| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "BATTLE DIEN BIEN PHU": |
|
|
The Battle of Dien Bien Phu, 2005.
A look at the conditions and events leading up to the Battle of Dien Bien Phu.
3,155 words (approx. 12.6 pages), 18 sources, APA, $ 91.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper aims to show that, despite popular opinion, the selection by French High Command of Dien Bien Phu as a massed defense against the Communist forces of the Viet Minh was ultimately based on the best evidence available. It briefly sketches the events leading up to the battle of Dien Bien Phu, including a general look at the first Indochinese war of 1946-1954, and an analysis of the decisions made by the French high command leading up to the actual establishment of the base at Dien Bien Phu. It also provides an understanding of the French political climate in the metropolis after the Second World War.
From the Paper
"When high command succeeded in evacuating Na Son without any problems, the last in a series of events gelled together to make the example of Na Son one worth repeating, at least to General Navarre. After the furious assault subsides, Na San is evacuated without incident. In order to confuse the several battalions of Viet Minh still established around the base, elaborate preparations were carried out. False radio communiques, parachute drops, use of civilian airplanes, and intense fighter and bomber cover were all employed to achieve a full evacuation. All this could not have occurred, however, if a small problem hadn't manifested itself when it did. "
| |
|
The Battles at Dien Bien Phu and Khe Sanh, 2006.
A paper discussing the similarities and differences between the battles at Dien Bien Phu and Khe Sanh during the Vietnam War.
3,300 words (approx. 13.2 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 94.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In an effort to better understand the battle at Khe San that involved Americans during the Vietnam War, the paper first examines the historical battle at Dien Bien Phu, which preceded the Khe Sanh battle by ten years. The paper points out that in order to understand the battle at Khe Sanh, it is necessary to first fully understand the Dien Bien Phu battle. The paper then goes on to discuss the battle at Khe Sanh and explain why the dien Bien Phu battle and the Khe Sanh battle were both similar and yet different.
From the Paper
"During Khe Sanh, which began thirteen years later, the allied forces of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam and the United States defeated the numerically superior North Vietnamese Army. The battle took place on the Khe Sanh plateau in the Quang Tri Province of northern South Vietnam. There, the three phases of the fighting lasted from April 1967 through April 1968. The Khe Sanh plateau was critical terrain because the North Vietnamese Army used area routes to infiltrate into South Vietnam from Laos and the Demilitarized Zone. To curtail that activity, the allied forces had maintained some form of a combat base since 1962, but in1967, the North Vietnamese Army started building up significant conventional forces in the area around the plateau, and in an effort to deny the North Vietnamese Army control of this important terrain, the U.S. started increasing its own strength in the region."
| |
|
The Battle for Dien Bien Phu, 2001.
An examination of the battle and its significance to American politics and military tactics
3,475 words (approx. 13.9 pages), 10 sources, $ 97.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The author of this paper discusses the significance of the battle at Dien Bien Phu as the place where the first Vietnamese revolutionaries found their power and became a force to be reckoned with and argues that had the United States learned from this battle and adopted the successful tactics in this terrain and situation, it might have had a better chance of winning its own conflict in Vietnam.
From the Paper
"The end of World War II brought vast political changes throughout Asia. In previously colonial areas, nationalists used the opportunity present in the Japanese surrender and the temporary weakness of European powers to demand self-determination. The August Revolution brought the Vietminh to power in Vietnam, and the clash between French and Vietminh was inevitable, as neither side was willing to concede sovereignty to the other. A few months after the close of World War II, France sought to re-establish its discredited and unpopular colonial rule in Indochina. Encouraged by words of support from President Truman, the French committed almost a million military men to their effort."
| |
|
French Failure at Dien Bien Phu, 1999.
