smooth as those carried out by Berlin and Tokyo. DanTD (talk) 12:19, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Fall of the Wall anniversary
Some mention should probably be made of the 20th anniversary celebrations of the opening of the Berlin Wall, where 1000 dominoes are to be toppled to symbolise the fall of communism in Europe. Rather ironic, that. -- 118.209.59.168 (talk) 10:08, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Other applications: Arab world protests?
In the "Other applications" section, should the recent protests in the Middle East and North Africa be mentioned? There is already a political cartoon regarding the event; a text description should be added to the corresponding section as well. --Delta1989 (talk/contributions) 03:35, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

2010-2011 Tunisian uprising image
I noticed that there was an image with the caption 'A more recent example featuring the 2010-2011 Tunisian uprising', but there was no information anywhere in the article that mentions this event. Is the image in the wrong place? I just find it odd that there is an image so out of place with the rest of the article with no information to go along with it. SudoGhost (talk) 18:35, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Arguments for all 3 sides?
There is a section for arguments supporting the theory, and a section for arguments against the theory. The section for arguments supporting the theory also has a part further supporting the idea that an unsuccessful war (supplying communists with volumes of morale, solidifying their negative views on capitalists through the bloodshed of civilians) actually held back the effect. I think there should be another part for arguments that the domino effect is real, but not all actions intended against it (ie. Vietnam War) is likely to slow it down in the long run. I'm not saying that I know for sure that the Vietnam War did not slow down the effect, in fact, I know very little. I just think the third view deserves some mentioning. Anyone agree? Or disagree? 173.180.202.22 (talk) 02:05, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

 * I don't see the need for a separate section for those - but it might depend on how many people have made such arguments. Korny O'Near (talk) 16:49, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Opps, did I imply a section?(I'm never really clear) Sorry I meant just some mentioning, similar to the mentioning of arguments the domino effect was held back in the section mainly about arguments the effect exists. 173.180.202.22 (talk) 04:27, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Oops
In the edit summary where I said "I'm not sure the changes are correct," I was addressing my own changes! 173.180.202.22 (talk) 07:35, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Domino theories describe more than Southeast Asia/Viet Nam
Yes, the most prominent example of a domino theory being widely argued in foreign policy was with regard to the spread of communism in Southeast Asia in the 1950s at the time of the decolonization of Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. But the descriptive analogy (and it is simply an analogy with all of the caveats) is more broadly understood by policy makers. For a good discussion, see The Irony of Vietnam: The System Worked, by Leslie Gelb and Richard Betts, starting on page 197, National Security Goals and Stakes: "'two generations of presidents and high officials had lived through or were reared on the dominoes of the 1930s...if aggression is tolerated in small, out-of-the-way places, aggressors will be emboldened to attack larger, more vital places...a straight line from the Japanese takeover in Manchuria in 1931 to the invasion of China to the attack on Pearl Harbor...the same straight line from Italy's attack on Ethiopia in 1935 to German reoccupation of the Rhineland to the anschluss of Austria to the rape of Czechoslovakia at Munich to general war in Europe...These were not simplistic analogies, not mechanical formulae. It is in the nature of power to want to keep thing from getting out of control, and control in diplomacy operates on the margins... Taken to extremes, such analogies break down. Used cautiously as operating principles of politics, they are sound. It should not be forgotten that the domino principle was easy to understand and to explain to the American people...The analogical force of historical, current, and psychological-legal dominoes blotted out—more, made irrelevant—the peculiarities of Vietnam.'" 71.190.76.5 (talk) 16:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Arguments Against
The Arguments Against section has no sources and very few arguments. It is dominated by a discussion of Communist politics in Indochina which has little relevance.

Critics of the theory seem to conflate it with what could be called the Puppet Master Theory - that everything was being controlled from Moscow or Beijing. But I think that is different. A row of dominos is not a monolith.

Most of this section could be deleted without loss to the article.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:50, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

 * The theory was never exclusive to Indochina. -User:DanTD (talk) 15:41, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Contemporary Communist analysis thereof?
Domino Theory wasn't a secret worry; even presidents publicly indicated worries about how loss of Tonkin might essentially doom countries from Japan to Malay to India all becoming Communist-controlled.

One thing I haven't seen much of is contemporary analysis of the idea, and of the American fascination with the idea, from Soviet and Chinese theorists of the time. Surely there must have been some consideration; even if they themselves doubted it to the point of considering it preposterous (and I don't know that they did, at least until the Sino-Soviet split), they must have considered it in light of estimating how the United States and to a lesser degree its allies might act in various circumstances, and whether and how to exploit it in propaganda.

Have Soviet and Chinese archives offered anything on this?

98.248.37.55 (talk) 23:42, 16 February 2015 (UTC)anon

Cuban support for FLQ and Black Militants
Did I mention this source for Fidel Castro's support communist factions of Quebec Separatists and the Black Liberation Front? I know I've added other references here. -User:DanTD (talk) 22:45, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Ho Chi Minh was more of a communist than a nationalist
This sentence wreaks of pure revisionism:

"The domino theory failed to take into account the character of the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong struggle in the Vietnam War. By assuming Ho Chi Minh was a pawn of the Communist giants Russia and China, American policymakers failed to see that the goal of Ho and his supporters was limited to Vietnamese independence, rather than the spread of global communism."

First, Ho Chi Minh was a puppet of "Communist giants" such as the USSR and Red China. Second, the goal of Ho and his supporters was an all-communist Indochina, due to his support for the Pathet Lao and Khmer Rouge, not to mention his direct invasion of Laos in the late-1950s. If anything his goal was the spread of regional communism. The predecessors of the South Vietnamese government were just as interested in Vietnamese independence, if not more so. -User:DanTD (talk) 16:36, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Domino theory. 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/20131021040535/http://iis-db.stanford.edu/evnts/6186/Stalin_and_Eastern_Europe.pdf to http://iis-db.stanford.edu/evnts/6186/Stalin_and_Eastern_Europe.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051126071737/http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2005/Che-Guevara-Gott11aug05.htm to http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2005/Che-Guevara-Gott11aug05.htm

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) 09:54, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Dead link
The Eisenhower "Domino Theory" speech from April 7th, 1954 is a dead link. Not sure if it needs modifying, but I'm not really a Wikipedian and can't find a different link. (Feel free to delete this off of your original post, I couldn't figure out how to create a new one.) 152.13.33.31 (talk) 07:33, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up; I've fixed it now. Cheers! YoPienso (talk) 07:50, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Not neutral
Hi, I think this article needs to be revised as it is not neutral; it's states as a fact that communist or socialist are a threat and then it starts to show points of views about if this Domino effect happens or not, or when...

it says about Noam Chomsky opinion on this: he believes that the domino theory is roughly accurate, although he put a more positive spin on the threat,

That is so blatantly biased that it equals socialist or communist government to a threat(for who? clearly U.S. control of foreign countries economies, which is, obviously, illegal)

The subject of the article should be about a doctrine of the U.S. government to illegaly overthrown or invade other countries governments by commiting crimes against humanity and genocide (see Operation Cóndor)

If I get any help I would make some changes here. Thanks!

Agustin6 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:48, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

 * The victims of these nations would disagree with you on that, and Chomsky's support for these nations is worth noting. If you want to maintain neutrality, I suggest reviving the chapter on the Case against the Domino Theory. -User:DanTD (talk) 14:38, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

User:DanTD (talk) express what you mean better, the victims of what? I born and lived 40 years in one of these nations (Argentina), the CIA involvement with national army murdered nearly 30.000 people against neoliberal policies (the militar Junta is now in prison for genocide and crimes against humanity in what they called dirty war)

the same happened in almost every country in Latinoamérica. They called it Operation Condor

I'm not very familiar with Chomsky's work, but that quote describes the last 60 years of latinoamerican history.

Agustin6 (talk —Preceding undated comment added 21:57, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The victims of all these communist dictatorships. What did you think I meant? Also, Chomsky is a big supporter of revisionist history, including that of Latin America. -User:DanTD (talk) 22:36, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

User:DanTD (talk)Which communist dictatorships? there wasn't any communist dictatorships in latinoamérica, here we had military neoliberal dictatorships, backed up by the CIA.

I don't know the work of Chomsky, I know latinoamerican history; I think the problem is you are confusing two different things (as the article does), soviet communism and latinoamerican socialism, the first one had genocides and dictatorships, the last one didn't; they are different things, both politically and culturally. The situations doesn't link.

What U.S. interventionism has done in Latinoamerica has not connection with the Russian policies. Has been illegal and the people involved sentenced by courts here and in Spain as genocides, there was no Stalin here, no real threat for nobody except for banks illegal bussiness. It's what court sentences says I mean, not this writer Chomsky.

Agustin6 —Preceding undated comment added 23:09, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

 * That's 100% untrue. It has in fact been entirely in reaction to communist insurgencies in these countries. The alleged "latinoamerican socialism" as you put it was backed by the former Soviet Union. Cuba was a Stalinist, and so was Che Guevara who imposed communist guerilla wars upon Latin America, as well as Africa, and other parts of the third world. Noam Chomsky wants the world to believe these people are legitimate organizations benefiting the people, instead of the Bolshevik thugs they are. The only communist dictatorships he didn't support, were the USSR and "People's Republic" of China.-User:DanTD (talk) 00:34, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Agustin6 That is 100% untrue. Castro needed the back up of Russia at the point when he had no choice but to make a deal mith the maffia when Cuba was in danger of being erased of the map. Cuba was socialist; Che Guevara wanted people to get free of foreign intervention, both U.S. or the soviets, both thugs. You are too biased by propaganda, these people was indeed legitimate organizations benefiting the people, unlike Bolsheviks. I know many of those left wing militants survivors of the 70s genocide here in Argentina.

You may check Oliver Stone documentaries about Cuba, Castro, Chavez in Venezuela and other presidents, it can be usefull so you see the difference this guy Chomsky does is 100% real (I cannot tell about her views on other subjects, though)

Oliver Stone's documentaries can be found online. (sorry about my grammar, it's possible full of mistakes). Lastly, you should came around the region and see by yourself. It is still a pretty good place. Agustin6 —Preceding undated comment added 01:22, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

 * 1)Noam Chomsky has sided with almost every communist terrorist group ranging from the Greek Communist Party to the Khmer Rouge 2)Post-colonial Cuba was never in danger of being erased from the map, and I'm right about Cuba, and their puppet regimes and communist terrorist groups in other countries. All that crap about Cuba only being a socialist and Che being some kind of liberator is straight up communist propaganda. 3)Hugo Chavez was a Fidelista, and so is Nicolás Maduro. 4)Oliver Stone is a communist sympathizer. The man came back from Vietnam and made it his lifelong duty to trash everything we were trying to do against communist tyranny, so it should be no surprise if he made some movie lionizing Venezuela's current regime. Let's not forget that Venezuela backed known communist terrorist such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia and his puppet Fidel Castro straight up took over Grenada, which is was caused us to invade the country in 1983. 5)As for Argentina, the best thing you can say is that we didn't support that regime when they invaded the Falkland Islands in 1982. -User:DanTD (talk) 05:36, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

I didn't read anything of Chomsky, so I'll leave it aside. You are repeating propaganda; In 62' Castro had to make a deal with the USSR accepting to have their missils on the island after Cuba have being invaded by U.S. army in april of 61'. This conversation seems pointless, you are repeating propaganda and telling me about who is who on the place I live. It doesn't make any sense.

However, you cannot say communism or socialism itself is a threat, is just a form of society. Every country has the right to choose which kind of society wants, whitout other countries intervention, and foreign millitary interventions are illegal

That is neutrality.

