Navy expeditionary plan seeks ‘sailor with a bayonet in his teeth’

[dsumner]

River ready
Navy expeditionary plan seeks ‘sailor with a bayonet in his teeth’

By Andrew Scutro
Times staff writer


The Navy wants in.
Naval war planners have been ordered to build a riverine assault force that’s capable of taking the fight directly to insurgents, upriver from the sea.

Those orders come from the top.

In the works right now are three riverine warfare squadrons; a battalion of Marine-like naval infantry; a civil affairs battalion; detachments to train foreign navies; teams to exploit information gleaned in maritime interdiction operations; foreign area officers who specialize in certain cultures and regions; and various enhanced intelligence and identification mechanisms.

Roll it all together, and it’s a Navy for fighting insurgencies from fresh water or close to it.

“If it’s in the maritime domain, we should own it,” said a senior Navy official who briefed defense reporters in the Pentagon on July 13.

Outgoing Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Vern Clark initiated the service’s new war on terrorism plans. Incoming CNO Adm. Mike Mullen approves.

Hard-charging sailors who have been looking for a direct action role in the terror war will surely be stoked.

“We need to create a sailor with a bayonet in his teeth, ready to go ashore and mix it up,” the Navy official said.

Those sailors and their equipment will be trained to fight in river country or ashore in myriad maritime locales.

The move is more than an administrative shuffle. The orders for new forces will require retooling of current and future budgets as well as ongoing force reduction assumptions.

“We want to make sure that we have the personnel to do these missions,” the official said. He added that CNO wants planners to quickly identify capability requirements to ensure the Navy doesn’t cut sailors who have the skill sets that match the new plan.

Most specifics, however, remain elusive.

But while the plans are conceptual for now, one thing is clear: Warriors are wanted.

From leak to wide distribution

The Pentagon briefing followed a July 7 leak of a memo from the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations outlining the Navy’s new plans for fighting the Global War on Terrorism.

Indicating the widespread nature of the program, the GWOT memo has been distributed to the manpower, intelligence, operations, logistics, programs, resources and reserve force shops on CNO’s staff. It also went to Fleet Forces Command, as well as the commander of Naval Facilities Engineering Command and the 1st Naval Construction Division, the Seabees.

The most pressing requirement will be to get Navy river patrol forces into Iraq to replace Army and Marine units now conducting that mission. The Marine Corps has decommissioned its Small Craft Company, leaving a gap on the near horizon.

The Navy official was not able to provide a date when a riverine force might deploy to Iraq’s inland waterways, but plans for building such a unit no later than fall of 2006 are required by Aug. 24.

The riverine component calls for establishing three squadrons, one active and two reserve. Early concepts call for 220 men and 20 boats per squadron. Manning remains undefined, but typically a unit of that size has been led by a commander.

It’s not clear what kind of boat will be used, but the official said both the Marine Corps’ Small Unit Riverine Craft and a boat already used by Naval Special Warfare forces, the Special Operations Craft-Riverine, are being considered. The Marines have also deployed a menacing, heavily armed boat called the Riverine Assault Craft.

“If you’re going to fight a counterinsurgency, you need to be able to control the riverine environment. You need to be able to interdict the flow of insurgents and supplies in the river environment,” he said. “And we don’t have the capacity to do that in the single company the Marine Corps has or in the organization that Special Operations Command’s got. It’s a gap in capability.”

Concepts for a 700-man battalion of naval infantry — called a Navy Expeditionary Combat Battalion — stem from demands being placed on the Corps in Iraq and Afghanistan. As a result, amphibious assault ships have set to sea without Marines aboard.

“The capability we are used to having with the Marine Corps is not deploying with us right now,” the official said.

The official said the Navy Expeditionary Combat Battalion could engage in ground combat. As the official put it, the naval infantry will be more combat-oriented than masters at arms, but not as elite — or therefore rare — as SEALs.

Picture a Navy force on the ground in a maritime domain as was in Indonesia during the tsunami relief, but prepared more specifically for hostilities.

“We need to better distribute the combat power we have in the Navy to be in more places at one time,” the official said.

