We Wanna Play Too Damn It!

[NousDefionsDoc]

July 07, 2005

Navy to establish expeditionary and riverine forces

By Andrew Scutro
Times staff writer

The Navy is sailing flank speed into the war on terror. And more sailors will be heading ashore to help fight it.
In a July 6 memorandum from the office of out-going Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Vern Clark, a copy of which has been obtained by Navy Times, officials spell out a series of actions to “expand the Navy’s capabilities to prosecute” the so-called Global War on Terror.

Key directives call for establishing expeditionary and riverine warfare units with the Navy.

Specifically, Clark has ordered creation of:

• An active component riverine warfare force by 2006 and two reserve component riverine units by 2007.

• A Navy Expeditionary Combat Battalion by 2007. How such a unit would differ from U.S. Marines is unclear.

• A provisional civil affairs battalion attached to Seabees in 2006 and a reserve civil affairs battalion by 2007.

• An active/reserve integrated structure for two Helo Combat Support Special Squadrons, HCS 4 (Red Wolves) and HCS 5 (Firehawks).

• A unit that will be able to “data-mine” information culled from the National Maritime Intelligence Center, which tracks information on global ship traffic.

• A team to exploit intelligence gathered from maritime interdictions.

• A community of Foreign Area Officers who are experts in specific regions of the world, similar to Army and Marine Corps FAOs.

According to the memo, Navy endstrength “should not grow” as a result of the new initiatives may. It also notes, but not specify, possible budget requirements.

Navy officials were unavailable for comment.

Tom Donnelly, a defense analyst with the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, DC said the ideas have long been on Clark’s agenda.

“Just as a principle, I applaud the CNO trying to be relevant for the needs of the country,” he said. “Certainly it’s a different attitude than some people in other services who have been waiting for this war to go away.”

Donnelly noted the manpower and budgetary implications.

“It’s not like the Navy has a lot of excess money running around. [These initiatives] are probably not that expensive but they’ll run up against resistance from entrenched communities in the Navy.”

One Navy industry analyst who has seen the memo and requested anonymity, however, strongly criticized the move. He asked why the Navy would take on missions already handled by the Coast Guard and Marine Corps.

Creating an entirely new command and structure, he said, makes little sense.

“In general you are more effective building up things that exist rather than building new organizations,” the analyst said. “The Navy has enough trouble managing today’s Navy without adding new structures.”

[The Reaper]

If requirement for those additional units exist, why not just take away budget and end strength and redistribute it to Army and Marine commands who have those capabilities already?

TR

[rubberneck]

From strategypage.com

AMPHIBIOUS OPERATIONS: USN Creates a New Marine Corps

July 20, 2005: The U.S. Navy feels it is in need of more “soldiers of the sea.” But since the U.S. Navy has lost control of the U.S. Marine Corps, the navy is assembling a new force of sailors serving as naval infantry. This is not really new. For example, the toughest troops in the Navy Department are not the marines, but the sailors who belong to the SEALs, an organization formed in the 1960s. But the process of regenerating the American naval infantry is accelerating. There was a time, not too long ago, when the marines where what marines had always been, soldiers who belonged to the navy and served on ships. But since World War II, the U.S. Marine Corps have developed into a truly separate force, no longer available to the navy.

While marines like to think that the Marine Corps has, since 1798, been a separate service, this did not actually happen until quite recently. Until World War II, the Marine Corps was so small, and dependent on the navy (for amphibious ships and, well, work to do), that in practice, marines tended to do whatever the navy asked them to do. But after World War II, the much larger marine force became, gradually, a truly independent service. The marines were still intertwined with the navy, but increasingly, able to defy the admirals. Thus we have the navy forming the SEAL commandos, in the early 1960s, using sailors, rather than marines. Over the next few decades, the navy slowly stopped using marines for their traditional job of providing onboard ship security. By the end of the century, the navy was content to let the marines be whatever they could get away with, and the navy would basically do without them.