Agustin6 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:07, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * "However, you cannot say communism or socialism itself is a threat, is just a form of society. Every country has the right to choose which kind of society wants, whitout other countries intervention, and foreign millitary interventions are illegal." That's nice, but without reliable secondary sources, Wikipedia is not an appropriate place for you to self-publish your original research ruminations about the illegality of U.S. intervention. Similarly, without reliable secondary sources making the connection, the material you added on the subject of Operation Condor is WP:UNDUE and violates WP:SYNTH. Please familiarize yourself with these and other Wikipedia content policies before making further edits like this.--יניב הורון (talk) 11:43, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
 * "However, you cannot say communism or socialism itself is a threat,..." Yes I can, for the same reasons I can say fascism is a threat. Caving into holocaust denial in the hopes of appearing neutral is just as idiotic. -User:DanTD (talk) 14:05, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

You are insulting me now. Socialism is just about abolition of privileges, that example doesn't makes sense; Again, you are mixing soviet's history with the ideology. Norway is a socialis country, how it will derive into an holocaust? Latinamerican socialism (or culture) has no point of connection with USSR policy. Even inside latinoamerica; For example, Chilean culture is completely different to Nicaragua culture, both in some point wanted to own their resources and manage their economies for equality purposes...both process where blown by CIA intervention (by militar Juntas or Contras)

Agustin6 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:55, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * And you're living with the false assumption that Latin American communist terrorist groups were merely socialists. You say socialism is about abolition of privileges, but communism replaced economic privileges with privileges based on political status. I'm not mixing Soviet ideology with communism in Latin America, Soviet and Maoist ideology is actually part of it. The majority of communist terrorist groups in Latin America were backed by Cuba after 1959, and Cuba was a Soviet puppet (and still is, despite the fall of the USSR). The exceptions are groups like the Shining Path in Peru, which is Maoist. No reasonable person can claim that nations like Norway are genocidal, but guess what; The USSR was, the "People's Republic" of China was the so-called "Socialist Republic" of Vietnam was, the Khmer Rouge definitely was, and the "Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia" was. -User:DanTD (talk) 03:19, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

I live here, I know dozens of left-wings activists. What communist terrorist groups are -or were- here besides Shining Path?

I just saw this ''your original research ruminations about the illegality of U.S. intervention. Similarly, without reliable secondary sources making the connection, the material you added on the subject of Operation Condor is WP:UNDUE and violates WP:SYNTH.'' which sources are you talking about?

Agustin6 (talk —Preceding undated comment added 11:18, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The category from your country is right here (Category:Communist parties in Argentina) The rest in South America are here. -User:DanTD (talk) 14:30, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Not one of those parties are terrorist nor even one of their members has a gun, or are interested on buy one (what for?). I know a few of them, most of them are students financially broke whos major delictive activity is to smoke marihuana. You should come to this country to get the idea of how absolutely Ridiculous it is to categorize this as a soviet backed up terrorist anything. Their activity is usefull eventually as they protest against illegal mass dismissals in companies. Agustin6 (talk —Preceding undated comment added 20:06, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * You obviously didn't read about their activities. All communism has ever been useful to are the leaderships of communist parties. -User:DanTD (talk) 13:28, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

 * It is a pity that a discussion about the content of the article is dominated by mindless shouting. Bever (talk) 18:59, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. Community Tech bot (talk) 08:37, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Communist Party of Indonesia.svg

German article
The article at the German Wikipedia may serve as an example to enhance this article. Bever (talk) 18:55, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I will take a look. Viriditas (talk) 06:20, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

primary evidence: Comintern (Third International)
The article section "Arguments in favor of the domino theory" currently states: "The primary evidence for the domino theory is the spread of communist rule in three Southeast Asian countries in 1975, following the communist takeover of Vietnam"

but the domino theory was well before 1975 (unless you want to make a pedantic point that's a good point but nobody wants to make, that prior to 1975 it was the domino hypothesis, and the spread of communist rule as predicted by the hypothesis proved the domino theory :)

In any case, I think the primary argument in favor of the domino theory is the stated goals of Marxist socialism. Lede from the Comintern article: "The Communist International (Comintern), also known as the Third International (1919–1943), was an international organization that advocated world communism. It was controlled by the Soviet Union.[1][2][3] The Comintern resolved at its Second Congress to "struggle by all available means, including armed force, for the overthrow of the international bourgeoisie and the creation of an international Soviet republic as a transition stage to the complete abolition of the state".

There are many other sources for that same idea. That coupled with the obvious notion that it's easier to influence or subvert a neighboring country than a geographically isolated one. 108.185.102.135 (talk) 00:13, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Secret Service as ‘persecuting communists’ in “Arguments that criticize the domino theory”
I had to correct the wording of the article because it said that the US Secret Service was involved in political persecution. It was not. The US Secret Service (USSS) did not take any part in the persecution of communists in the US government or abroad neither before, during, or after McCarthyism. The US Secret Service is a federal agency that deals only with diplomatic security (President, VicePresident, etc.), and counterfeiting (that’s why up until 2003 the USS was under the Department of the Treasury). Other federal agencies must have been responsible for that persecution, either the FBI or the CIA but definitely not the US Secret Service.

Unused sources
I found the following sources (here, reformatted properly in citation templates) dumped in a nonstandard "Literature" section, but none of them were actually cited in the article. Maybe they will be useful later, but they serve no purpose being in there right now. If they were meant to be a "Further reading" section, these honestly are not very helpful, and at least one of the entries was not appropriate for such a section anyway, since it is not in English (we can certainly cite non-English sources as inline reference citations, but they are not useful as "Further reading" recommendations for users of en.wikipedia). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  14:40, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Domino theory


text:
CIF

CIF, c.i.f. or Cif may refer to:

Finance

 * Climate Investment Funds, in international climate change agreements
 * Community Infrastructure Fund (CIF), a method of UK government funding for transport infrastructure
 * Cost, Insurance and Freight, (c.i.f.) a historic trade term and International Commercial Term (Incoterm) indicating that a price includes cost, insurance and freight
 * Código de identificación fiscal, a former Spanish tax identification number for legal entities; See Identity document

Organizations

 * California Interscholastic Federation, the governing body for high school sports in California
 * CIF Central Section
 * CIF Central Coast Section
 * CIF Los Angeles City Section
 * CIF North Coast Section
 * CIF Northern Section
 * CIF Oakland Section
 * CIF Sac-Joaquin Section
 * CIF San Diego Section
 * CIF San Francisco Section
 * CIF Southern Section
 * Canada India Foundation, a Canadian lobbying organization
 * China International Fund, a Chinese company that funds large-scale national projects in developing countries

Science and technology

 * Caltech Intermediate Form, geometry language for VLSI design, in which the primitives are coloured rectangles (similar to GDSII)
 * Catch-in Focus, a function offered by SLR cameras to release the shutter automatically when the subject comes into focus
 * Central Instrumentation Facility, a former building at the Kennedy Space Center that housed data processing machines
 * CFTR inhibitory factor (Cif), a virulence factor secreted by Pseudomonas aeruginosa
 * Common Intermediate Format, a video format common in video teleconferencing
 * Crystallographic Information File, a standard text file format

Other uses

 * Counter Insurgency Force, a Police tactical unit of West Bengal Police
 * Cif, a brand of household cleaning products by Unilever
 * Cif., the standard author abbreviation for Raffaele Ciferri
 * Champions Indoor Football, a professional indoor American football league
 * Chifeng Yulong Airport (IATA code), China
 * Coming into force, the process of legislation becoming effective
 * Comment is free (Cif), online comment section of The Guardian newspaper

title: CIF


text:
Hungarian alphabet

The Hungarian alphabet (magyar ábécé) is an extension of the Latin alphabet used for writing the Hungarian language.

The alphabet is based on the Latin alphabet, with several added variations of letters, consisting 44 letters. Over the 26 letters of the ISO basic Latin alphabet it has five letters with an acute accent, two letters with an umlaut, two letters with a double acute accent, eight letters made up of two characters, and one letter made up of three characters. In some other languages, characters with diacritical marks would be considered variations of the base letter, however in Hungarian, these characters are considered letters in their own right.

One sometimes speaks of the smaller (or basic) and greater (or extended) Hungarian alphabets, differing by the inclusion or exclusion of the letters Q, W, X, Y, which can only be found in foreign words and traditional orthography of names. (As for Y, however, it exists as part of four digraphs.)

As an auxiliary letter sometimes Ë is used in academic documents to show different pronunciation of spoken dialects, though it is not part of the alphabet.

Description
Each sign shown above counts as a letter in its own right in Hungarian. Some, such as the letter ⟨ó⟩ and ⟨ő⟩, are inter-filed with the letter preceding it when sorting words alphabetically, whereas others, such as ⟨ö⟩, have their own place in collation rather than also being inter-filed with ⟨o⟩.

While long vowels count as different letters, long (or geminate) consonants do not. Long consonants are marked by duplication: e.g. ⟨tt⟩, ⟨gg⟩, ⟨zz⟩ (ette 'he ate' (det.obj.), függ 'it hangs', azzal 'with that'). For the di- and tri-graphs a simplification rule normally applies (but not when the compound is split at the end of a line of text due to hyphenation), only the first letter being duplicated, e.g.
 * ⟨sz⟩ + ⟨sz⟩ → ⟨ssz⟩ (asszony 'woman'),
 * ⟨ty⟩ + ⟨ty⟩ → ⟨tty⟩ (hattyú 'swan'),
 * ⟨dzs⟩ + ⟨dzs⟩ → ⟨ddzs⟩ (briddzsel 'with bridge (playing game)').

An exception is made at the joining points of compound words, for example: jegygyűrű 'engagement ring' (jegy + gyűrű) rather than *jeggyűrű.

Hyphenation of individual letters ⟨Dz⟩ and ⟨dzs⟩ were changed in the 11th edition of Hungarian orthography (1984). Prior to that, they were allowed to separate as two-letter combinations ⟨d⟩+⟨z⟩ and ⟨d⟩+⟨zs⟩.

Pronunciation
The pronunciation given for the following Hungarian letters is that of standard Hungarian.

The letter ë is not part of the Hungarian alphabet; however, linguists use this letter to distinguish between the two kinds of short e sounds of some dialects. This letter was first used in 1770 by György Kalmár, but has never officially been part of the Hungarian alphabet, as the standard Hungarian language does not distinguish between these two sounds. However, the ë sound is pronounced differently from the e sound in 6 out of the 10 Hungarian dialects and the sound is pronounced as ö in 1 dialect. It is also used in names. Other letter for this sound is Ėė (rarely).

A more open variety of, close to , may be denoted as Ää in the Hungarian linguistics literature.

The digraph ch also exists in some words (technika, monarchia) and is pronounced the same as h. In names, however, it is pronounced like cs as well as like h or k (as in German) (see below).

The letter Y is only used in loanwords and several digraphs (gy, ly, ny, ty), and thus in a native Hungarian word, Y never comes as the initial of a word, except in loanwords. So, for native Hungarian words, the capital Y only exists in all caps or small caps formats, such as the titles of newspapers.

Historic spellings used in names and historical documents
Old spellings (sometimes similar to German orthography) used in some Hungarian names and their corresponding pronunciation according to modern spelling include the following:

On áá:

Generally, y in historic spellings of names formed with the -i affix (not to be confused with a possessive -i- of plural objects, as in szavai!) can exist after many other letters (e.g.: Teleky, Rákóczy, Dézsy). Here are listed only examples which can be easily misread because of such spelling.

Examples:

Historic spellings of article and conjunctions
In early editions the article a/az was written according to the following rules:
 * before vowels and h — az: az ember, az híd
 * before consonants — a: a' cs'illag.

The abbreviated form of the conjunction és (and), which is always written today as s, was likely to be written with an apostrophe before — ’s (e.g. föld  ’s nép).

Capitalisation
The di- and the trigraphs are capitalised in names and at the beginning of sentences by capitalising the first glyph of them only.
 * Cs ak jót mondhatunk Sz ékely Cs abáról.

In abbreviations and when writing with all capital letters, however, one capitalises the second (and third) character as well.