This battalion — and others that might follow — would embark with carrier strike groups and expeditionary strike groups. They would also expand Navy ability to board potentially hostile vessels during Maritime Interdiction Operations.

“We’re looking at all these options and trying to determine what’s the right kind of sailor to do this mission.”

Civil affairs, too

In addition to combat power, some of the forces needed for fighting an insurgency are civil affairs forces to handle assessment and reconstruction of infrastructure. For example, Seabees have been used heavily in this role in Iraq, specifically in the aftermath of the Marine assault on Fallujah in the fall of 2004.

“If we had a civil affairs battalion, we could insert it right into the tsunami relief process. We didn’t have one,” the official said.

Finally, a critical part of any Navy effort to get into the brown water will be successful relations with the locals. The proposed Foreign Area Officer program for all services, akin to current Army and Marine Corps programs, will fit that bill, the official said.

Those sailors will serve as attachés, on staffs as needed and along with Navy expeditionary forces. The FAOs will be surface warfare officers, submariners and aviators who choose the program or have existing, appropriate skills.

Along with FAOs, sailors assigned to expeditionary training teams will also need cultural and language expertise.

‘I would have gone riverine’

The Navy official said he has some experience with operations in the North Arabian Gulf, where a contingent of sailors now provide oil platform security and maritime interdiction forces.

In a follow-up interview with Navy Times, he offered that the sailors he encountered there are as gung-ho as any he’s known. But to use them for these new units would be “robbing Peter to pay Paul,” he said. Volunteers for expeditionary service will be needed from all over the Navy.

And for officers, these new units will offer the kind of chance at early command the official wishes he’d had 15 years ago.

“I think a junior officer will look at this as a great opportunity to lead and face these challenges,” he said. “If riverine was an option for me, I would have gone riverine.”

Whether or not the Navy continues on it current course for drawdown, the Navy’s new expeditionary forces will undoubtedly be popular billets in the fleet.

“We’re going to have no problems getting these organizations manned,” the official said.

[VMI_Marine]

The most pressing requirement will be to get Navy river patrol forces into Iraq to replace Army and Marine units now conducting that mission. The Marine Corps has decommissioned its Small Craft Company, leaving a gap on the near horizon.

Honestly, it makes me sick the way this was conducted. We decommissioned an operationally valuable resource to make room for the Navy to get in the game? The Navy should have recognized this need a long f*cking time ago if they really wanted to be the ones to fill it. What was the phrase we kept hearing during the elections? "Don't change horses mid-stream."

“If you’re going to fight a counterinsurgency, you need to be able to control the riverine environment. You need to be able to interdict the flow of insurgents and supplies in the river environment,” he said. “And we don’t have the capacity to do that in the single company the Marine Corps has or in the organization that Special Operations Command’s got. It’s a gap in capability.”

And in a move of spellbinding beaurecratic stupidity, we have now WIDENED that gap with the goal of filling it NLT Fall 2006. Who wants to bet that the Navy will not effectively meet that deadline?

“The capability we are used to having with the Marine Corps is not deploying with us right now,” the official said.

Then WTF have I been doing aboard amphibious shipping for the past 4 months!? Moron.

Maybe I'm getting overworked about this because of the way SCCo appears to have been sold out, but I can't figure out why the Commandant isn't standing on tables in committee hearings and raising holy hell. The Marine Corps already has a time-tested training pipeline for "naval infantrymen" who can operate in the "maritime" environment. Now the Navy wants to build one from scratch. Why don't they just increase our authorized strength so we can bring back the rest of 9th Marines, giving us an additional three battalions on top of what we have now?

[SOTB]

Maybe I'm getting overworked about this because of the way SCCo appears to have been sold out, but I can't figure out why the Commandant isn't standing on tables in committee hearings and raising holy hell.From what I have seen of this Commandant, it appears he is more used to working UNDER the table....

[VMI_Marine]

Just call the quoted line from my post "wishful thinking", I am under no illusions about our Commandant. Although I did thoroughly enjoy watching him publicly embarass several field grade officers. See my sig line.

