logo
A Look Back at the Last Major U.S. National Military Parade in 1991

A Look Back at the Last Major U.S. National Military Parade in 1991

To mark the 250th anniversary of the United States Army, Washington D.C. will play host to a national military parade on Saturday, June 14. The date also falls in line with President Donald Trump 's 79th birthday, but the U.S. Army has said it has no plans to mark the occasion alongside the parade. Either way, the President is still expected to play a significant role in the celebrations.
But the event comes at a highly precarious time, amid nationwide protests which started in Los Angeles when people rallied against raids conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). After some of the protests descended into violence, Trump controversially deployed the National Guard and active-duty Marines to L.A. to quell the demonstrations. The move was made without a request from California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has taken legal action against the Trump Administration.
Amid backlash, the 'No Kings' movement is expected to hold nationwide protests against Trump on Saturday, including in Arlington, Virginia, across the Potomac River from Washington, D.C.
Speaking at the Oval Office on Tuesday, Trump warned against people who planned to protest at the upcoming parade, telling reporters:"For those who want to protest, they're going to be met with very big force."
Even prior to the recent escalated tension over immigration efforts, Trump's decision to hold the parade received criticism, especially from some Democratic lawmakers.
Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, who is an Iraq War veteran, has called it an 'egotistical, nonsensical birthday parade.' While Sen. Adam Schiff of California described it as a ' dictator-style military parade ' and accused Trump of spending millions of tax dollars to throw himself a 'birthday party.'
The upcoming parade is expected to cost around $45 million, including $16 million in damages to roads after tanks and other heavy vehicles tour the streets of Washington. It's set to be a grand affair, involving an estimated 6,500 U.S. troops, 150 vehicles, and 50 aircraft.
This is the first major national military parade in the U.S. since 1991. President George H. W. Bush held the event on June 8 that year, after the U.S. led a successful coalition in the Gulf War.
As the U.S. gets ready for Trump's much-discussed June 14 military parade, here's everything you need to know about the last one that took place 34 years ago.
Why exactly was the 1991 military parade held?
The parade was held to celebrate the military success of the U.S.-led coalition in the Gulf War, which came to a conclusion in late February. The first phase of the war, named Operation Desert Shield, involved a military and personnel coalition in Saudi Arabia from August 1990 to January 1991, hashed out on the border with Kuwait which had been invaded by Iraq, under the eye of Saddam Hussein.
On Jan. 17, 1991, the war entered its second phase, Operation Desert Storm, in which the U.S-led coalition orchestrated an aerial and naval bombardment of Iraqi forces in Kuwait. This was followed by a ground operation, which lasted for five days, concluding on Feb. 28, with Kuwait liberated and Iraqi forces expelled.
On the evening that Desert Storm began, President Bush addressed the nation in a speech from the Oval Office, saying: 'I've told the American people before that this will not be another Vietnam, and I repeat this here tonight. Our troops will have the best possible support in the entire world, and they will not be asked to fight with one hand tied behind their back.'
He added: 'This is an historic moment. We have in this past year made great progress in ending the long era of conflict and cold war. We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a new world order.'
But it wasn't only the Gulf War occupying the minds of Americans during the 1991 military parade.
Bill Allison, a professor of history at Georgia Southern University, says that the legacy of the Vietnam War, which ended in April 1975, was still very much felt.
'Vietnam was looming large in that rear-view mirror. Vietnam veterans didn't get a parade and the war was a hot mess,' he says. "[For symbolic reasons], there was also a group of Vietnam veterans invited to march in the 1991 parade and as Bush said, ' We've kicked the Vietnam syndrome.''
Connor Williams, a professor of history at Yale, says that this campaign changed the American mindset on the military. 'Desert Shield and Desert Storm provided a relationship with the military that had not been seen in a generation… The incredible swiftness and completeness of that victory left a lot to celebrate,' he notes.
The Gulf War was also the first major conflict in which the U.S. deployed a fully voluntary military force after conscriptions in both World Wars, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War.
'For the United States, [the parade] was a testament to the volunteer work force and that had been a very risky move at the time,' says Allison.
How much did the 1991 military parade cost?
The parade is estimated to have cost around $12 million, which adjusted for inflation, translates to roughly £28 million today.
An estimated $5 million dollars in 1991 was raised by the volunteer Homecoming Foundation, established to support military personnel returning from the Gulf and to help coordinate the parade. Around 700 foundation volunteers were also present to help the clean-up operation.
Although, with roughly 8,000 troops marching through the streets of the nation's capital, the show of military might attracted a far smaller crowd than expected. Only 200,000 showed up to the parade early in the day, with numbers peaking later in the evening, when around 800,000 were present for the glittering fireworks display.
Was there criticism of the 1991 military parade?
Whilst there were some, such as anti-war protesters and people concerned about the cost, who voiced disapproval over the parade, there didn't appear to be too much criticism from lawmakers, according to historians.
"One thing that will always unite politicians is supporting the troops, [even though] there's different opinions on how the troops should be supported," Williams says, adding that this sentiment can change if there is no notable military success to honor.
'In 1991, it was very much a campaign event for everybody. The salute Bush exchanged with Norman Schwarzkopf [a U.S. Army General during the Gulf War] was highly photographed. There was a [presidential] election the next year and there was a lot of B-roll happening because Bush and Democratic leaders wanted to be seen shaking hands and supporting the troops,' Williams says.
The only significant demonstration was a group of anti-war activists delivering speeches in Lafayette Park, on the opposite side of the White House to the parade, which went down Constitution Avenue.
In January 1991, during the conflict in Kuwait, thousands of protestors attended multiple anti-war demonstrations, centered around humanitarian worries.
What was the message being sent at the 1991 military parade?
Experts tell TIME that, generally speaking, there are three key reasons behind military parades, including the one held in 1991:
Celebrating the troops
Rallying the public
Sending a message to other countries
'In 1991, it was more about rallying the people and celebrating the troops. To some extent, the U.S. didn't need to display power like the Soviets did. The power had already been displayed. People had been watching the capability of the U.S. military on the nightly news,' says Williams. 'Not everyone [tanks and personnel] rolled down Pennsylvania avenue to give off that effect. It was more a way for people to celebrate what they thought was emerging, a unipolar world.'
As for Trump's upcoming parade on June 14, Williams says that it 'will be interesting' to see how U.S. strength is displayed anew. 'Will it be demonstrated in a peaceful way or in attack mode? How will the people respond?'
That remains to be seen.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The Gen Z New Yorkers Selling Their Parents on Mamdani
The Gen Z New Yorkers Selling Their Parents on Mamdani

