Talk:Chilean Armed Forces

Remove section Carabineros de Chile

Currently there is a note (which is not adequate in Wikipedia standards) which reads: "Note from 2012: The Carabineros are no longer a part of the Chilean Armed Forces, but instead belong to the Ministerio del Interior." If the note is correct, the section must be removed from this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.39.188.173 (talk) 01:20, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Article

It mentions that the new acquisitions turned Chile into the Strongest military force in latin america. I'd like to read a Reference for that sentence..

Bye

Mr Anonymous, I think the list speaks by itself!!!, mention pls another country hardware list and we should compare. Jor70 12:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

There is news that the Command of the ejercito is currently in talks to acquire 120 Marder1A3 vehicles as these are phased out of German service. Perhaps someone should look for verification and then add that to this article.

Movement proposal

Chilean army is a fairly short article about the military hardware in chile. Such content would look more complete in this article (plus it stops loads of small articles) with this article having sub-headings for the armed forces rather than those large links --Errant Tmorton166^(Talk)(Review me) 08:37, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Either – I have created a better layout and more wikified format. At the moment the army article is quite small yes, but it could be something that is expanded from that stub into a proper article (as someone has done with their navy and air force) so perhaps from that point it should stay? I guess the alternative POV is that the stub contents should be in this article until it grows too large at which point it can be moved to it's own page? Not my articles, but for me it could go either way--Deon Steyn 10:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Against- I do not believe it should be moved. It is longer then some other service branch articles. I believe it is a decent length and if some sources or links could be added it would be much better.SAWGunner89 23:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

There is a lot of false and incomplete information about the chilean army. Please edit the information....

Against - Almost all countries have their Military of article because is the proper place to put information regarding all or more than one of the services such in this case chile major programs Jor70 23:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Pic, other stuff

Aside from the other propaganda, if you take the link from the F-16 it says the plane is USAF. Why should it say Chilean?

And like someone else has said, there is a lot of false and missing information. 151.205.67.9 (talk)

I don't think it is fair to claim this article is propaganda. The article has some holes in it but the subject at hand -the Chilean military- which is currently undergoing rapid reform, is a difficult subject to cover. There are a fair number of individuals from neighboring countries who are more than a bit upset at that nation's recent rapid progress and who probably feel eclipsed. Indeed if I am not mistaken the writer is an Argentinean, so characterizing the article as propagandistic is a bit unfair. I realize it is difficult to acquire photos of actual Chilean material, but posting photos of the same equipment in use by another nation like the U.S. is unprofessional. It would probably have been preferable to include photos of Netherlands stock. Also the inventory/acquisitions list is getting a little out of hand. It would be nice if a more streamlined format was used, remember the Chilean military is undergoing an overhaul and it will probably continue to acquire much more material. Maybe if a short overview was penned of what the goals are of these reforms (as is stated in the government website). For instance an update is needed to show that 120 Marder 1A3 vehicles are to be acquired - so what role is served by the 256 to 316 dedicated IFVs of the ejercito? How does this differ from the force's composition before reform? These are the questions I'd like to see answered. As i said before it is a difficult subject to follow and exact data isn't always there. All the best! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.155.126 (talk) 06:27, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Manpower

In the sidebox, the manpower of the Chilean armed forces is quoted as 60,560. However, in the body of the article, it mentions a 60,000-person army, a 25,000-person navy and an 11,000 strong air force. I make that 96,000. I'm disinclined to change anything myself without up-to-date figures. I'd be surprised if the army, navy and air force figures were so exact. Has anybody got the right numbers?Agent0060 11:27, 26 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agent0060 (talk • contribs)

Correct size of the Army?

According to Chilean Army the Army contains 36,500 personnel organized into 6 divisions, an air brigade and a special ops brigade. Here it says the Army contains 80,000 personnel in 7 divisions and an air brigade. I assume 80,000 is for the entire armed forces and not the Army alone.

Lovkal (talk) 12:37, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Military of Chile. 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/20100328072123/http://milexdata.sipri.org/ to http://milexdata.sipri.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

History of the Armed Forces

Is there a reason why this article is so short? This doesn't really describe the role of the armed forces in the Pacific War, Pinochet's dictatorship, or even the progressive coup during the interwar period. I know some of this could be delegated to a specific branch, but there's also the combined history (e.g. the effectiveness of the navy vs army in the Pacific War, occupation of Tacna, the strafing of the capital by the air forces combined with the arrests by the military).

I think it's important to understand this, because the social impact of the armed forces in Chile is heavily shaped by its historical legacy.--173.165.56.241 (talk) 15:50, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Manpower

The manpower section of the article states that there’s only 80,000 active military troops, but this number doesn’t take into account the Navy or the Air force. Is this intentional or a mistake that should be fixed? Josez gox (talk) 11:33, 5 November 2021 (UTC)