[Snake]

Is this Naval Infantry MOS(NEC?) going to be closed to Females?

[Dutch8654]

And the "wave" once again recedes.

[Ranger5280]

There's an article in the most recent Defense News with a subtitle of: Naval Infantrymen could ease strain on SEALS and Marines.

The plan also includes "a community of FAO's", two helicopter combat support 'special' sqaudrons and a team that would exploit intel gathered from maritime interdictions.

[Dutch8654]

Just call the quoted line from my post "wishful thinking", I am under no illusions about our Commandant. Although I did thoroughly enjoy watching him publicly embarass several field grade officers. See my sig line.

Every time the Corps does something that pisses me off I try to look at the big picture. Our military is controlled by civilians who are controlled politically and monetarily by others. Therefore the DOD can never truely act in its on true self interest at all times, or ours. We all know the Corps is the little step child and the big three are always competing for the big missions and resources($$).

It wouldn't surprise me if the Air Force/Navy began to be "threatened" by the Corps air assets/mission in the future. Maybe the CMC and the others are saying fuck it. We will give you a few active divisions and a few in reserve. All this other "non-critical" shit to that end is not in my budget. We don't want to play or pay. So much for the self-sustained, pre-deployed, quick reactionary, multi-mission capable amphib force. See...too many words...lets simplify.

What really infuriates me worse is how the Pentagon says constantly that we have at present, a force capable of sustaining the global war on terror AND the capability to confront two major enemies all at once.:rolleyes: You guys have much better gear and training than we did in the cold war but things were different. Nukes, space wars and DARPA projects alone will not serve us now. Some of these military big shots need to "buck up" and stop worrying about their next gig at Boeing or Lockheed. Off-course you need the politicians which is a whole other problem. So relax...its well above our paygrade.

[jw]

Dumb idea. I just want to know if they are going to be wearing the blue digital cammies. Seriously, it looks like Navy EOD is going to fall under the same boss as these guys and the SEA BEE's. Hpoefully we'll find out more soon.

[Tracy]

...It wouldn't surprise me if the Air Force/Navy began to be "threatened" by the Corps air assets/mission in the future...

Nah, I don't want your Harriers or Ospreys. I want those d*mned Warthogs or some Frogfoots...

[dsumner]

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.

[Equinox]

15997Gee this sounds familiar, and i feel invisible again. Maybe they can use this for a pin....

[CREWSAFE]

From strategypage.com

AMPHIBIOUS OPERATIONS: USN Creates a New Marine Corps

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.

You are going to take "high quality rejects" with absolutely no training in either infantry tactics or basic discipline of an Infantryman & make him "higher quality than the Marines?" :confused: What kind of drugs is the US Navy issuing out? It has to be some good shit to come up with this crap.:rolleyes:

[ExSquid]

After 13 years of active & reserve Naval service and now working as a civilian trainer for the Navy, I can say this, "Yeah right." Where are these super warriors going to come from, the fleet? Basically, the only people I have ever been impressed by in the Navy came out of the specialty fields like the Diving, SpecWar, or SAR communities. I see a new batch of security folks every two weeks and they are pitifully trained, under motivated, and physically soft. Somebody has been sniffing the ink from too many "Sea Warrior" posters that are popping up everywhere.

D/S

[Dutch8654]

Bring on the Deck Ape Battalions:D The Marines can go take over some island nation somewhere if it gets too bad.

[ratamojada]

Equinox,
Nicely said.........I knew their was a reason why we got a fleet looking pin. Its so we could give it to them eventually. HAHAHAHA.
Does anyone know anyone who actually voted for this design? I don't.
The fleet can have it!

DS, I agree totally. I have many friends working on the same program I think you are on. I've seen those guys show up for their force on force VBSS stuff. Its absolutely hysterical.

Rata

[skeeter8654]

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

BBBWWWAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! :D

[GRENDEL]

As a former Marine and a current SWCC, I have pretty strong feelings about this story. Im extremly interested to see how this fiasco plays out. I agree with Equinox and ratamojada. The guys out at 20 are looking at this and just shaking their heads. There is a reason that alot of those clowns drop out of BUDS/s and SWCC. They are immature and completely unprepared for the level of intense physical activity with which these programs are known for, taking these X div commandos and putting them in some sort of infantry(?) pipline will increase the dropout rate for SpecWar.

