Pendragon_6
08-21-2005, 03:25 PM
The deadliest weapon in the world is a Marine and his rifle."
— U.S. Army Gen. John J. "Black Jack" Pershing
This is one of those rare moments when it might be better if I were not a former Marine. Don't misunderstand me, I'm incredibly proud of my prior service as one of America's "few good men." But I'm afraid I may now come across as being somewhat less-than objective when I attempt to blast Navy fawning James F. Dunnigan out of the water (no pun intended). Here's why:
Last month, Dunnigan, acclaimed author and the editor in chief of Strategy Page, wrote a piece, "Why the U.S. Navy Is Creating a New Marine Corps," in which he said, "the toughest troops in the Navy Department are not the Marines, but the sailors who belong to the SEALs."
Tougher than Marines? Is he kidding? Is there anything on the planet "tougher" than those men who waded ashore at Tarawa in 1943, battled their way back from the frozen Chosin Reservoir in 1950, fought house-to-house for Hue City in 1968, captured 80 percent of the island of Grenada (though they only comprised 20 percent of the landing force) in 1983, or fought the worst sort of fight-to-the-death fanatics – often tooth-to-eyeball – in the 2004 battle for Fallujah?
How, pray tell, can anyone be tougher than that? Granted, one might be equally as tough, and there certainly are picked-men within special units who are trained for specific types of operations, and in that sense they may have more extensive training for those types of missions and specific equipment for special operations. But to suggest that those men are somehow tougher than U.S. Marines is just, well, not true.
Dunnigan goes on to wax philosophic about a newly proposed Naval infantry force or "expeditionary combat battalion" that would be comprised of some 600-700 sailors trained in infantry tactics. The battalion, if it becomes a reality, will be deployed in 2007 as an additional ground combat arm for the purposes of supporting riverine missions or conducting small direct-action operations along coastlines or on small islands. Such a force would also help relieve some of the pressure on Marine and Army units in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's an interesting concept hearkening back to the days when all sailors were trained to fight ashore and during boarding operations.
In Full
Reporting the War (http://reportingwar.com/dropzone.shtml)
— U.S. Army Gen. John J. "Black Jack" Pershing
This is one of those rare moments when it might be better if I were not a former Marine. Don't misunderstand me, I'm incredibly proud of my prior service as one of America's "few good men." But I'm afraid I may now come across as being somewhat less-than objective when I attempt to blast Navy fawning James F. Dunnigan out of the water (no pun intended). Here's why:
Last month, Dunnigan, acclaimed author and the editor in chief of Strategy Page, wrote a piece, "Why the U.S. Navy Is Creating a New Marine Corps," in which he said, "the toughest troops in the Navy Department are not the Marines, but the sailors who belong to the SEALs."
Tougher than Marines? Is he kidding? Is there anything on the planet "tougher" than those men who waded ashore at Tarawa in 1943, battled their way back from the frozen Chosin Reservoir in 1950, fought house-to-house for Hue City in 1968, captured 80 percent of the island of Grenada (though they only comprised 20 percent of the landing force) in 1983, or fought the worst sort of fight-to-the-death fanatics – often tooth-to-eyeball – in the 2004 battle for Fallujah?
How, pray tell, can anyone be tougher than that? Granted, one might be equally as tough, and there certainly are picked-men within special units who are trained for specific types of operations, and in that sense they may have more extensive training for those types of missions and specific equipment for special operations. But to suggest that those men are somehow tougher than U.S. Marines is just, well, not true.
Dunnigan goes on to wax philosophic about a newly proposed Naval infantry force or "expeditionary combat battalion" that would be comprised of some 600-700 sailors trained in infantry tactics. The battalion, if it becomes a reality, will be deployed in 2007 as an additional ground combat arm for the purposes of supporting riverine missions or conducting small direct-action operations along coastlines or on small islands. Such a force would also help relieve some of the pressure on Marine and Army units in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's an interesting concept hearkening back to the days when all sailors were trained to fight ashore and during boarding operations.
In Full
Reporting the War (http://reportingwar.com/dropzone.shtml)