New York Times

time6 minutes ago

  • New York Times

The Gen Z New Yorkers Selling Their Parents on Mamdani

Zohran Mamdani's improbable ascent has been widely understood as a generational pivot, a resonant sign of the power of the youth vote when youth itself gets politically turned on. Even as so much about his claim to the Democratic nomination in New York City's mayoral race has undergone intense scrutiny, one aspect remains underplayed — that the 33-year-old candidate may have won not because of the city's demographics but rather despite them. Mr. Mamdani clearly energized young voters. But in statistical terms, the young do not dominate. There are roughly a half-million more New Yorkers over 50 than those between the ages of 20 and 39. The city's population, like its infrastructure, is simply getting older and older. During the past quarter-century the number of New Yorkers 65 and over increased by 53 percent, to 1.43 million. Since 2020 — and even with the devastations of a pandemic that left older people especially vulnerable — this age cohort has been the only one to grow. But the lack of available exit polling makes it impossible to know what percent of older Democratic voters actually ranked Mr. Mamdani in first place (or at all). But polling data released the day before the primary showed Mr. Cuomo's lead on him shrinking among voters over 60. In the weeks both before the June 24 primary and since, I have talked to many people in middle age and well beyond it about the mayoral race, about the candidate (or candidates) they supported and, in instances in which they changed their minds, what prompted their shifts in allegiance or interest. The discussions inevitably came around to Mr. Mamdani, and boomer and Gen X parents routinely told me that even if they were not drawn to him initially — questioning his lack of experience and policies, some of which struck them as entirely unfeasible or even absurd — they had been moved by their children's enthusiasm for him. One friend, a longtime Andrew Cuomo supporter, was recently asked by her 17-year-old son whether she would vote for the former governor in the general election, and she said she would not. As much as she believed he would make a very good mayor, the 'kids,' and her own in particular, had spoken. The future, she felt, belonged to them. Others view the future in a more proprietary fashion. Earlier this week, someone writing under the handle Caitlin on X described an unpleasant encounter she had just had with a Mamdani antagonist. 'A woman spent the entirety of my parents' party last night insulting me to every guest because I support Zohran,' she offered. 'Thanks to her, my parents, who had Cuomo prayer candles, just sent $1,000 to @ZohranKMamdani.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Nvidia and AMD CEOs Back Trump's AI Plan, Signal Growth Tailwinds for U.S. Chip Stocks
Nvidia and AMD CEOs Back Trump's AI Plan, Signal Growth Tailwinds for U.S. Chip Stocks