Frankly, I'm sick to death of hearing about this whole thing. The DOD leadership needs to use what it has, and keep the services in line with what they know. Navy boot camp does not produce or mentally prepare someone to be a warrior. SWCC/BUD/s is in place for that very reason.

[Finger]

This is by no means a slam on the teams, but if they were not doing PSD stuff, this might not be an issue. They have the warrior heart for this mission. Just my opinion, but if you want the fight taken to the enemy, send studs.

[Snake]

Will the Naval Infantrymen(persons?) get to wear striped shirts?

[Xdeth]

strategypage.com, sounds more like seriouslyuninformed.com.

The real conclusions are this, the goals laid out can not be met without duplicating the Marine Corps training programs and personnel standards. It will take Marine Corps trainers and the Marine Corps training facilities to stand this BN up and provide sustainment training. It will take at least two maybe three BN's worth of directly supporting troops in virtually every capacity, basic and advanced training, supporting logistics units etc. Somewhere along the line the BS flag will be raised, probably on the civilian leadership (funding) side, seems very unlikey that they could get this program.

So it's totally unrealisitc, or is it? My feeling is that by asking for so much that even E-3's see that it's completey stupid and unfeasable, they must be after something else. Some concilitory measures in lieu of the total proposal that could either be to lock in a smaller part of the program, or some kind of leverage with Marine Corps, it's unclear at this point exactly.

[shootnsurf]

Im concerned, there will be no one left to shout...DOMINO MUTHAFUCHA!!!! anymore

[moonman]

Equinox...I could not agree more. Who decided on this pin anyway???

[KSM]

the goals laid out can not be met without duplicating the Marine Corps training programs and personnel standards.

I argued in another thread a while back that this is exactly what the navy SHOULD have been doing this whole time. This little "gap" problem would have solved itself. Though this idea probably won't work out, maybe it's a step in the right direction to getting the navy as a whole more in line with being a military fighting force, and not a floating gas pump / radar station / supply point.

[loldaddy]

I can't believe you put SWCC and BUD/s in the same senctence togeather in terms of training. I have seen first hand of the crop that comes out of 3 weeks of BUD/s indoc and then onto SWCC school training and the PT they do. Give me a break. SWCC pipeline is not even close to BUD/s. Wake up.

[triumph]

It is always the young guys......

[sarc88]

Can you imagine checking into the unit?

"Hey, Mac, when did you drop?" Maybe if you made it to the 2nd day of HW you get to be a squad leader or something.

[dsumner]

Navy League
August 2005

Washington Report

Navy Creates Riverines, Landing Unit To Lighten Marine, Army Force Load

The Navy is re-creating the riverine warfare capabilities that it has largely shunned since the end of the Vietnam War and is establishing a naval infantry battalion as a means of taking some of the expeditionary load off of the heavily tasked Marine Corps and Army forces, and to stabilize use of reserve forces.

The Navy plans to establish an active-duty riverine squadron by fiscal year 2006, followed by two reserve riverine squadrons by 2008. The capability will more than fill a void caused by the disbanding of the Marine Corps’ single riverine company.

A Navy official said “the Navy should own that capability” and that Adm. Vern Clark, outgoing chief of naval operations (CNO), “was looking to make these things happen fast.”

As he left office, Clark also approved initiatives to create a Navy expeditionary combat battalion and bolster civil affairs capabilities. Many of the initiatives, also approved by the new CNO, Adm. Michael G. Mullen, are intended to further shape the force for fighting a 20-30 year global war on terrorism.

The initiatives were published in a July 12 memorandum from Vice Adm. Albert T. Church III, director of the Navy staff.

The Navy plans to stand up an expeditionary combat battalion — 600-700 sailors — in fiscal year (FY) 2007.