A history of French role in Vietnam with an emphasis on the battle at Dien Bien Phu.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 7 sources, $ 63.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"This research will examine the French failure at Dien Bien Phu. The research will set forth the historical context and background for exploring France's role in the modern history of Vietnam, which is, in the modern historical imagination, associated with Dien Bien Phu, and then discuss the causes of the encounter between French and nationalist Vietnamese military forces at the site, as well as issues surrounding the question of whether either the encounter in general or the French failure in particular could have been prevented.
The story of Western failure of culture, ideology, and military strategy in Vietnam in the 20th century is most immediately associated with the American debacle in that country in the circumstances of U.S. withdrawal and the aftermath in the mid-1970s. But a Western prelude to the American failure occur..."
| |
|
Addressing the Battle of Antietam from Its Impact on Military Strategy, 2002.
This paper addresses the Battle of Antietam in terms of its significance as a military victory, and how this battle helped to change the conduct of war during its era. This paper demonstrates that the fighting tactics used by the Union Army at the Battle
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper addresses the Battle of Antietam in terms of its significance as a military victory, and how this battle helped to change the conduct of war during its era. This paper demonstrates that the fighting tactics used by the Union Army at the Battle of Antietam helped prove that a small, maneuverable fighting force could win over superior firepower, demonstrating that a lack of strategy could not be compensated through weaponry. Through doing so, it can be seen how the Battle of Antietam helped redefine war protocol to a significant degree.
| |
|
The Battle of New Orleans, 2005.
Examines the background, the battle and the aftermath of the 1815 conflict known as "The Battle of New Orleans".
2,641 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The Battle of New Orleans of the War of 1812 was fought on January 8, 1815, between about 6,000 American troops, mostly irregulars, under the command of the American general, Andrew Jackson, and a British force of about 7,500, commanded by the British general, Sir Edward Pakenham. This paper covers the background for the War of 1812 that enveloped New Orleans and the South and the preparation for the battle. It also looks at the battle itself and the aftermath.
Paper Outline
Introduction
Background
Preparations
The Battle
After the Battle
Works Referenced
From the Paper
"The British were concentrating their forces along the Gulf. They had attempted an amphibious landing in Mobile Bay, with the intention of destroying the city of Mobile, and then advancing on New Orleans. Andrew Jackson, in command of the American irregulars in the South repulsed the British. "Not only did he successfully defend the entrance to Mobile Bay against a powerful amphibious expedition sent by the British to capture and destroy Mobile, but his men had blown the enemy flagship out of the water and repulsed the King's forces, inflicting 232 casualties." After that, Jackson, defying the orders of the Secretary of War, James Monroe, decided to march East to Pensacola where he defeated the British again."
| |
|
The Confederate Cause at the Battle of Gettysburg, 2000.
This paper take a detailed look at one of the greatest battles of the Civil War. Follows General Robert E. Lee and his men as they plot their strategy and take action against the Union Army leading up to and during the battle.
2,110 words (approx. 8.4 pages), 6 sources, $ 66.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper follows General Robert E. Lee and his men as they plot their strategy and take action against the Union Army leading up to and during the Battle of Gettysburg. It also goes into great detail about the military strategy that both the Union Army used prior to this attack, and the affect it had upon the outcome of this battle, and what affect it had on the eventual outcome of the Civil War.
From the paper:
"There were over 70,000 Confederates involved in the Battle of Gettysburg. Of those men, 3,903 died, 18,735 were wounded, and 5,425 were missing, for a grand total of 28,063 men lost. That is about 40 percent of the soldiers who fought the battle. The percentage of men lost on the last day was much higher. Total losses on both sides came to 51,053.
"The Battle of Gettysburg was a major turning point in the Civil War. More men were lost in this battle than any other battle of the Civil War. After such a crushing defeat, Lee was never again able to launch a full-scale offensive on Union ground. The battle was also a landmark in the minds of people for years to come. Abraham Lincoln quoted in November 1863, ?The world? can never forget what they did here.? Although the Confederates suffered a tremendous defeat that third day of July, their dedication and determination are still evident in the valiant effort displayed during those three long days."
| |
|
Battle of the Bulge, 2006.
