Talk:Military history of the Netherlands

New Page
I believe this is the start of a great article, my goal is to make an useful article comprised of as much of the militairy information about and concerning the Dutch, Flemmings and their ancestors.I hope many will join me.

At the time, there are still great gaps.Yet, the article is already larger than for instance Military history of Germany.

The history of the Netherlands is worth to mentioned, and well documented.

Sander 20:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I spot two obvious gaps that need to be filled: the Spanish Succession war and the battle of Quatre Bras Mvdleeuw 05:26, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Be my guest. Rex Germanus Tesi samanunga is edele unde scona 11:39, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest a comment on the involvement of the Dutch forces in the civil was in Bosnia in the ninties as well. unsigned comment by 83.83.36.26
 * I agree (on Dutch with UN/NATO in Bosnia), I'll add a comment when I get a chance Chwyatt 09:35, 1 August 2006 (UTC) Hardly the Dutch marines' finest hour. Are you being sarcastic?Jatrius (talk) 12:14, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Anyone know what units from the Netherlands are currently in Afghanistan? Chwyatt 15:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Acording to the Dutch army:
 * "De militairen van de Battle Group zijn voornamelijk afkomstig van 12 Infanterie Bataljon Luchtmobiel Air Assault Regiment Van Heutsz, aangevuld met militairen van 44 Pantserinfanteriebataljon Regiment Johan Willem Friso. Het PRT wordt geleverd door 42 Tankbataljon Regiment Huzaren Prins van Oranje.


 * Ter ondersteuning gaan zes Apache gevechtshelikopters mee naar Afghanistan. Daarnaast maken ook Cougar transporthelikopters en F-16 jachtvliegtuigen deel uit van het luchtmachtdetachement"

"The soldiers of the battle group are mostly from off the 12th Infanterie Bataljon Luchtmobiel Air Assault Regiment Van Heutsz suplemented with soldiers from 44 Pantserinfanteriebataljon (Mechanized infantry) Regiment Johan Willem Friso and tge 42th tank battalion Regiment Huzaren Prins van Oranje."
 * Rex 16:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Brilliant, cheers Rex. Chwyatt 08:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Glorious Revolution
There should maybe be a bit in here on the Dutch invasion of England in 1688. RandomCritic 20:57, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Outlines of the article
Dear all,

Although this is a very noble enterprise, don't you think that the page is very imbalanced? The main focus should be on the DUTCH military history, and even if a little background information is indispensable now and then to put the dutch history into a broader European perspective, we should refrain from straying too far.

First of all, we have to delineate the subject: what do we mean when we use the term 'the Netherlands'? From 1568 on, it's pretty obvious, but before that? I strongly object against the taken course where we just deal with the military history of every part of every empire that ever held sway within the Low Countries. In my opinion we should limit the article to military acts and developments within the borders of the Low Countries or military acts abroad that contain a strong dutch/'netherlands'element.

I look forward to your comments. In the mean time I'll add some small bits and try to start a discussion on other bits.

Luetzen 21:40, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Historic enemies
Dear all,

I find it hard to fathom the worth as well as the truthfulness in the piece on 'historic enemies'. Does a country have any real historic enemies or, nice and eloquent, archenemies, short of modern day demagoguery? If so, than the English don't qualify, because they liberated the Netherlands and Belgium in 1944/45 and as such are not archenemies. The French, who could qualify better than the English for the role of evil villain in dutch history, fought shoulder to shoulder with dutch troops in 1940 and are thus disqualified as archenemies. The germans did occupy the Netherlands, but are nowadays our closest allies, so much that there is even a german-dutch corps (which is a mixed german-dutch affair down to the platoon-level, I understand). To cast Spain in the role of enemy isn't entirely correct either. Although we had the dutch revolt against Habsburg overlordship, it wasn't against Spain as a nation, but against the king of Spain -- who was, coincidentally, the Emperor of a lot of Europe, not to mention king of another lot of Europe -- and as such I don't find it at all logically to paint Spain black.

All in all, I suggest we delete the whole paragraph. Historical fact contained therein should be incorporated in the main article.

Cheers,

Luetzen 21:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, you shouldn't read too much into the term "historic enemy". Not "archenemies" are meant, but simply those political entities with which, obviously due to historical reasons, the Dutch often had military conflicts — at least often enough to make it useful too give some diachronic account of the relations with each enemy. I'll change the, apparently confusing, section heading.--MWAK 14:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:D070102rf1136mg.jpg
Image:D070102rf1136mg.jpg 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 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 06:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Napoleonic Wars Omission
You might want to mention that the Grande Armée contained a massive amount of Dutch people (see Grande Arm%C3%A9e), not to mention completely Dutch units (e.g. the Red Lancers and a Dutch grenadier[-on-foot] regiment of the Imperial Guard (http://www.museum.ru/museum/1812/Army/Bellange/pic/12-030.jpg)).

This article will remain incomplete and even bias so long as it doesn't incorporate a reference to the Dutch allegiance to Napoleon.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Military history of the Netherlands. 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/20051005122450/http://www.un.org/News/ossg/srebrenica.pdf to http://www.un.org/News/ossg/srebrenica.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081110153404/http://www.afsouth.nato.int/factsheets/DeliberateForceFactSheet.htm to http://www.afsouth.nato.int/factsheets/DeliberateForceFactSheet.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071208065114/http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/6_1_1.asp?id=1275 to http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/6_1_1.asp?id=1275

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) 00:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Military history of the Netherlands. 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/20130511065442/http://www.julianstockwin.com/RNN.htm to http://www.julianstockwin.com/RNN.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061206150113/http://www.2id.org/2iddutch.htm to http://www.2id.org/2iddutch.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060821091136/http://www.afsouth.nato.int/operations/DenyFlight/DenyFlightFactSheet.htm to http://www.afsouth.nato.int/operations/denyflight/DenyFlightFactSheet.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) 06:29, 31 January 2018 (UTC)