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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
34 minutes ago
- USA Today
Why did US bomb Iran? In Trump's vibes war, it's impossible to trust anyone.
At least the last time a Republican president got America involved in a military quagmire in the Middle East he had the decency to cook up a bunch of phony reasons beforehand. The day after President Donald Trump launched attacks on Iranian nuclear sites and swept an unprepared nation into another Middle-Eastern conflict, Vice President JD Vance said the most ludicrous thing imaginable. Asked if he and Trump trust the U.S. intelligence community and its assessments, which had been that Iran was not close to developing a nuclear weapon, Vance replied: 'Of course we trust our intelligence community, but we also trust our instincts.' Your instincts? Trump and Vance just marched America into a potential war because the vibes felt real nuclear-weapon-y? Trump didn't even take time to lie to Americans before bombing Iran At least the last time a Republican president got America involved in a military quagmire in the Middle East he had the decency to cook up a bunch of phony reasons beforehand. These guys just hauled off and dropped bombs and now want us to sit back and trust their hunch that it was the right move. In 2003, former Secretary of State Colin Powell went to the trouble of holding up a blue-capped vial of fake anthrax before the U.N. Security Council to back up the Bush administration's claims that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was producing weapons of mass destruction. (Spoiler alert: Nope!) All we got from the Trump team was a lie that the president was going to ponder the bombing option for a spell, and then a stupid Truth Social post saying the bombing had happened. No congressional approval. No case made to the American people. Just bombs away, then a bunch of people known for their dishonesty trotting out and saying, 'Trust us, this was a good thing.' Trump just bombed Iran. We deserve to know why, but don't count on the truth. | Opinion Marco Rubio, like much of the Trump administration, hates intelligence Pressed on CBS' 'Face the Nation' to explain what intelligence led the administration to think bombs needed to be dropped, a frustrated Secretary of State Marco Rubio uttered three words that perfectly encapsulate President Trump, his cabinet and the entire MAGA movement: 'Forget about intelligence.' They should put that on hats. Vance swears Americas is only a little bit at war with Iran Vance continued to stumble about during his June 22 interviews, telling NBC News: 'We do not want war with Iran. We actually want peace.' Because nothing says 'we want peace' quite like firing a couple dozen tomahawk missiles at a country before walloping it with more than a dozen 30,000-pound bombs known as 'Massive Ordnance Penetrators.' On ABC, the duplicitous Mr. Vance made this whiplash-inducing claim: 'We are not at war with Iran, we're at war with Iran's nuclear program.' So we don't want war, we want peace, but we're at war with Iran's nuclear program, but we're not at war with Iran. That's starting to sound a bit like, 'I want to love you but you keep making me drop bombs on you, so it's all your fault.' Opinion: From massive protests to a puny parade, America really let Donald Trump down Of course this Age of Stupidity brought us a war based on vibes And in the same NBC News interview, he barfed out this gem: 'I empathize with Americans who are exhausted after 25 years of foreign entanglements in the Middle East. I understand the concern, but the difference is that back then we had dumb presidents.' Buddy, right now we have a dumb president. We have a president who still hasn't accepted he lost the 2020 presidential election, one who misspelled his own name in a June 22 social-media post that read: 'The GREAT B-2 pilots have just landed, safely, in Missouri. Thank you for a job well done!!! DONAKD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!' Thank you, Donakd! We have a president who, just hours after his Defense secretary said the Iran mission 'was not, has not been about regime change,' posted this: 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' MIGA? Those are the words of a dumb president. And he's the same president who in his previous term took the word of Russian President Vladimir Putin over information from America's intelligence community. Choosing who to trust here is nearly impossible So what are the Russians who Trump trusts saying about America's bombing of Iran? Russian Security Council deputy chairman Dmitry Medvedev said it didn't accomplish much and the nation's nuclear sites suffered only minor damage. 'The enrichment of nuclear material – and, now we can say it outright, the future production of nuclear weapons – will continue,' Medvedev said on social media. 'A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads.' So who do we trust? The Russians, who Trump apparently trusts? Rubio, the guy telling us to forget intelligence? Vance, the guy who wants us to roll with the vibes? Trump, the guy who seems deathly allergic to honesty? If you elect liars, you're going to get lied to It's simple: We can't trust anyone in this administration. They're liars and sycophants from top to bottom, either too lazy or too full of themselves to even pretend they can present a clear case for this risky military action. If Trump's bombing of Iran proves successful – and I, of course, hope it does – it'll be dumb luck. But if it leads to disaster, it'll be exactly what anyone paying attention to these reckless hucksters predicted. Follow USA TODAY columnist Rex Huppke on Bluesky at @ and on Facebook at You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
The Hill
35 minutes ago
- The Hill
Pakistan nominates Trump for Nobel Peace Prize, then condemns strikes on Iran