Thus ("The Rules of Hungarian Orthography", a book edited by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences):
 * A magyar helyesírás sz abályai
 * MH SZ (not MHSz)
 * A MAGYAR HELYESÍRÁS SZ ABÁ LY AI (not SzABÁLyAI)

Alphabetical ordering (collation)
While the characters with diacritical marks are considered separate letters, vowels that differ only in length are treated the same when ordering words. Therefore, for example, the pairs O/Ó and Ö/Ő are not distinguished in ordering, but Ö follows O. In cases where two words are differentiated solely by the presence of an accent, the one without the accent is put before the other one. (The situation is the same for lower and upper-case letters: in alphabetical ordering, varga is followed by Varga.)

The polygraphic consonant signs are treated as single letters.

The simplified geminates of multigraphs (see above) such as <nny>, <ssz> are collated as <ny>+<ny>, <sz>+<sz> etc., if they are double geminates, rather than co-occurrences of a single letter and a geminate.
 * könnyű is collated as <k><ö>< ny ><ny><ű>. tizennyolc of course as <t><i><z><e>< n ><ny><o><l><c>, as this is a compound: tizen+nyolc ('above ten' + 'eight' = 'eighteen').

Similar 'ambiguities', which can occur with compounds (which are highly common in Hungarian) are dissolved and collated by sense.
 * e.g. házszám 'house number (address)' = ház + szám and of course not *házs + *zám.

These rules make Hungarian alphabetic ordering algorithmically difficult (one has to know the correct segmentation of a word to sort it correctly), which was a problem for computer software development.

Keyboard layout
The standard Hungarian keyboard layout is German-based (QWERTZ). This layout allows direct access to every character in the Hungarian alphabet.

The letter "Í" is often placed left of the space key, leaving the width of the left Shift key intact. "Ű" may be located to the left of Backspace, making that key smaller, but allowing for a larger Enter key. Ű being close to Enter often leads to it being typed instead of hitting Enter, especially when one has just switched from a keyboard that has Ű next to backspace. The German "Ä" and "ß", the Polish "Ł", and the Croatian "Đ" are also present.

Letter frequencies
The most common letters in Hungarian are e and a.

The list below shows the letter frequencies for the smaller Hungarian alphabet in descending order (sample: 9620 letters).

The spelling alphabet
Note that some letters were omitted (notably, Dz, Dzs, Gy, Í, Ly, Ny, Ty, Ú, Ű).

Old Hungarian script
The Old Hungarian script is a writing system formerly used for the Hungarian language. It was derived from the Old Turkic script. Its usage began to decline after the Kingdom of Hungary adopted the Latin alphabet.

Epigraphic evidence for the use of the Old Hungarian script in medieval Hungary dates to the 10th century. At the turn of the 11th century, with the coronation of Stephen I of Hungary, Hungary became a kingdom and the Latin alphabet was adopted as official script.

The runic script was first mentioned in the 13th century Chronicle of Simon of Kéza, where he stated that the Székelys may use the script of the Blaks. Johannes Thuróczy wrote in the Chronica Hungarorum that the Székelys did not forget the Scythian letters and these are engraved on sticks by carving.

Its usage between the 11th and 19th centuries is believed to have been limited, although it featured in folk art of the Early Modern period. The script experienced a revival in the 20th century. Beginning with Adorján Magyar in 1915, the script has been promulgated as a means for writing modern Hungarian.

title: Hungarian alphabet


text:
Talk:St. Johns County, Florida

Untitled
Wondering how to edit this U.S. County Entry? The WikiProject U.S. Counties standards might help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rambot (talk • contribs) 20:40, 27 July 2003 (UTC)

Saint Johns, Florida
Saint Johns is a newly designated town/city in St. Johns County. It encompasses the northwest portion of the county and includes (I believe) Fruit Cove, Switzerland and the Julington Creek development. I don't know if it's incorporated or not, but the U.S. Postal Service recognizes it as a ligitimate town to address mail to. A new page should be created for Saint Johns.

 * From my understanding, St. Johns, Florida is an unincorporated community. I could be wrong, though. Skillz187 02:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

History
In the last paragraph under history I removed a ludicrous comparison between the geographic size of St. John's county and the "eleven" states. In 1821 there were actually 23 states. At no point was there eleven states. Any third grader knows we started with 13 states in 1776 and the number never went down from that. Besides that, a quick glance at any map of the U.S. will make it very obvious that the entire state of Florida would comprise a fraction of the eastern sea board. In fact, Florida totals about 65,772 square miles. New England alone comprises nearly 72,000 square miles. I am astonished that someone else didn't notice this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.144.213.97 (talk) 21:56, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Saint Augustine and Jacksonville
Jacksonville is in Duval County. Saint Augustine is not a part of Duval County or Jacksonville. Saint Augustine is not a suburb of Jacksonville. The leaders of Jacksonville should remember this. 2601:346:C280:3B30:75A8:374:EE24:24E0 (talk) 14:38, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:St. Johns County, Florida


text:
Talk:St. Lucie County, Florida

Untitled
Wondering how to edit this U.S. County Entry? The WikiProject U.S. Counties standards might help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rambot (talk • contribs) 20:40, 27 July 2003 (UTC)

Map
The map image is located at File:Map of Florida highlighting Saint Lucie County.svg. Apparently, however, even though the image is specifically named in the infobox, the infobox defaults to a name that's the same as the county name, and there is no image called File:Map of Florida highlighting St. Lucie County.svg. Corvus cornix 21:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I changed the infobox heading to Saint Lucie County, which caused the map to pop up with no problems. Quidam65 19:19, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:St lucie county fl.gif
File:St lucie county fl.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Election fraud by election supervisor
Why was the information about the Democrat who threw away the results for 40 out of the 94 precincts in the county deleted? More bias from the deletionists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.116.228 (talk) 12:27, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Spanish Fleet
" The fabled 1715 Spanish treasure fleet sank off the area that is now St. Lucie County... "
 * I`m pretty sure this is wrong...the wreck site is just south of Sebastian Inlet which is the extreme north part of Indian River County about 30 miles north of St Lucie County. 66.177.244.25 (talk) 13:33, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree. I visited the site of the wreck a few years ago in Indian River County, and the information is indeed incorrect. Donny (talk) 20:52, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Previous writers have neglected to include
Previous writers have neglected to include the wikilink St._Lucie_River. There is an article by that title. 75.167.104.115 (talk) 00:34, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:St. Lucie County, Florida


text:
Paul Scarron

Paul Scarron (c. 1 July 1610 – 6 October 1660) (a.k.a. Monsieur Scarron) was a French poet, dramatist, and novelist, born in Paris. Though his precise birth date is unknown, he was baptized on 4 July 1610. Scarron was the first husband of Françoise d'Aubigné, who later became Madame de Maintenon and secretly married King Louis XIV of France.