“We’re looking at some capability less than SEALs and some capability more than [found] in our master-at-arms force that guards our bases,” a Navy official said, adding that under the concept — still in development — the force could be filled by sailors who may not qualify for the SEAL community but could meet stringent requirements for expeditionary combat operations ashore.

“We need to create a sailor with a bayonet in his teeth, ready to go ashore and mix it up,” the official said.

The expeditionary combat battalion could be deployed, for example, on amphibious ships and used in direct action against light opposition to stabilize a crisis on a small island.

“We’re not looking to supplant the Marine Corps and the Army in the fight on the tip of the spear in Iraq and Afghanistan,” the Navy official said. “We are looking for ways to relieve pressure on them outside of Iraq and Afghanistan” in the maritime domain.

The Navy currently has 6,000-8,000 sailors on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, the official said.

The Navy also intends to establish a provisional reserve civil affairs unit in FY 2006 and a reserve civil affairs battalion by FY 2007 to institutionalize the work being done as a matter of course by Navy Seabee construction battalions and other units.

The Navy staff also will be refining the concept of the Navy expeditionary training team, a unit scheduled for activation in FY 2007, with the skills, language capabilities and cultural training to aid foreign navies in upgrading their capabilities and effectiveness, particularly against terrorism.

The Navy’s only two helicopter combat support (HCS) special squadrons — reserve units that support special operations and provide combat rescue capabilities, and have deployed detachments continuously to the Middle East since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom — will become integrated active-reserve units, in a manner similar to the manning of the two helicopter mine countermeasures squadrons. The official said the HCS units have reached the legal limit of their mobilization, and that active-duty pilots and crews will augment the squadrons to enable the Navy to continue to deploy them.

One of the initiatives will be the formation of a maritime intercept operations intelligence team that will begin training next month. Team personnel will be trained to join boarding parties to quickly exploit intelligence onboard ships. The Navy official said the service already is deploying a biometric capability, using fingerprints and facial photos to crosscheck during boardings with the FBI database in near real time.

The initiatives will be reflected in the September budget change submission to the Office of the Secretary of Defense. The Navy will have to take the manpower requirements for the new forces out of its existing forces, “to the extent possible,” the directive memo said.

[dsumner]

DEFENSE DAILY 11 JUL 05

CNO Directs Navy To Develop Capabilities To Fight Global War On Terror

By Geoff Fein

Adm. Vern Clark, Chief of Naval Operations, has directed Navy officials to expand the service's capabilities in fighting the Global War On Terrorism to include establishing a riverine force in both the active and reserve components, according to a memo to Navy officials from Vice Adm. Albert Church.

The memo calls for the Director of Navy Staff (DNS), Church, to schedule a Vice Chief of Naval Operations (VCNO) corporate board in mid-August to review implementation Clark's directives.

The Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (DCNO) for Resources, Requirements and Assessments (OPNAV N8) is directed to ensure that the September budget changes submission to the Secretary of Defense reflects the FY '06 and FY '07 changes to appropriate and carry out the proposals.

"OPNAV N6/N7 (Warfare Requirements and Programs) will in coordination with OPNAV N8, N095 (Director of Naval Reserve) and Commander Fleet Forces Command (CFFC) provide a plan to establish an AC riverrine squadron in FY 2005-2006, followed by the establishing two RC riverine squadrons in FY 2007-2008," Chruch said in the July 6 memo.

Additionally, the DCNO for Fleet Readiness and Logistics (N4) is directed to establish a reserve civil affairs battalion in the SEABEES in FY '06 for the active forces and a reserve unit by the end of FY '07.

By the end of July, the Director of Naval Intelligence (N2) will provide a plan establishing an Intelligence Data Mining capability at the National Maritime Intelligence Center, starting in FY '05. The plan, according to Church's memo, should include hardware, software, manning, and resource requirements.

And OPNAV N6/N7 in coordination with the CFFC and OPNAV N8 will develop a plan to procure and install stand-alone Automatic Identification Systems (AIS) for all surface ships by the end of FY '06. "Procurement and installation should begin as soon as possible," Clark said. The stand-alone system should be compatible with the N6/N7 Program Review-07 Integrated Sponsor's Program Proposal (ISPP) for an integrated AIS/Global Command and Control System-Maritime (GCCS-M) system.