Business Insider

time21 minutes ago

  • Business Insider

Nvidia and AMD CEOs Back Trump's AI Plan, Signal Growth Tailwinds for U.S. Chip Stocks

Nvidia (NVDA) and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) are backing the Trump administration's new AI 'action plan,' a policy move designed to clear regulatory hurdles and expand U.S. technology exports. Both chipmakers see the initiative as a tailwind for their businesses and the broader American semiconductor industry. Elevate Your Investing Strategy: Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. The plan focuses on accelerating AI infrastructure, including the construction of data centers and ensuring access to reliable energy, both of which are critical for running high-performance AI chips. It also seeks to ease export controls, helping U.S. firms ship more AI-enabling tech to global partners, while ensuring those allies remain reliant on American chips and software instead of turning to China. Trump Is America's Unique Advantage At a tech industry event in Washington, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang referred to Trump as America's 'unique advantage' in the global AI race. He credited the president for recognizing early on the dual importance of AI and domestic energy production. AMD CEO Lisa Su described the plan as 'excellent,' stating that it outlines the key components necessary for the U.S. to maintain leadership in AI. 'It's a great day for those of us… trying to get technology adopted as fast as possible, in partnership with the government,' Su said. Trump took the stage at the same event and acknowledged both Huang and Su as key figures in the AI push. The new policy was formalized with the signing of AI-related executive orders late Wednesday. Notably, Huang recently lobbied for the reversal of Commerce Department restrictions on Nvidia's H20 AI chip exports to China. The administration lifted those limits following a direct meeting with the president, signaling a more flexible stance on export controls tied to AI. If fully implemented, the plan could strengthen Nvidia and AMD's positions at the heart of global AI infrastructure growth. Using TipRanks' Comparison Tool, we analyzed Nvidia and AMD to get a clearer picture of each company individually and how they stack up against each other.

The White House wants more states to redraw House maps to help GOP. Democrats are readying a fight

time27 minutes ago

The White House wants more states to redraw House maps to help GOP. Democrats are readying a fight