An examination of the battle that became the turning point in World War Two: The Battle of the Bulge.
3,240 words (approx. 13.0 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 93.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines the battle that became the turning point in World War Two, greatly aiding the efforts of the Allied forces to bring a quick and decisive end to the war and to the Third Reich. On December 16, 1944 the German army began their "Ardennes Offensive" in the Ardennes region of Belgium and Luxembourg. The "Battle of the Bulge", as it became known, is Adolph Hitler's "last stand" against the Allied forces. Hitler knew that if the Americans managed to penetrate the German front lines, it would signal the beginning of the end for the Third Reich. The paper takes the student through the history of the battle and how the Allied forces, though ill-prepared and utterly taken by surprise, managed to fight back to victory. This battle serves as one of the greatest military engagements in the war in Europe, and some historians compare it to the Battle of Gettysburg during the Civil War. It is also the worst battle, in terms of loss, to the American forces during World War II.
From the Paper
"According to John Kline, the biggest and most costly battle of World War II began on December 16, 1944 which the German army referred to as their Ardennes Offensive. On this eventful day, "the (American) 106th Infantry Division. . . were hit with full force" by the German army, and after three days of fighting, "two of the Regiments, the 422nd and 423rd, were surrounded" which forced the 424th Regiment to join the 112th Regiment, part of the 28th Infantry Division. And working together as a massive armed team, these regiments and divisions "countered the German attack (by) driving the Germans back through the same area where the 106th had been in position in mid December 1944." Thus, "this German offensive became known in the U.S. Forces journals as the Battle of the Bulge." "
| |
|
Battle of the Ardennes, 2002.
A battle analysis of the Battle of Ardennes.
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 4 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A paper which briefly analyzes the Battle of the Bulge in WWII. Topics such as opening moves, climate, terrain an opinions as to what the first targets should have been are discussed.
| |
|
Battle of Britain in 1940, 1991.
This paper analyzes the British-German battle, the "Battle of Britain" in 1940: Causes, strategies, German mistakes, Operation Sea-Lion, outcome and impact on WWII.
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 6 sources, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The Battle of Britain, which took place over a few weeks in the summer of 1940, is the most famous episode in the history of air warfare. It inspired Winston Churchill, the century's most quotable statesman, to make his most-quoted remark, of the British fighter pilots in the battle, that "never before in the annals of warfare did so many owe so much to so few." It was a fundamental turning point in the course of the Second World War--the first serious check suffered by the hitherto-triumphant Nazi German war machine, and which ultimately led to the two-front war that all German strategists, including Hitler himself, desperately wanted to avoid.
Why was the Battle of Britain fought, and why did it come out the way it did? To understand the strategic meaning of the Battle of Britain, it must be viewed in the context of the most ... "
| |
|
WWI Battle Tactics, 2005.
An examination of the use of armor and infantry on the battlefield during World War I from the Battle of Cambrai to the Battle of St. Mihiel.
2,149 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 67.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper begins with a discussion of the tactics used for the deployment of tanks and infantry, followed by a description of the integration of combined arms tactics used by General Pershing and other generals. A summary of how the synchronized or simultaneous application of armor, infantry, artillery, engineers, air defense and aviation changed the course of modern warfare is also provided in the conclusion. Includes tables and diagram.
From the Paper
"The epigram above suggests that General of the Armies John Joseph Pershing was responsible for a legacy that remains largely unrecognized among military leaders in the United States today. Certainly, World War I established new precedents across a number of measures, particularly in terms of the amount of death and destruction it caused. The First World War only lasted four years (1914-1918), but by the time the conflict ended, it had involved most of the European nations of Europe as well as the United States, Russia, countries in the Middle East, and other regions (Royde-Smith, 2005). Along the way, though, a military infrastructure emerged that would serve as the basis for military doctrine and training up to the present day."
| |
|
The Battle of Antietam and Its Impact on Military Strategy, 2002.