The Director of Naval Intelligence in coordination with Fleet Forces Command will provide a plan to establish a pilot program for Marine Interception Operation (MIO) Intelligence Exploitation Teams. "The first group of personnel will be identified and commence training by September 2005," Church said. The plan will include methodology to assess the results of the pilot program and determine the way ahead.

The CFFC will execute Active/Reserve integration of Helicopter Combat Support Special Squadrons Four and Five (HCS-4/5) in accordance with reference (b), "Sourcing OIF 2 EXORD MOD 015," according to the memo.

OPNAV for Plans Policy and Operations (N3/N5) supported by OPNAV for Manpower and Readiness (N1) will develop a plan to establish a Foreign Area Officer Community (FAO) in FY '06 by July 15, 2005. Not later than August 1, 2005, OPNAV N1 in coordination with N3/N5 will provide an assessment of the availability of qualified personnel to support establishment of an Enhanced FAO Community, the memo stated.

By August 24, 2005, OPNAV N1, N2, N4, N5, N6/N7, N8 and CFFC will refine and develop a plan for to stand-up a Navy Expeditionary Combat Battalion in FY '07 and a plan to stand- up a Navy expeditionary Training Team in FY '07. CFFC will use the concepts to develop a concept of operations for both, Church wrote. To the extent possible, active and reserve end strength, as reflected in the glidescope and zero-based review respectively should not grow, according to the memo.

[hyksht]

This is just like the navy, I went through a special infantry course,
provided by usmc... This was with the BeachMaster unit ONE, It was only
a week long, but the Marines made very challening, especially during navagation
training on an old RECON course...

[hyksht]

:confused: Sorry, I am a moron.

[EODDVR]

Mistake with a capital "M." It sounds like we simply need more good Marines.

[Snake]

Mistake with a capital "M." It sounds like we simply need more good Marines.

Or the Marines need to be more...service-oriented, vis-a-vis the Navy....

[Fred]

The Navy has no pressing need for this, it is their attempt to remain relevant until another sea power threat arises. The USMC support to USN should be requirements based, what requirements does the Navy have for the USMC right now that aren't being met?

[CREWSAFE]

what requirements does the Navy have for the USMC right now that aren't being met?

They have to clean their own boats.;)

[Matchanu]

The Navy has no pressing need for this, it is their attempt to remain relevant until another sea power threat arises. The USMC support to USN should be requirements based, what requirements does the Navy have for the USMC right now that aren't being met?

I disagree.

The Marines gave up this mission only recently, someone needs to fill the gap. The Army has been activly recruiting from the Navy for a while now. The See Bees have been combat oriented for a while, NSW is obvious, so why not another combat ready sailor?

If the Marines want this mission back then let them have it, but as of yet, they don't seem to be willing or able.

Just my .02

[shark11]

so what are these naval infantrymen going to do that SEALS or Marines dont already do?

[gator28]

What about SBT-22? I am curious to see how this all turns out. Seems like a pretty quick turnaround to stand up this new unit in a year.

[KSM]

According to the official US Navy web site, there are currently 363,350 active duty personnel in the Navy. Outside of a very small percentage of those, most have been relegated to some sort of "support" role in the war on terror. Many are frustrated with this and would like to take on a more active role. Rather than over-stretch other services and bitch about manpower issues, why not use some of those 363,000 active duty military personnel who are sitting off the coast re-painting an anchor or manning SONAR stations in 50 feet of water? Seems to me that this could be a step in the right direction, and a more effective use of resources that are already in place. They just need the right training and someone to utilize them.

[Snake]

so what are these naval infantrymen going to do that SEALS or Marines dont already do?

Security and/or forward defense of shoreside Naval activities (as opposed to the MA guys, who are more LE than FP...). Maybe take over the Security Forces/FAST niche.

[dsumner]

Security and/or forward defense of shoreside Naval activities (as opposed to the MA guys, who are more LE than FP...). Maybe take over the Security Forces/FAST niche.