Life
Scarron was born and died in Paris. He was the seventh child of Paul Scarron, a noble of the robe and member of the Parlement of Paris, and Gabrielle Goguet. Paul became an abbé when he was nineteen. He lived in Le Mans from 1632 to 1640, and in 1635 traveled to Rome with his patron, Charles de Beaumanoir, the bishop of Le Mans. Finding a patron in Marie de Hautefort, maîtresse-en-titre of Louis XIII, he became a well-known figure in literary and fashionable society.

In 1638, Scarron became disabled. One source (Laurent Angliviel de la Beaumelle, Memoires... de Mme de Maintenon) attributed Scarron's deformities to rheumatism contracted from spending time in a swamp. According to this story, Scarron, while residing at Le Mans, once tarred and feathered himself as a carnival freak and was obliged to hide in a swamp to escape the wrath of the townspeople. Another story has Scarron falling into an ice-water bath during the Carnival season. It seems more likely, seeing the connection with water, that he was disabled by polio.

Whatever the cause, Scarron began to suffer from hardships and pain. His upper body became permanently twisted and his legs were paralyzed; he was obliged to use a wheelchair, and began taking copious amounts of opium to relieve his pain. Adding to his misfortunes, he became involved in a series of lawsuits with his stepmother over his father's property, as well as being obliged to support his sisters financially.

Scarron returned to Paris in 1640. In 1643, he published Recueil de quelques vers burlesques ("A Collection of Some Burlesque Verses"), and the next year published Typhon ou la gigantomachie. At Le Mans he had conceived the idea of his Roman comique ("Comic Novel"), the first part of which was printed in 1651.

In 1645, his comedy Jodelet, ou le maître valet ("Jodelet, or the Valet as Master") – the actor who played the leading role was also called Jodelet. Jodelet was the first of many French comedies about a servant who takes on the role of master, an idea that Scarron borrowed from the Spanish.

Scarron became employed by the bookseller Quinet and called his works his "marquisat de Quinet." He had also a pension from Nicolas Fouquet, and one from the queen. Scarron had initially dedicated Typhon to Mazarin, who was not impressed with the work; Scarron then changed it to a burlesque on Mazarin. In 1651 he expressed his allegiance to the Fronde by writing a violent anti-Mazarin pamphlet, and lost his pensions due to this.

In his early years, Scarron was something of a libertine. In 1649 a penniless lady of good family, Céleste de Palaiseau, kept his house in the Rue d'Enfer, and tried to reform the habits of Scarron and his circle.

In 1652, he married the impoverished but beautiful Françoise d'Aubigné, afterwards famous as Madame de Maintenon, second wife of Louis XIV. He died in Paris on 6 October 1660.

Epitaph
Scarron wrote his own epitaph, which makes reference to the terrible physical pain he suffered during the last years of his life:

 * Celui qui cy maintenant dort
 * Fit plus de pitié que d'envie,
 * Et souffrit mille fois la mort
 * Avant que de perdre la vie.
 * ''Passant, ne fais ici de bruit
 * Garde bien que tu ne l'éveilles :
 * Car voici la première nuit
 * Que le pauvre Scarron sommeille.

 * "He who sleeps here now
 * Deserved more pity than envy,
 * And suffered death a thousand times
 * Before losing his life.
 * Passer-by, do not make noise here
 * Be careful not to wake him
 * Because this is the first night
 * That poor Scarron slumbers."

Works
Scarron was very prolific as an author. The piece most famous in his own day was his Virgile travesti (1648–1653), a parody of the Aeneid, but the reputation of this work later declined. According to the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, the Virgile travesti "is now thought a somewhat ignoble waste of singular powers for burlesque" and the Roman comique (1651–1657) is Scarron's best work: "This history of a troupe of strolling actors... is almost the first French novel...which shows real power of painting manners and character, and is singularly vivid. It is in the style of the Spanish picaresque romance, and furnished Théophile Gautier with the idea and with some of the details of his Capitaine Fracasse."

Scarron also wrote some shorter novellas, including La Precaution inutile, which inspired Sedaine's Gageure imprévue; Les Hypocrites and may also have inspired Molière's Tartuffe. His plays include Jodelet (1645), Don Japhet d'Arménie (1653), L'Écolier de Salamanque (1654), Le Marquis ridicule ou la comtesse faite à la hâte (1655), La Fausse Apparence (1657), Le Prince corsaire (1658).

Most of his works were adapted from Spanish sources, particularly Tirso de Molina and Francisco de Rojas Zorrilla.

Scarron is a character in the D'Artagnan romance Twenty Years After by Alexandre Dumas.

The Roman Comique
The Roman Comique tells the adventures of a company of strolling players in a realistic setting, thus providing much information concerning the customs of these companies of actors. The main plot tells the misadventures of Destin's acting company and presents us with an intrusive narrator who disappears when some of the characters tell their life stories such as Destin, La Caverne and La Garouffiere. These stories have a higher tone than the main plot since they tell of past loves among the nobility. In the end the reader is able to unveil many of the mysteries of the novel and the relationship between the heroic material from the past and the comic adventures of the present since L'Estoile is the noble Leonore in disguise. The novel also borrows some of its humor (partially embodied in Ragotin) from Miguel de Cervantes's Don Quixote as well as from Menippean satire. It also contains four interpolated tales, taken mainly from Spanish sources. The most famous is the novella of the "Invisible Mistress," a comic adaptation of the more serious tale by Alonso de Castillo Solorzano. This tale, which includes a number of comic narrative intrusions, would be reworked by a number of English authors such as Thomas Otway and Eliza Haywood.

