Talk:Organization of the United States Marine Corps

message: The statement, "because the U.S. Marine Corps relies on the Navy support for the overwhelming majority of its operations while the Army is self sufficient" is erroneous, incomplete, and misleading on several counts.
While some capabilities of the USMC and USA do overlap, just as do some capabilities of the USAF and US Naval Aviation (e.g., each performs both close and deep air support), and as do some capabilities of the USN and the USCG (especially concerning port security and littoral warfare), the major reason that the Army coveted the USMC was for budgetary concerns (i.e., funding from Congress), as the Army had/has little interest in maintaining a robust "forcible entry from the sea" capability.
Conversely, the US Marine Corps has always embraced amphibious/expeditionary warfare as part of its “raison d’etre” in furnishing “naval infantry” and began conducting amphibious/expeditionary operations on March 3, 1776, landing against two British forts, an ammunition depot, and the naval port in New Providence, Bahamas, again on January 27, 1778, against Fort Nassau, Bahamas, and in a naval raid against Whitehaven, England on April 23, 1778. Followed by the first US ground combat operation outside North America, against Derne, Tripoli, in North Africa on March 27, 1805, the US Marine Corps began its now legendary capability to land overseas in any “clime and place,” including the Falkland Islands (1831), Sumatra, Indonesia (1832 & 1838), Mexican California (1846), Mexico (1847), Japan (1853), China (1856 & 1900), Korea (1871), Panama (1885), Hawaii (1893), Cuba (1898), Philippines (1898 & 1899), Puerto Rico (1898), and Samoa (1899).   
The Army has conducted many amphibious operations (including riverine warfare), dating back to Washington's crossing of the Delaware on December 25, 1776, and was the largest participant in the greatest amphibious landing in history (Operation Overlord - Normandy/D-Day, June 6, 1944), but the Army has always viewed sea-borne operations in much the same way as the Marine Corps sees airborne operations. That is to say, that while they are occasionally useful and perhaps even necessary, they are not of sufficient value as to warrant significant expenditure of resources to maintain a credible capability. (To that end, the USMC maintains a very modest "airborne" capability through its parachute qualified personnel organic to MARSOC, Force Reconnaissance, ANGLICO, and Aerial Delivery units.)    
While it is true that the USMC relies on the Navy for much of its support, as the two Naval Services are somewhat symbiotic (e.g., the USMC provides instructors to various Navy schools and training programs and small-arms expertise to various organizations such as Navy Construction Battalion units, while the Navy provides all health services and religious program support to the Marines), they each rely on the other for various operational capabilities. For example, the Navy has no inherent capability to "seize or defend advanced naval bases," but the USMC does. (Yes, the Navy has the SEALs, and they are extremely good at what they do, arguable the best on the planet; however, they are relatively few in number, usually operate in small teams, and do not possess the heavy, crew-served weapons, artillery, armored vehicles, organic aircraft, and logistics support required for sustained operations to overcome strong organized defenses or to repel deliberate determined attacks in decisive combat. In short, they are "commandos" much like the US Army Special Forces "Green Berets.") Additionally, the Navy has a very limited capability for self-contained, ground based security, but again the Marine Corps does and it provides Security Battalions at the Strategic Submarine bases and Fleet Anti-terrorism Security Team Companies strategically placed around the globe to defend Navy and other US interests.
The USMC also serves as “state department troops” through its Marine Security Guard Regiment providing Marine Security Guards at US Embassies and Consulates abroad. The US Marine Corps is indeed unique, as codified in Title 10 of the United States Code of federal law and the National Security Act of 1947, in that it is the nation’s expeditionary force in readiness in performing “such other duties as the President may direct.” Finally, (admittedly, somewhat “tongue-in-cheek”) the USMC provides the US President his only “personal troops” through the members of the United States Marine Band, “The President’s Own,” the only United States military unit so designated.
 
The Army is not self sufficient. The Army possesses no close or deep air support capability (attack helicopters are part of the ground maneuver plan and as such provide direct-fire support, primarily in an anti-armor role, and are generally not part of the air battle plan). The Army possesses no intra-theater, tactical airlift capability (i.e., C-130's) or airborne forces delivery assets (i.e., C-130's and C-17's). The Army possesses no manned aircraft air defense capability (again, USAF or even USN/USMC assets are required.) All of the services rely on the USAF for strategic airlift (C-17's, and C-5's), strategic aerial refueling (KC-135's and KC-10's), and manned strategic aerial reconnaissance (TR-2's). Finally, the Army must rely on the US Navy for strategic sealift, which would mean, just as they have in the past, should the US Army ever conduct another amphibious operation, they will be transported and landed by ships, boats, and landing craft of the US Navy (and possibly USCG, as in WWII), and even more ironically, perhaps even (since the Army possesses neither) by amphibious assault vehicles and tilt-rotor aircraft operated by the United States Marine Corps.
By the way, the USAF is not self-sufficient either, in that it must depend on the US Army to provide its ground-based air defense and supplement its external security in hostile territory. The Air Force does not operate or maintain surface-to-air missile or gun systems and its Security Forces squadrons are essentially light infantry who specialize in air base defense. Again, just as for the Navy SEALs, while they are extremely good at what they do and can even "backfill" some Army and Marine forces in certain mission tasks, Air Force Security Forces do not possess the weapons, equipment, or logistics for extended independent ground combat.   
The Army does possess one capability that no other service does – a Veterinary Corps. Therefore the Army is responsible for providing animal healthcare, vector control (combating diseases spread by insects and animals, such as rodents), biomedical research, and food inspection services for all branches of the US military. 
So, you see, no uniformed service, (which, under US definition, includes not only the four DOD branches of the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, and Air Force, [listed in order of precedence] but also the fifth branch of the Armed Forces, the Coast Guard, DHS, as well as the Commissioned Corps’ of the Public Health Service, HHS, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, DOC), is truly self sufficient.CobraDragoon (talk) 23:58, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationship with other uniformed services 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Organization of the United States Marine Corps. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060719042959/http://www.usni.org:80/Proceedings/Articles02/PROcno10.htm to http://www.usni.org/proceedings/Articles02/proCNO10.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:28, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Bull Taylor Christian is in Marine in San Diego California. 2601:8C:700:CAE0:755C:99C6:932C:1DA6 (talk) 01:12, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marine