After September 11, 2001, when the navy sought to increase its security force for ships in port, it did not turn to the marines (who long had taken care of that sort of thing), but greatly expanded the number of “Masters at Arms” (previously a job category, not a force). Now comes the ECG (expeditionary combat battalion) of high quality sailors who could fight on water or land in coastal operations. The ECG would obtain its manpower from those who apply to join the SEALs, but don’t make it. The SEALs are a very selective organization, accepting less than one in ten of those who apply. Now the navy wants to do something with those high quality rejects. The recent navy announcement that it is putting together a “brown water (coastal and rivers)” force mentioned an infantry component, and that these troops would be sailors, not troops from the Marine Corps. This new force also makes it clear how much the navy and marines have grown apart.

But the ECG is expected to be higher quality than the marines, something close to U.S. Army Special Forces. The ECG would be trained in foreign languages and cultures, and be part of the force that provided training to foreign navies. But the ECG would also take over some SEAL functions, like providing boarding parties for dangerous interdiction missions. Most of these boarding operations are not dangerous, and are handled by specially trained sailors and Masters at Arms. These folks are also doing a job that has traditionally belonged to “marines.” But since the U.S. Navy no longer has control of the U.S. Marine Corps, and needs marines, it has to rebuild the force under a new name. Or, rather, several new names.

The new marine force will be only a few thousand strong, which is more in line with the proportion of marines in other navies. The U.S. Navy lost its original marine force because the U.S. Marine Corps got so large during World War II that it was no longer a part of the navy, but a truly separate entity. This new force of naval infantry also revives another old navy tradition; infantry training for sailors. Until about a century ago, infantry training for sailors, and even infantry exercises on land, were a regular feature of navy life. All this had faded away by the 1930s. The navy stopped issuing field manuals for naval infantry in the 1960s. But the war on terror, and increased emphasis on brown water operations, has returned many sailors to the old ways. The new naval infantry will perform many of the traditional marine functions, without being called marines.

[NousDefionsDoc]

If requirement for those additional units exist, why not just take away budget and end strength and redistribute it to Army and Marine commands who have those capabilities already?

TR
Admiral without a job?

[Footmobile]

But the ECG is expected to be higher quality than the marines, something close to U.S. Army Special Forces. .

Whatever :rolleyes:

Anyways, can is this really going to happen? Are they really gonna spend millions of dollars trying to develop this capability when it already exists in so many forms already?

Terrible idea. If they actually go thru with this, it won't be an effective orgainzation for 20-30 years. It will take at least that long to get the institutional framework in place. They don't have the Officer and NCO Corps that has any idea how to do this stuff, let alone teach and lead others to do it.

[brownapple]

They're going to take the quitters and non-hackers from BUDs and somehow turn them into a force the equivilant of the US Army Special Forces?

Excuse me if I think the person who wrote that article is on crack.

[The Reaper]

All about the money.

TR

[CommoGeek]

Yup. Amazing that this story broke about the same time as the disbanding of the Marine Small Craft Companies took place. Who here believes in coincidences and happenstance where defense money is concerned?

All about the money.

TR

[QRQ 30]

They forgot to mention changing uniforms to green and scuttleing all of their ships.

[Spartan359]

They're going to take the quitters and non-hackers from BUDs and somehow turn them into a force the equivilant of the US Army Special Forces?

Excuse me if I think the person who wrote that article is on crack.

I took the BUD/s exam three times and passed all three times but due to my crappy eyesight they always told me the same thing. NO. So I'm no quitter. ;) The article has been printed in both the Navy and Airforce Times.

They forgot to mention changing uniforms to green and scuttleing all of their ships.

I take it none of you fine gentlemen have been in the Navy. Let me explain to the best of my abilities. The Navy does shit ass backwards. Now granted I just talked shit about my own branch but who doesn't now and then, besides I wouldn't trade that......unique experince for anything. Back to the point. While I was in the Navy they took a poll to the majority of the sailors, E-1 to E-5. The poll asked sailors about uniform changes. Many stated that they didn't feel like soldiers. Well no shit, your in the Navy. Hence the uniform change that the Navy is going through.

If requirement for those additional units exist, why not just take away budget and end strength and redistribute it to Army and Marine commands who have those capabilities already?

TR

They will end up taking funds from the various programs that the Navy has. Such as the DDX program. Also when you are getting ready to decom TWO carriers, my old ship the Kitty Hawk and the Kennedy, you will have a plethora of money at your disposal.

Now the navy wants to do something with those high quality rejects

HAHAHA

[QRQ 30]

I was referrinmg to changing to Army uniforms and decomissioning the entire Navy!! :D

[Spartan359]

:D

[Squidly]

I don't post in the political/military headers as I am not as politically well informed as most of the rest of you nor was I ever in the Army. After I check out a posted subject I generally find that I appreciate your responses and enjoy coming back to see what happens next.

Now that you have recieved my validation (you bet):

This has got to be some sort of a project evaluation (civvie talk) ordered by the Navy that has been ascribed as fact through the CNO office. Clark just porked the new guy.

I don't think they are talking about you Spartan359.

If this isn't misreported (I know, I know, the odds are slim) Clark needs a whoopin'.

[The Reaper]

Clark just porked the new guy.

Uhh, I am pretty sure what that means in Armyspeak, does that mean what I think it does in the Navy?

TR

[Squidly]

I'll bet it does. Especially egregious when used in reference to Jewish or Moslem screwings.

[Spartan359]

I know they aren't talking about me Squidly.

[Max_Tab]

Dang NDD I read the title of this thread, and I thought you were talking about 1st Grp, and 7th Grp :D

[brownapple]

I took the BUD/s exam three times and passed all three times but due to my crappy eyesight they always told me the same thing. NO. So I'm no quitter. ;) The article has been printed in both the Navy and Airforce Times.


OK, you're not a quitter. You're a non-hacker.

[Spartan359]

Rub it in alittle more GreenHat it's not like I'm pissed about it or nothing. :D

[NousDefionsDoc]

OK, you're not a quitter. You're a non-hacker.
How does a physical limitation imposed by God make one a non-hacker?

[rubberneck]

Why would the Navy let you screen three times for BUDs if they have already determined that your eyesight made you unfit? Somes like a waste of time all around.

[The Reaper]

How does a physical limitation imposed by God make one a non-hacker?

Not like he could PT them into shape.

Did the Navy ever have a correspondence course version of the SFQC like we used to?

TR

[EchoSixMike]

Why would the Navy let you screen three times for BUDs if they have already determined that your eyesight made you unfit? Somes like a waste of time all around.

Hazarding a guess because I'm USMC not USN, but it probably is due to the hope that it'll get overlooked or missed on subsequent screenings. I see it often enough, something encouraged by a general lack of attention to relevant details. Also encouraged by the climate of just about everything being waiverable these days. S/F....Ken M

[Spartan359]

I'll answer the questions that were asked. The Navy's pipeline for BUD/S is very simple. If you have ever heard the term KISS you know what I'm talking about. The first thing you do is take a sissy screening test. Then you get orders to BUD/S. That damn simple. The screening test consist of a 1.5 mile run in less than 11:30, a 500 yard swim in less than 12:30, perform minimum of 42 push-ups, 50 sit-ups and atleast 6 pull-ups. Easy. As for the eye requirement they require no worse than 20/100, I'm slightly over it. No they won't do a waiver for that either. I tried getting laser surgery done but the Navy said that I wasn't important enough. After that minor defeat I took to memorizing the eye charts and wearing contacts for the eye exam. I know that's cheating but it's something that I've wanted for along time. Try 13 years. But I understand why they won't take me because of my eyes so I'm not to hard on myself. I wouldn't want to get anyone killed. You've asked why would the Navy let me screen three times. Each time the paper work is done from scratch so they never really keep any data on you. EchoSixMike is also correct in his post. I only tried three times because I was stationed in Japan. So the screening exams weren't done very often. I just refused to take no for an answer, that's why I kept trying. I've spoken to TR about eye requirements for SF. Shortly after that conversation I got ahold of the 20th SF group in Ocala FL. I spoke to a Sgt. Kurt C. Anyone know him? He invited me to come take the screaning test for SF with them.