Pakistan on Sunday condemned U.S. strikes against Iran, one day after Islamabad announced it had nominated President Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize for his mediation of a ceasefire between Pakistan and India last month. Pakistan said the U.S. attacks violated norms of international law and voiced support for Iran's right to retaliate in self-defense. 'Pakistan condemns the US attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities which follow the series of attacks by Israel. We are gravely concerned at the possible further escalation of tensions in the region,' the Pakistani Foreign Ministry said in a statement. 'The unprecedented escalation of tension and violence, owing to ongoing aggression against Iran is deeply disturbing. Any further escalation of tensions will have severely damaging implications for the region and beyond.' Pakistan on Saturday announced it was nominating Trump for a Nobel prize for the president's 'decisive diplomatic intervention and pivotal leadership during the recent India-Pakistan crisis.' The government praised Trump for 'pragmatic diplomacy and effective peace-building' and added that Islamabad was hopeful the president would also resolve ongoing crises in the Middle East, including humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip and 'the deteriorating escalation involving Iran.' Trump has lamented not getting a Nobel prize during his first term. On June 20, he posted a long missive on Truth Social listing different diplomatic actions from his first term and some from his second term that he 'won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for doing.' 'No, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do, including Russia/Ukraine, and Israel/Iran, whatever those outcomes may be, but the people know, and that's all that matters to me!' he wrote.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' is getting more expensive as the world's attention is on Iran
The long-awaited summer collision course for President Trump's economic agenda is here and now competing for attention with geopolitics. The competing storylines are playing out — just in parallel — after a weekend where the president's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" saw a new higher price tag and the removal of key provisions in developments that were fully overshadowed by a weekend attack on Iran. Trump's priorities for taxes and the debt ceiling — not to mention tariffs — still face key deadlines in the weeks ahead even as foreign affairs takes center stage. On Saturday evening, shortly after the attacks on Iran commenced, Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) even released an analysis that made official how recent changes to Trump's tax-cut bill in the Senate are likely to increase the package's price tag by hundreds of billions of dollars. The group found that Senate's changes on the tax front — once economists untangled a key budget gimmick — mean the bill will potentially add about $4.2 trillion to the deficits in the years ahead if passed as is. The bill is also undergoing a close examination by the Senate parliamentarian who is moving section-by-section and has already deemed some provisions — such as a defunding of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) as well cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) — are not in line with Senate reconciliation rules. And more changes are likely coming this week that could increase the price tag and political pressure even further as key Republicans are still saying they will vote no, throwing into doubt a GOP goal of final votes within days. It all could also have near-term economic impacts. Brian Rehling, Wells Fargo head of global fixed income strategy, said in a recent Yahoo Finance Live appearance that developments in the bill could be 'more consequential' to things like interest rates for the time being over even signals from the Federal Reserve. These developments come just weeks before Trump and the Republican's self-imposed deadline to get the bill signed into law by July 4. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has said that means the Senate will need to pass this bill this week to keep the timeline on pace. The weekend's Joint Committee on Taxation analysis was focused specifically on the Senate Finance Committee's tax proposals and offered a headline number that would appear to be good news for fiscal hawks: It found the projected cost of the revised bill comes to about $441 billion over the coming decade. But that calculation came using an accounting maneuver known as a "current policy" baseline that allows the bill to be calculated assuming current tax levels stay the same. That means Congress can say the cost of extending expiring provisions in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is free, at least for accounting purposes. Republicans defend the practice, with Senate Finance Committee chair Mike Crapo offering that it 'more accurately reflects reality.' But the bottom line is that these zeroed out tax extensions are projected to add about $3.8 trillion to the national debt — versus the scenario of Congress doing nothing. "Ignore the $441 number, which is both trying to hide the cost of extensions and gimmick some specific policies to make them look cheaper," offered Marc Goldwein of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget following the release. Andrew Lautz of the Bipartisan Policy Center also offered a detailed breakdown of the differences brought by the assumptions — such as how it makes the approximately $2.1 trillion in costs from extending individual tax rates cuts look instead like they instead come to $83 billion. Both Goldwein and Lautz and others say the full price tag that should be considered is a total impact to the nation's debt of $4.2 trillion over the next decade. The new price tag projections also come as the Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, is going through the bill line by line to see if it complies with the Senate's strict reconciliation rules. It's part of a wonky Senate process — known colloquially as a 'Byrd bath' after a rule enshrined by Robert Byrd of West Virginia — that sets limits of what can be fast tracked and what is subject to the normal 60-vote threshold. MacDonough has already analyzed the Banking and Commerce and Judiciary and Homeland Security committee portions of the bill and found a series of provisions must be taken out. Pieces that appear set to be removed from the bill so far include one that would have placed a funding cap on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) as well as others that cut the SNAP program. The apparent removal of cuts to the SNAP program around state matching funds could have a significant fiscal impact, with those provisions previously estimated to save roughly $128 billion. One other closely watched provision by the tech community — to cut broadband funding for states that regulate artificial intelligence — has been allowed to stay in but still faces political opponents pushing to have it struck from the package. It's a series of rulings that Republicans contend aren't yet final but appear set to change the makeup of the overall package. "The Byrd Rule is enshrined in law for a reason, and Democrats are making sure it is enforced," said top Democratic Senator on the Budget committee, Oregon's Jeff Merkley, in a statement. And even more significant changes could be coming in the days ahead with the parliamentarian scheduled to next take a pass as the Senate Finance committee's portion of the bill. That where the biggest ticket items reside like tax provisions as well as Medicaid cuts. Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices
