Talk:Case–Church Amendment

	Vietnam portal This article is part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Asian / North America / Southeast Asia / United States C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	North American military history task force
	Southeast Asian military history task force
	United States military history task force

Amendment to what?

What did this "amendment" amend? --Doradus (talk) 02:45, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is a good question. If I had time, I would try to work on this. Suggest looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McGovern-Hatfield_Amendment for template. It answers the question: what did it amend? It also provides the text of the amendment and some context - speeches by sponsors.--75.151.46.161 (talk) 16:29, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the vote totals listed are for passage of the entire resolution, and not for the amendment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.147.173.170 (talk) 16:03, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Combat operations"

It is true that Rowley treats the airlift to Cambodia after August 15, 1973, as if it were a form of "combat operations," but Rowley was being careless and inaccurate in his phrasing. Delivery of food and munitions to Pochentong Airport on cargo planes was not what is normally called combat operations, and the Congress did not consider it so. The Senators and Representatives who had forbidden combat operations continued to appropriate US government funds to pay for the airlift. Ed Moise (talk) 21:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Surely supplying munitions is combat support, if not operations? Mztourist (talk) 06:54, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Supplying munitions is combat support, but support is not the same as operations. The Case-Church amendment forbade combat operations but did not forbid combat support, so in an article about the Case-Church amendment we need to pay attention to that distinction. Ed Moise (talk) 22:26, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In light of that, it seems that the current final sentence of the lead section needs to be rewritten. As I understand it, it describes airlift support to Cambodia as being (the only) "US combat operations" in Southeast Asia that did not end on the deadline.

I have not tried to unravel what the #Amendment to what? section above mentioned but did not unravel, but it says to look at the McGovern–Hatfield Amendment article. I see that the text of that amendment quoted there required "the orderly termination of military operations" by a deadline ("military operations", not "combat operations"). I'm wondering what phraseology Case-Church used (I couldn't find the text). Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:00, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]