This paper addresses the Battle of Antietam in terms of its significance as a military victory, and how this battle helped to change the conduct of war during its era
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper addresses the Battle of Antietam in terms of its significance as a military victory, and how this battle helped to change the conduct of war during its era. This paper demonstrates that the fighting tactics used by the Union Army at the Battle of Antietam helped prove that a small, maneuverable fighting force could win over superior firepower, demonstrating that a lack of strategy could not be compensated through weaponry. Through doing so, it can be seen how the Battle of Antietam helped redefine war protocol to a significant degree.
| |
|
The Battle at Antietam, 2007.
This paper examines the effects of the battle at Antietam, the bloodiest battle in the American Civil War.
2,338 words (approx. 9.4 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses how the battle at Antietam ended the first attempt by the South at invading the North, with the army under the leadership of General Robert E. Lee. The paper explains that the battle was inconclusive because while Lee withdrew, the Northern army under McClellan did not follow and so did not destroy the Southern army at this time. The paper shows, however, how the battle did set the stage for the Emancipation Proclamation, making slavery a more explicit subject for the rest of the war. The paper relates that this was something President Lincoln had not wanted to do in this manner, but which he embraced once it was possible.
From the Paper
"At the time, General Lee was buoyed by his success at Bull Run but also uncertain about what to do next. He could not go after Pope's army because the later withdrew to Washington and was protected by a fort and by reinforcements. Analysts say he could have fallen back to the fortifications at Centreville, but he did not want to do this because the provisions and forage in that area had all been used up the year before. Lee had other choices he could have made, such as moving west or south, but he also faced the desire to deny the North the time to recover from recent defeats. A move to the west appealed most to Lee, and he was especially interested in an invasion of Maryland, with reasons that were military, political, and psychological."
| |
|
Battle of the Bulge, 2001.
An examination of the tactics used by the Germans during the Battle of the Bulge of WW2 and how it lead to them into losing this battle.
2,040 words (approx. 8.2 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 64.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains the effects, circumstances, causes and happenings of the Battle of the Bulge, also known as the Battle of the Ardennes. It also suggests what went wrong for the Germans and what mistakes Hitler made. Military tactics of both sides are analyzed - Germans and Allies.
From the Paper
"The Battle of the Bulge, which lasted from December 16, 1944 to January 25, 1945, was the largest battle of World War II in which the United States participated (Toland). Over a million men fought for their lives, countries and families. Although many a soldier dreamed of the day they could return to their families, many of them did not make it home. At the conclusion of the battle there were 81,000 American casualties including 23,554 captured and 19,000 killed. The British suffered 1,400 casualties, with only 200 killed. Also, the greatest number of all, there were 100,000 German soldiers killed, wounded or captured (Cole)."
| |
|
The Battle of Gettysburg, 2002.
The story of the Battle of Gettysburg, the bloodiest battle of the American Civil War, from both perspectives.
3,171 words (approx. 12.7 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 91.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper recounts the story the Battle of Gettysberg, one of the most horrific battles to occur during the Civil War. It provides a concise account of the days leading up to and a detailed description of the events of actual battle in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania taken from factual accounts and historical documentation. It discusses the leadership and tactics of both sides and looks at the events from the perspectives of both the North and South .
From the Paper
"General Stewart?s troops were well behind him and would be unable to join the fight this day. It took several hours for General Lee?s three corps to get into position, in which he had laid out, to ready for an attack. General Meade had been up all night inspecting and arranging his lines. By early the second day, most of the army of the Potomac was in place, in the shape of a rough horseshoe pointing towards Gettysburg and open to the south. General Jeb Stewart, riding far ahead of his men, had arrived after noon, and Lee was quite furious with him. General Lee demanded to know why Stewart had not kept in contact with him."
|
|
|