The earliest English translation was in 1665 by John Bulteel, titled The Comical Romance. The "Brown-Savage" translation was published in 1700. In 2012, it was newly translated by Jacques Houis as The Comic Romance.

title: Paul Scarron


text:
Jean Jules Jusserand

Jean Adrien Antoine Jules Jusserand (18 February 1855 – 18 July 1932) was a French author and diplomat. He was the French Ambassador to the United States 1903-1925 and played a major diplomatic role during World War I.

Birth and education
Born into a rich Lyonnais family, Jean Jules Jusserand spent his childhood between his familial residence in Saint-Haon-le-Châtel and Chalon's boarding school in Lyon. After his father's death in 1870, he was determined to honour him by learning new cultures and excelling in his international and bicultural career.

After his scholarship in Chartreux, he continued his studies at the University of Lyon, not knowing where these studies would lead him. He also wanted to increase his knowledge, which he judged insufficient. He studied literature, science, law and history, where he became an excellent student in all the subjects. He received two licenses, history and law, and, despite the worries his family had about him not completing his studies, he obtained a doctorate in history. Jusserand continued travelling across the world, learning languages and discovering new horizons. He completed his studies in 1875 and pursued an international career.

Career
His career started in 1878 when he applied to the Foreign Affairs national competition, at the age of 23. He first started as a student-consul, and he was then kept as a help-consul in London under the direction of Mr. Langlet, who congratulated him on his remarkable work. In 1880, he became sous-chef of the 'cabinet de Barthélemy-Saint-Hilaire', where he worked as minister of foreign affairs. His literary work enabled him to reach a higher status as Paul Cambon's partner, the Minister of France in Tunisia, in 1882. During this time Jusserand was in charge of the administrative organisation of the protectorate. He became known as a respected diplomat, thanks to his contributions to the great humanization of the protectorate. Jusserand came back to the Quai d’Orsay In 1887, in a delicate moment, where he worked in the political sector. In 1898 he exercised in the role of emissary near Saint-Siège, then Minister of France in Copenhagen. In 1902 Jusserand was named Ambassador to the United States, under the presidency of Loubet.

Before the war
As the new French ambassador in Washington, Jean Jules Jusserand succeeded Jules Cambon who, in Madrid, was replacing his brother Paul Cambon, himself nominated in London. Jusserand took up his position on 7 February 1903.

Jusserand was elected an International Member of the American Philosophical Society in 1907.

In 1911, he was admitted as an Honorary Member of the Society of the Cincinnati in the State of New Jersey.

He was elected an International Honorary Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1912.

He soon won Roosevelt's sympathy, in addition to the President's successors'. Thus, during 22 years, Jusserand was the French politic spokesperson alongside 5 presidents of the United States (Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson, Harding and Coolidge), especially he had served as Dean of the Diplomatic Corps from May 1913 to January 1925.

As in June 1905, the French and German concurrence over Morocco's domination nearly lead to a war. Jusserand used his influence on Roosevelt in order to play an efficient role in the Algeciras Conference. The support that was brought by the United States and the United Kingdom to France helped the French access to the Cherifian Empire (known today as the Moroccan Empire.). Everything happened in a very friendly and courteous manner, several American and French personalities considered that the ambassador had "saved the peace".

During the war
Jean Jules Jusserand played an important role in the United States's entry into the war. As early as 1914, he campaigned for the entry of the United States to support France. It was a period of anguish and concern for Jusserand because the American public's opinion was very divided. It took the Americans more than three years to enter the war, being triggered by the submarine campaign launched by Germany.

On 12 March 1917, the House of Representatives authorised the arming of commercial vessels. Following the attack on two US ships by German U-boats, the US president realised on 20 March that the US was in fact at war with Germany. The United States would not be able to limit its intervention to the naval domain alone. On 2 April, he announced to Congress that he wished to go to war alongside the Entente, sending troops on French soil, thus directly entering the conflict. The US Senate approved this resolution by 82 votes to 6. On 6 April 1917, the US was officially at war. On 28 June 1917, the first American division landed at Saint-Nazaire. Jean Jules Jusserand said on this occasion: "For the first time, a neutral nation has decided to enter the conflict without prior bargaining, without having laid down a condition."

On 10 May 1917, French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau sent him a telegram to congratulate him on his action, saying "All you have said is excellent." On 5 September, the United States of America participated in their first offensive against Germany. On 11 November, during an allied offensive, the armistice was signed, thus ending the First World War.

He helped to support of professor Thomas Garrigue Masaryk legions especially in Russia and in negotiation for independent Czechoslovak state in America from May to October 1918.

For the Versailles negotiations, President Wilson was accompanied in France by Jean Jules Jusserand, whom he trusted. As a matter of fact, Wilson was the first incumbent US president to come to Europe. The Paris Peace Conference, beginning on 18 January 1919, culminated in the signing of the Treaty of Versailles on 28 June, establishing a seemingly definitive peace.

After a brief period of harmony lasting only 22 years, another world conflict ensued in 1939. However, Jusserand had no influence on this Second world war, passing away in 1932.

After the war
Even after the First World War, Jean Jules Jusserand was still fighting to maintain the peace obtained after so many efforts and sacrifices. He accompanied the American President Woodrow Wilson to the Paris Peace Conference (1919), during which was signed the Treaty of Versailles on 28 June 1919. When the Polish army invaded Ukraine, a Russian counter-attack reached Warsaw, where there was a rise in revolutionary ideas. France sent Jusserand at the head of a diplomatic and military mission to save the Polish.

He remained the French ambassador to Washington for the next five years under presidents Warren G Harding and Calvin Coolidge. During this time, he published a dozen books in French and English, on various subjects. Later on he returned to France, where he spent some time with his wife in Saint-Haon-le-Châtel, their property in Forez.

In 1923, Jean Jules Jusserand presided and delivered a speech during the inauguration ceremony for the American war memorial.