WASHINGTON -- The White House is eyeing redistricting efforts beyond Texas to help Republicans hold the U.S. House in 2026 — and Democrats are preparing to escalate in response, with one senator vowing to go 'nuclear' if needed. What's shaping up to be a multistate redistricting battle could mark the opening round for House control ahead of next year's midterms, when Democrats see retaking the House as the party's best chance to break Republicans' hold on Congress and President Donald Trump is determined to keep the GOP's majority. Democrats, under pressure from their base to match GOP tactics, have grown more forceful in their messaging and are taking concrete steps to push back, even as the party enters at a disadvantage. 'If they're going to go nuclear, then so am I,' said Sen. Elissa Slotkin. 'They're forcing us into this position because they're trying to pick their voters.' At Trump's urging, Texas Republicans are looking to redraw congressional maps to favor GOP candidates during a 30-day special legislative session that started this week. Trump has said he wants to carve out five new winnable GOP seats. But Trump officials are now going beyond just Texas, looking to redraw lines in other states such as Missouri, according to a person familiar with conversations but unauthorized to speak publicly about them. Democrats have fewer options. More of the states the party controls do not allow elected partisans to draw maps, instead entrusting groups such as independent commissions to draw fair lines. Still, party leaders are exploring their legal options and shifting their posture. A party long known for believing it's on the moral high ground is signaling it's ready to fight dirty. 'We can't fight with one hand behind our backs,' Rep. Pete Aguilar, chair of the House Democratic Caucus, told reporters Tuesday. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries may have fewer options to match Republicans, but it hasn't stopped him from exploring them. Earlier this month, Jeffries' team spoke with New York Gov. Kathy Hochul's office about redistricting after the news in Texas, according to a person familiar with the conversations. Drawing new congressional lines now could run afoul of the state constitution and undoubtedly draw legal challenges — but it doesn't appear to be off the table. 'What I'm going to say is, all is fair in love and war,' Hochul said Thursday, adding that she's 'going to see what our options are.' 'If there's other states that are violating the rules that are going to try and give themselves an advantage, all I'll say is I'm going to look at it closely with Hakeem Jeffries.' Jeffries and his advisers have also examined legal strategies in other states with Democratic trifectas, including California, where he recently met with the state's congressional delegation. On Wednesday, the California delegation's Democrats discussed the redistricting issue during a private meeting on Capitol Hill. And on Thursday, Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi joined an emergency call with others in the state about the effort. In an interview with The Associated Press, Pelosi said that she is not a fan of using redistricting outside of the 10-year window, but if that's what the party needs 'to win, we will do that.' 'Everything is on the table,' Pelosi told AP. California's governor, Gavin Newsom, a potential Democratic contender for president in 2028, has taken a similar approach. He said on social media in response to Trump's redistricting push that 'two can play this game.' An independent commission handles redistricting in his state. Newsom has floated the notion of California's Democratic-controlled legislature doing a mid-decade redistricting, arguing it wouldn't be expressly forbidden by the 2008 ballot initiative that created the commission. He's also mentioned the possibility of squeezing in a special election to repeal the popular commission system before the 2026 elections get underway, either of which would be a long shot. Beyond the behind-the-scenes maneuvering, Democrats see the redistricting fight as an opportunity to meet the moment politically — delivering the kind of aggressive pushback their voters have demanded. Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, in a series of social media posts, pushed Democrats to fight back, saying the party should 'gerrymander to help Democrats' and arguing they should dilute heavily Democratic districts to secure more seats 'everywhere.' 'It's time for Democrats to understand the existential threat. Republicans aren't playing around and they will do this as long as it takes to keep power,' he warned. Gallego later told The Associated Press it's simply about ensuring 'that we're also fighting back.' That sentiment has gained traction beyond Congress. Former Texas congressman Beto O'Rourke said Sunday on CNN that Democrats need to be 'to be absolutely ruthless about getting back in power.' Next month, former President Barack Obama is heading to Martha's Vineyard for a fundraiser benefiting the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, a group whose nonprofit affiliate has filed and supported litigation in several states over GOP-drawn districts. Eric Holder, Obama's former attorney general who chairs the outfit, is expected to attend, along with former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, according to a copy of the invitation first reported by Politico. In a statement to AP, Marina Jenkins, executive director of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, called Republicans' moves 'cheating,' adding that the group would be 'using every single tool at our disposal to fight back and stop Donald Trump's scheme to steal the 2026 midterm elections from voters.' In addition to fundraisers like the one featuring Obama next month, that tool kit includes the group and its affiliates focusing on organizing volunteers and donors around the special Texas session. They also make media appearances and craft digital campaigns to highlight their arguments. Redrawing of congressional maps holds risks. During the 2010s, Texas' GOP-controlled Legislature redrew the congressional map to bolster the party's majority. But the advantage proved short-lived: in 2018, a backlash to Trump's presidency helped Democrats flip two seats that Republicans had assumed were safely red. 'There had to be folks that drew these lines and everything that had a very strong opinion of exactly where they ought to be,' said West Virginia Sen. Jim Justice, a Republican. 'Now just to say, 'OK, we're going to redraw this, we're going to redraw that. And by god, if you're going to redraw, we're going to redraw.' I don't like that.' Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley said Thursday that he has not yet spoken to any Republicans in his state about redistricting but that it's up to the Missouri legislature and governor to make the call. 'I'd love to have more Republicans,' Hawley said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store