This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: North America / United States List‑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 List This article has been rated as List-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 not met Associated task forces: /  North American military history task force United States military history task force United States: Military history / History List‑class Mid‑importance 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 List This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force. This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as Mid-importance). Lists List‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles List This article has been rated as List-class on the project's quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of List of wars involving the United States was copied or moved into List of American Indian Wars with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by lowercase sigmabot III.

There is a disagreement currently between editors on whether or not the 2023 American–Middle East conflict counts as a conflict involving the United States.

• I say yes it does. It is obvious through the article that the U.S. is currently involved in a conflict in the Middle East. Two carrier strike groups in the Middle East and the U.S. has already conducted retaliatory strikes after being attacked over 2 dozen times. This conflict started more as a result of the 2023 Israel–Hamas war, and recently, the 2023 American–Middle East conflict was removed from the Israel-Hamas war article, because the American–Middle East conflict is a result of said war. Some editors are arguing that this is related to the Syrian civil war, but if that was the case, then the Israel-Hamas war would be spill-over of the Syrian civil war as well (given the parent (per se) of the American–Middle East conflict is the Israel-Hamas war). However, that is not the case by a long shot. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 16:54, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• No. Nothing you have said changes the fact that the article you cite says the American intervention in the Syrian civil war, the Rojava conflict and spillover in the 2023 Israel–Hamas war. Everything else you are saying is original research, please see Wikipedia:No original research.--DarkAzure (talk) 17:01, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I just removed that original research from the article. There is sources (like the Institute for the Study of War) which do clearly indicate this is part of the Israel-Hamas war (example from Nov 4), but I do not know of a source indicating it is part of the Syrian Civil war. So, that WP:OR was removed. Cheers! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:06, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy to help, but Let's keep the edits on the talk page for the moment. Don't forget that this is a list linking to articles.

Ok so it is your thesis that America is a main belligerent in the 2023 Israel–Hamas war. At the moment that article lists Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Popular Resistance Committees, Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, Hezbollah, Lebanese Resistance Brigades, Houthi movement, & Israel as the Belligerents. If it is your thesis that the USA should be listed as a belligerent in that conflict. Then please seek consensus there and once obtained in that article (not just an edit, but consensus on the page) it should indeed be listed here as well. This is not the page for that conversation. The 2023 Israel–Hamas war page is where it should occur. --DarkAzure (talk) 17:33, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also to note, your argument was solely based on a generally unreliable source. You need to provide a reliable secondary source indicating this conflict is part of the Syrian civil war. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:23, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, using the page as written where sources are listed and where people who have more knowledge on the subject tend to be. This is a list page, this is not a main article. So please get a consensus on the pages you are citing before you add them to the list if you believe that those pages disagree with your beliefs.--DarkAzure (talk) 17:33, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's not how that works. Wikipedia as a whole per community consensus was deemed to be an unreliable source. You still must list a reliable secondary source for your argument. Everything you just listed is soley using Wikipedia as a source, which does not mean anything. Please read WP:RS and WP:RSPWP. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:37, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I mean you can just check the sources there yourself as well^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]} This is a list page, not an article. Please go to those article and make your changes and seek consensus there--DarkAzure (talk) 17:40, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DarkAzure, you just proved my point correct actually. Out of those 20 sources, the term "civil war" appears 0 times. In fact, that 20th reference you provided says and I quote, "But with a war raging in the Gaza Strip and fears of an escalation into a regional conflict there is an underlying worry that Iran and its proxies could soon get involved in the fight between Israel and Hamas, sparking a wider and even more serious war." You pretty much just proved majority of sources don't indicate this is part of the Syrian civil war at all (i.e. 20 referenced provided saying it isn't). I would have to sit down and read all of them to see how many indicate a new conflict more like US vs Iran style, but I would bet most of those 20 do. Either way, you still have yet to provide an actual source saying this is part of the Syrian civil war. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's not a good-faith edit. "“These narrowly tailored strikes in self-defense were intended solely to protect and defend U.S. personnel in Iraq and Syria,” Mr. Austin said. “They are separate and distinct from the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, and do not constitute a shift in our approach to the Israel-Hamas conflict.”" New York Times. Please wait for the other editors. This is a list, not an article. Why are you not making changes on the main Wikipages on this subject if you believe that this proves your point? Please make changes there. If consensus is formed there I have no objection. But as it stands the only place you are making changes to is here. Go to 2023 Israel–Hamas war or 2023 American–Middle East conflict and make those changes and cite it as a new American war. No source you have shown has said that America is now in a new war. It might happen, yet the pages are clear that is not the case and the sources all talk about American "US bases in Syria and Iraq" or trying to ensure conflict does not spread. If consensus forms on those articles then that's fine, just have those conversations there.--DarkAzure (talk) 18:02, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just to clarify what you mean DarkAzure, you are opposed to it being related to the Israel-Hamas war? I presume you haven't located a source for it being part of the Syrian civil war yet. Would you have an objection to it being an independent conflict the US is involved in, given it wouldn't be (1) apart of the Syrian civil war and not (2) apart of the Israel-Hamas war? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 18:25, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At the moment, I have not seen any evidence to show that this is an active and distinct war from other active wars America is in at the moment. America's 1998 bombing of Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory is not listed as a war, nor are the multiple other targeted bombings that America has done over the past 70 years... Targeted bombings in of itself does not signify a war, weirdly enough. However, I do believe that this conversation is not best placed on a list article's talk page. This should be discussed in the main article in question's talk page, where more people who have an interest in this subject can discuss their thoughts on the matter. Once consensus is formed there and people do see this as indeed a new war, with sources also declaring it as such (not just a bombing but a new war), then it would need to be added as a separate entity / a part of the Israel-Hamas war/Syrian civil war, whichever is decided.--DarkAzure (talk) 16:40, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can this be shown to be an active war that is not like the bombing of Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory, which has never been considered a war, and a war that is separate and distinct from other active wars? Is this an actual active war? Are there sources saying as such? Only sources so far say things like “These narrowly tailored strikes in self-defense were intended solely to protect and defend U.S. personnel in Iraq and Syria,” Mr. Austin said. “They are separate and distinct from the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, and do not constitute a shift in our approach to the Israel-Hamas conflict.” New York Times. This may indeed be seen as a war, one which expands across the Middle East, it might even sadly happen very soon, but we must remember that Wikipedia is not a newspaper. --DarkAzure (talk) 11:58, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DarkAzure:, with all respect, you seem to be the only editor opposed to it’s addition. Another editor has tried to add it in the past (which you reverted), I have added it (you reverted) we discussed it (us two alone), discovered it clearly it not part of the Syrian civil war, meaning it isn’t part of an ongoing conflict and started in October 2023, I re-added it after you failed to provide a source saying it was part of the Syrian Civil war (with my re-addition not including it), I was thanked by an editor and two other editors worked to improve it’s addition before your last revert. I am going to go ahead and re-revert it back, since this seems to be like beating a dead house carcass. Given this timeline, if you truly believe it is not an independent conflict, I would suggest you open an RfC on its removal. With how many editors are clearly in support of it + silent support through not reverting, but improve it, the consensus is to include it as a stand-alone conflict. But, like I said, if you can provide solid evidence to say it is not an independent conflict, one that is clearly apart of one of the other 4 ongoing conflicts (Syria, Yemen, Somalia, and Niger), then please, open a Request for Comment (RfC) and that will do more alerts to other editors and would provide a solid consensus. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 16:30, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Btw, before I say anything else, thanks for being polite and assuming best intentions 😃 I did double check the edit history and I am unsure if I missed something as I could see it was the two of us going back and forth recently (can we just keep this on the talk page instead on the article btw?). The only other editor who made input on this so far was Dasomm who reverted it back to Status Quo after your addition. You Mention WP:SILENCE & WP:CON, yet it is clear that is not the case as the edit has been immediately disputed after the edit. I was also hoping that you could provide sources that this is indeed a separate and distinct war. I have given other examples of past military actions which are not considered a part of any war, yet I am open to evidence from reliable sources stating that this is indeed a new and independent war from any others as there is a chance you are correct, I just have not seen any at the moment. Have you found any you can provide? It is not on myself to disprove the edit you are trying to add as "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material" WP:BURDEN. I would love for more people to be involved in this, though I am unsure if a list page is the best place to do it.--DarkAzure (talk) 11:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well @HuntersHistory: restored it in this edit, which was the immediate edit right after Dasomm. Also, @Omnipaedista: was that editor I talked about who thanked my re-addition. Omnipaedista, I know why you didn’t see their support, but I am unsure how you missed HuntersHistory’s support for its re-addition, since they mentioned it in their edit summary. Either way, you are correct about WP:BURDEN saying that. To me, I personally feel the burden of proof is on you, given your objections have completely switched from (not actual quotes) “It is part of the Syrian civil war” to “It isn’t an independent conflict”. But nonetheless, it seems there are at least 5 editors related to this overall dispute, and, rather than go to a dispute resolution, I am going to start an RfC on this matter. That should clear up this and hopefully get a clear consensus. Also, thank you as well for assuming good faith :D. Hopefully the RfC will clear this up for everyone. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:44, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah good catch I did not see that edit. So there have been two others who briefly were involved. I did not catch that one. As for Omnipaedista, I have only seen this edit and not what you mentioned. Well, I do see it as a part of the Syrian civil war if you are curious, as so far, to my own eyes it does seem to me that they are trying to stay out of the 2023 Israel–Hamas war. However, I am very willing to know that my views might be in error. As for WP:BURDEN I did quote the section that specifically states that "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material". As you are the editor who added this and changed the status quo, I do hope you can understand why I have asked for verifiable sources saying otherwise. The quote I have shared multiple times does indeed state that it is a part of the Syrian Civil War, though I will restate that understanding might change at any moment. And I would like to say again that it is nice to have a good conversation with another person on the Internet. So many people seem to take differences of opinion as an affront. It is nice to meet someone who is willing to discuss those differences 😃 I also hope that a good RFC could get others involved and see if other sources can be found one way or another.--DarkAzure (talk) 17:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I believe that the Korean War section should be edited to say inconclusive to line up with the actual article page for the Korean War. This can mislead people who are trying to learn about conflicts the USA has been in and also those trying to learn about the Korean War. Adriiwan (talk) 22:25, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 03:07, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does the 2023 attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria count as a new and separate war for the United States? Is it a wider part of the American intervention in the Syrian civil war, the 2023 Israel–Hamas war, or is it more akin to the 1998 bombing of Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory which was not a war. Can sources be shown to support any of the above? DarkAzure (talk) 11:54, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Point of information – The article has been renamed to 2023 attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria based on overwhelming consensus at Talk:2023 attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria#Requested move 1 November 2023 as evaluated by SJ. – Fuzheado | Talk 08:09, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the update. I have changed the text to reflect that.--DarkAzure (talk) 10:16, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion

• Do not list/Wait - At the moment I believe that it is too soon to tell where it will ultimately be. In hindsight, it will be far clearer and easier to place. At the moment the only quotes that have been found state that it is seen as a wider part of the American intervention in the Syrian civil war "“These narrowly tailored strikes in self-defense were intended solely to protect and defend U.S. personnel in Iraq and Syria,” Mr. Austin said. “They are separate and distinct from the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, and do not constitute a shift in our approach to the Israel-Hamas conflict.”" New York Times Who knows, tomorrow it might be abundantly clear if this should be listed with another conflict, as its own conflict, or if it should not be listed. But until there are reliable sources stating that this is a new and independent war from other conflicts America is involved with and not similar to the 1998 bombing, I do think that it should not be listed until the facts show otherwise. --DarkAzure (talk) 12:03, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Separate war — In this article from CNN, “The US carried out airstrikes targeting two facilities linked to Iranian-backed militias in eastern Syria…The US assessed that the airstrikes against the facilities linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and affiliated groups”. Besides the location of the attacks being Syria, “Syrian civil war” was not mentioned. Then we have where Houthi shot down a US drone as well as where the U.S. shot down a Houthi missile heading for Israel, not Syria over the Red Sea. Then we have this article from NBC News, which says “The groups conducting the attacks are supported by Iran and its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a Pentagon spokesman said.” Again, 0 mention of Syria except as a location for some of the attacks. This is an overall proxy war between the U.S. and Iran, not part of the Syrian civil war. This also is spillover from the 2023 Israel-Hamas war, which kickstarted this smaller proxy conflict starting 18 October. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:55, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• No. There is no such thing as 2023 American–Middle East conflict. This page is a classic WP:OR and it must be renamed.My very best wishes (talk) 23:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  My very best wishes, this discussion is not about a renaming. The renaming discussion can be found here. This is whether it is part of the Syrian civil war. In that No !vote, you didn't actually provide reasoning for it being a part of the Syrian civil war. Do you have a reasoning for it being part of the Syrian civil war, or was this a wrongly placed comment meant for the renaming discussion? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 00:00, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Well, I tried to respond that this does not "count as a new and separate war for the United States" simply because this is not a war by the United States (yet). Hence it should not be included to the list. The renaming discussion of the page under discussion is very much relevant in this regard. My very best wishes (talk) 00:05, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Ok, that helps clarify your comment some. That said, how would this article be listed in this list? The main discussion is (1) is it apart of an ongoing conflict already listed here. There are four ongoing conflicts right now listed here. If the attacks are directly apart of one of those 4 ongoing conflicts, it gets listed under it. If it isn’t apart of an ongoing conflict, then it gets its own entry on the list. That new entry would be either independent (as you are opposed to), or spillover from the 2023 Israel-Hamas war, which is still an independent entry on the list (as it isn’t part of one of the ongoing conflicts), but it would be listed not as an independent conflict, but rather a spillover conflict. So you are opposed to it being listed as an independent entry, but that still doesn’t really answer how it is categorized, since no individual entry means it is part of one of the four ongoing conflicts. I hope that someone helps explain the purpose of this RfC. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 00:10, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Comment. OK. I think the page under discussion should be renamed as 2023 attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria. Arguably, it is already a war by the US because US forces responded by hitting several targets, mostly in Syria. This might be a part of the ongoing Israel-Hamas war, but the targets are located far away of the area. Hence it might be indeed regarded as a separate war, but I would rather wait to see how these events will develop. My very best wishes (talk) 00:22, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Would it be accurate to put you down as a Do not list/Wait or are you saying that this should be listed under the American intervention in the Syrian civil war section?--DarkAzure (talk) 00:50, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Yes, this is Do not list/Wait. Based on current info, the involvement of US to actual combat (such as shooting targets with missiles) is not significant yet. But the Israel-Hezbollah conflict will became bigger, with poorly predictable results. My very best wishes (talk) 18:12, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  That is more or less where I am at, too. "Wars involving..." seems a little woolly to me. Selfstudier (talk) 13:01, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Do not list/wait WP:NOTACRYSTALBALL. We follow, we do not lead. Anything else would be WP:OR. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:13, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment: My tentative impression is that we ought to wait for greater coverage by RS, and for the results of the RM on the page itself. I do not feel strongly, and if there is further escalation (and, more importantly, further coverage by RS) I would almost certainly support inclusion. I definitely think this RfC should not be closed in a hurry, to give commenters time to see how things unfold. So, to be clear, my vote is not “No, exclude”, it’s “wait for now, but let’s keep the RfC open”. Some relevant articles from RS, posted Nov. 13: Politico; The Guardian; ABC; The Nation (which is more about domestic politics, but may be interesting to some). WillowCity^(talk) 03:32, 14 November 2023 (UTC) Pinged for this RfC by FRSReply[reply]
• Do not list/wait Too early to tell right now. Anything else is OR/feelings. GenQuest ^"scribble" 17:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment It is well sourced that there was a sustained low intensity conflict against US forces in Syria and Iraq from January 2020 onwards. See here [1]. There had been an article that covered this conflict, which has since been deleted. There was a pause in attacks by these Iranian backed proxy groups during the middle of this year. They restarted after the normalization talks with Israel and Saudi Arabia started to bear fruit in the fall. That there is a proxy conflict between the US and Iran is absolutely clear and well established by reliable sources. Whether or not this current round of fighting is a "separate conflict" from the post January 2020 fighting is a question that has yet to be answered.XavierGreen (talk) 16:16, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Yes, the attacks on US bases in Iraq and Syria are happening for a number of years already [2], they have only intensified right now. My very best wishes (talk) 17:15, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Don't you mean No, as in not a new war according to your reasoning? 89.206.112.10 (talk) 09:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  This was a reply to the above conversation, not a new vote. This user has already voted earlier for Do not list/wait. --DarkAzure (talk) 13:26, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• No, as of now part of the ongoing American intervention in the Syrian civil war, pending further escalation. 89.206.112.10 (talk) 09:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Yes It can be regarded as a separate item, and has its sufficient related sources to indicate its notability. Ali Ahwazi (talk) 08:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• New/Separate Not that I am any sort of expert, but it seems that if Operation Observant Compass rises to inclusion in the List, then the recent increase in engagements in and around Iraq and Syria are likewise qualified. Plenty of sources. All this said, there is no deadline for inclusion -- it should be discussed for at least a number of days. - Swiss Mister in NY (talk) 19:10, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The United States invasion of Honduras section does not cite any external sources, and only internally links to the spanish page of José Santos Guardiola, which has a small section on Guerra "Honduro-Estadounidense (1859)", but which does not contains any sources at all.

I was not able to find any reference or sources talking about this war after half an hour of research. As the page is protected I can not edit it but I would strongly suggest either adding a reference needed tag right now, or if a verified user has a bit more time to verify references can not be found, removing the content entirely.

Xelote (talk) 14:23, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since I was verified after posting this, I removed the section myself, until sources can be found. Xelote (talk) 14:31, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am unsure if my edit was correct in terms of table formatting, could someone more experienced with tables check it? Thanks Xelote (talk) 14:36, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]