At the age of seventy, he retired. Émile Daeschner succeeded him in 1924, followed by Henry Bérenger on 1 January 1925.

On 10 January 1925, a farewell banquet was organised in his honour by the American government in order to express their esteem and gratitude. This ceremony brought together the most important political, scientific and cultural figures of the United States. He was also awarded a medal for his deeds.

In 1930, Jean Jules Jusserand published his last book, The evolution of the American sentiment during the war (L'évolution du sentiment américain pendant la guerre).

He died in 1932 in Paris at the age of 77, following a lengthy bout of kidney disease. His national funeral took place in Notre-Dame, and his body rests in the family home in Saint-Haon-le-Châtel.

Alliance Française
In 1884, Jean Jules Jusserand took part in the foundation of the Alliance Française. The Alliance Française is a French organisation which aims to promote French culture and language, especially after France's defeat by Germany in 1870.

This association is not subject to any political or religious influence.

The Fondation de l’Alliance Française is the "moral and juridic reference" for the other Alliances Françaises. It is she whom approves the formation of new Alliances françaises by approving their status. It helps the Alliances to form employees, and guide them in the extension of their activities or even when they go through tough times.

The Alliance Française has buildings all around the world and is today the biggest cultural Non-Governmental Organisation of the world with around 1000 establishments in more than 136 countries. The Alliance Française in Lyon was created in 1984 and has received many Labels since then. Nowadays, it is the first French language school in Lyon and the third Alliance Française in France. Within it, there is a multicultural team of 40 people, who welcome 2500 students per year and more than 130 nationalities. The 2,500 m2 of modern locals dedicated to the study and learning of languages with 17 classrooms. It perpetuates the founders' spirit, including Jusserand's.

Legacy

Even today, different monuments exist in France and the United States in order to commemorate Jusserand's diplomatic role.

A pink granite bench in Rock Creek Park honoring Jusserand was dedicated by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt on 7 November 1936. It is the first memorial erected on Federal property to a foreign diplomat. In 2014 Washington City Paper called it the "best obscure memorial" in D.C.

Literary work
He wrote a series of articles published in Cosmopolis: An International Monthly Review on the history of French reactions to Shakespeare. Jusserand was a close student of English literature who produced some lucid and vivacious books on comparatively little-known subjects:

His publications in French

 * Le Théâtre en Angleterre, depuis la conquête jusqu'aux prédécesseurs immédiats de Shakespeare (1878)
 * Les Anglais au Moyen Âge: la vie nomade et les routes d'Angleterre au XIVe siècle (1884; Eng. trans., English Wayfaring Life in the Middle Ages, by LT Smith, 1889)
 * Le Roman au temps de Shakespeare (1887) (The English Novel in the Time of Shakespeare, (1887), translated from French by Elizabeth Lee)
 * Histoire littéraire du peuple anglais (vol. 1, 1893; vol. 2, 1904; vol. 3, 1909; Eng. trans., A Literary History of the English People, by G.P. Putnam, 1914).
 * L'Épopée de Langland (1893; Eng. trans., Piers Plowman, 1894).
 * Les Anglais au Moyen Âge. L'Épopée mystique de William Langland (1893) (Piers Plowman, a contribution to the history of English mysticism, (1894), translated from the French by Marion and Elise Richards, revised and enlarged by the author)
 * Le Roman d'un roi d'Écosse, (1895), (The Romance of a King's life,(1896), translated from French by Marion Richards, revised and enlarged by the author)
 * Histoire abrégée de la littérature anglaise (1896) Online text
 * Shakespeare en France sous l'ancien régime (1898) Online text
 * Les Sports et jeux d'exercice dans l'ancienne France (1901)
 * Ronsard (1913) Online text
 * Recueil des instructions données aux ambassadeurs et ministres de France depuis les traités de Westphalie jusqu'à la Révolution française. XXIV-XXV, Angleterre, publié sous les auspices de la commission des archives diplomatiques au ministère des affaires étrangères, avec une introduction et des notes par J. J. Jusserand (1929)

His publications in English

 * A French Ambassador at the Court of Charles II (1892), from the unpublished papers of the count de Cominges. Online text
 * English essays from a French pen (1895) Online text
 * A Literary history of the English people from the origins to the Renaissance (1895)
 * A Literary history of the English people from the Renaissance to the Civil War (1906)
 * Piers Plowman, the work of one or of five (1909) Online text
 * First Annual Shakespeare Lecture of the British Academy (1911)
 * With Americans of Past and Present Days (1916), for which he earned the first Pulitzer Prize for History.
 * The School for ambassadors and other essays (1925) Online text
 * The evolution of the American sentiment during the war (1930)
 * What Me Befell : The Reminiscences of J. J. Jusserand (1933).

Participation in other works

 * Jean-Jules Jusserand, "La Tunisie", an extract from La France coloniale, histoire, géographie, commerce, ouvrage published under M. Alfred Rambaud. Paris : A. Colin (1888)
 * Jean-Jules Jusserand, « Les Grands Écrivains Français. Études sur la vie, les œuvres et l’influence des principaux auteurs de notre littérature », text inserted in Jules Simon, Victor Cousin, Paris, Hachette, 1887

Letters

 * Jean-Jules Jusserand, [Letter to Anatole France], 9 March 1888 or 1889, Correspondence d’Anatole France, Bibliothèque Nationale
 * Jean-Jules Jusserand, [Letters to Ferdinand Brunetière], 11 and 23 March, 23 September, Correspondance de Ferdinand Brunetière, Bibliothèque Nationale (Nouvelles Acquisitions Françaises, 25 041/307, 309, 313).
 * Jean-Jules Jusserand, [Letter to Gaston Paris], 11 September 1900, Correspondance de Gaston Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale
 * Jean-Jules Jusserand, [Letter to Joseph Reinach], 23 November 1898, Correspondance de Joseph Reinach, Bibliothèque Nationale
 * Jean-Jules Jusserand, [Letter to Arvède Barine], 12 February 1889, Correspondence d’Arvède Barine, Bibliothèque Nationale

title: Jean Jules Jusserand