Talk:United States Indo-Pacific Command

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the United States Indo-Pacific Command article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: North America / 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 not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

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

Chain of Command over the Pacific Fleet?

The article starts of stating that only the President, Commander In Chief, and his joint command councils have authority over the Pacific Fleet. That is technically in error, because the Secretary Of Defense, by Law, is second in command of the military. User:MPA — Preceding unsigned comment added by MPA (talk • contribs) 14:38, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Be bold. Give us a cite for the law and make the change. Jinian 16:06, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

SEATO?

Since the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty was terminated in 1977, it is probably incorrect to state that SEATO provides a rationale for PACCOM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.195.164.34 (talk • contribs) 20:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat unrelated, but I used to hear this term pronounced as suggested by its spelling in the above comment (short 'a' in the first syllable, rhyming with 'back'). But the acronym is spelled in the article with a single 'C' (PACOM), and I've recently heard it pronounced correspondingly (long 'a' in first syllable, as in the word 'pay'). And that seems to be the official spelling, although typing paccom into google sends you directly to pacom.

My question: what is the "correct" pronunciation, short 'a' or long? I suppose "correct" means how the current CDRUSPACOM pronounces it :-). Mcswell (talk) 17:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Standard pronunciation is the long 'a' (ADM Harris also uses it). Interestingly, the service components (USARPAC, PACFLT, and PACAF) use the short 'a' for their own names (Air Force is less consistent about it than others, however. USPACOMPAO (talk) 00:24, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of Previous Comm.

Other commanders in other articles are neatly boxed. Does anyone know the editing code to do so? Colonel Marksman 17:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image update needed.

The image needs to be updated to deal with the transfer of Madagascar (and other relatively close islands) from PACOM to AFRICOM.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Naraht (talk • contribs) 13:58, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CINCPAC vs PACOM

The article starts off with CINCPAC, then starts using it interchangably with PACOM. I came to find when the change occured in actuality to no avail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.163.128.41 (talk) 18:08, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

INDOPACOM Name

The header states that the renaming of PACOM to INDOPACOM was in recognition of the US's alliance with India while the body of the article says it relates to the Indian and Pacific Oceans being withing the Command's scope. The latter is correct and the former should be changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:9301:9CAD:54D2:DA1:93A3:3CEF (talk) 18:26, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Garuda28 (talk) 18:49, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Placement of SOCKOR in "Subunified Commands"

SOCKOR is a Subunified Command under SOCOM with Operational Command (OPCON) delegated down to the USFK Commander. Should it be placed on the table as its own entry like it currently is, or should it be incorporated into the "Subordinate Commands" of USFK? Tsubasa-Minoru (talk) 10:41, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Artic to Antartic

I'm struggling to see how INDOPACOM extends up to the arctic, as stated in the lead. Perhaps when it included Alaska in its AOR, but that is now part of USNORTHCOM. INDOPACOM clearly stretches down to Antartica, but every map I look at has USNORTHCOM and USEUCOM stretching north to the arctic. I am not removing this yet, since I am conscious of WP:NOR and I have yet to find a reliable source that actually lists the coordinates (another issue with this article is lack of citations for the coordinates listed in various places throughout- feels like more WP:OR). Would propose removing mention of the arctic and the actual coordinates throughout in the absence of a RS. Schwinnspeed (talk) 03:55, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]