The Origins of the Legion of the United States
In: The journal of military history, Band 67, Heft 4, S. 1249-1262
ISSN: 0899-3718
23 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: The journal of military history, Band 67, Heft 4, S. 1249-1262
ISSN: 0899-3718
In: The journal of military history, Band 73, Heft 3, S. 1030-1032
ISSN: 1543-7795
In: The journal of military history, Band 72, Heft 4, S. 1213-1247
ISSN: 1543-7795
Historians have often used a 1966 Army report nicknamed PROVN either to cast aspersions on the commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam between 1964 and 1968, General William C. Westmoreland, or to praise his successor, General Creighton Abrams. This interpretation is simplistic and inaccurate. Although the report criticized aspects of the war under Westmoreland, its target was really the U.S. and Vietnamese governments. Moreover, PROVN's conclusions were less radical and its remedies less novel than observers have tended to admit. A fresh look at PROVN reveals significant continuities in thought between Westmoreland, the report, and Abrams.
In: The Journal of Military History, Band 61, Heft 2, S. 255
In: The journal of military history, Band 61, Heft 2, S. 255-282
ISSN: 0899-3718
In: The journal of military history, Band 73, Heft 3, S. 1030-1031
ISSN: 0899-3718
In: The journal of military history, Band 72, Heft 4, S. 1213-1248
ISSN: 0899-3718
In: The journal of military history, Band 67, Heft 4, S. 1249-1261
ISSN: 1543-7795
The 1792 reorganization of the United States Army into the Legion of
the United States marked a significant transformation in the structure
of American military forces. Designed for the exigencies of American
conditions, the Legion represented an innovative experiment in combined
arms warfare. This article examines the roots of the legionary concept,
from the ancient Romans to eighteenth-century European military theorists,
and suggests that the structure of the Legion of the United States may
have been based on the writings of Colonel Henry Bouquet, a noted veteran
of the Indian frontier.
In: The Journal of Military History, Band 63, Heft 2, S. 455
In: The journal of military history, Band 63, Heft 2, S. 455
ISSN: 0899-3718
In: British journal of political science, Band 42, Heft 3, S. 511-537
ISSN: 0007-1234
BACKGROUND: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. DESIGN: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference. SETTING: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: These consensus statements provide further guidance on ...
BASE
BACKGROUND: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. DESIGN: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference. SETTING: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1–3 (disagree), 4–6 (equivocal), 7–9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: These consensus statements provide further guidance on ...
BASE