I thought thats what the Mobile Security Squadrons were supposed to used for. From the way I'm reading the press releeases, they want these guys to handle some of the VBSS/MIO missions, and engage in direct ground combat.

[LRS Guy]

OMG! This is another blant attempt to get more money, publicity for the navy. Correct me if I'm wrong but the USMC is part of the Navy...the Marines have supported this tasking since what? 1775?

Waste of time ,effort and $..IMHO. If the Navy is going to reinvent the wheel..ie "naval infantry", then I suppose the Army needs to absorb the Marines and use them as Amphibious Infantry Divison or Brigades.

Sometimes I really wish instead of 4 services, we were all one service say a U.S. Defense Forces or something like that. The Dept of the Navy should have their ass kicked for wasting time & money.

[KSM]

The Dept of the Navy should have their ass kicked for wasting time & money.

I take the opposite approach... I think they're wasting time and money now by having 300,000 combat-capable (with training) military personnel not being used for combat.

[ExSquid]

KSM I must completely disagree with your logic. The USN certainly does not have 300K combat capable personell. The average fleet/air-wing sailor is just not equipped mentally or physically, regardless of how much training they were to receive, to engage in any sort of combat role.

D/S

[CREWSAFE]

KSM I must completely disagree with your logic. The USN certainly does not have 300K combat capable personell. The average fleet/air-wing sailor is just not equipped mentally or physically, regardless of how much training they were to receive, to engage in any sort of combat role.

D/S

IF...this ever comes about? It would be interesting to see exactly how many Navy guys volunteer for it. Sure, younger guys will initially jump into it but once they find out what a real Grunt's life is all about they will be submitting for rate changes by the droves.

I agree...another colassal gambit by US Navy brass to get $$$ & remain relevant in the GWOT, instead of having the balls to stand up & honestly state their mission & limitations in GWOT. I still think they better get busy preparing for the China games (& I ain't talking about the 2008 Olympics):D

[BigNickT]

I heard a rumor that if you wash out of PJ/CCT training you now have the option of going to the new Air Force Parachute Infantry Regiment.

Makes the same sort of sense.

Tax out

[SN]

I heard a rumor that if you wash out of PJ/CCT training you now have the option of going to the new Air Force Parachute Infantry Regiment.

???

This a lame attempt at humor?

[LRS Guy]

The Navy needs to stock with remaining the the most effective Naval combat force in world, ie dominating the sea lanes. They do a damm good job of it.

Besides at some point the US & China will square off (IMHO),over Tawian , Spratly islands or something else perhaps. Then the boys in the "Big Grey Yachet Club" need to be at the top of thier game!

[Matchanu]

OMG! This is another blant attempt to get more money, publicity for the navy. Correct me if I'm wrong but the USMC is part of the Navy...the Marines have supported this tasking since what? 1775?

Waste of time ,effort and $..IMHO. If the Navy is going to reinvent the wheel..ie "naval infantry", then I suppose the Army needs to absorb the Marines and use them as Amphibious Infantry Divison or Brigades.

Sometimes I really wish instead of 4 services, we were all one service say a U.S. Defense Forces or something like that. The Dept of the Navy should have their ass kicked for wasting time & money.


As was stated before, the Marines had this mission, they gave it up, so there's a void. I sailors are up to it and the standards and training are there, I don't see what the problem is.

The Army is busy with other shit,the Air Force has no interest in it, so who else is going to do it?

I think you guys are too hung up on the image of a fat sailor in dungaries eating a twinky with his fat sweaty hands all over a LBFM.

I think there is hope for this program, but I do agree the Marines should take this mission back.

[BigNickT]

???

This a lame attempt at humor?


What's lame about it? I thought it was funny. The idea of th Air Force developing Parachute Infantry certainly has as much merit as what the Navy is doing here. Hell, I can see the Navy duplicating a role that has already been filled by someone else. All the services do that to some extent. But when they start duplicating their own capabilities I think it's ok to poke fun. If there's a need for this than the SBU's can handle it. That's where the expertise is going to come from anyway. You already have enough team guys and long term SBU guys in the SBU's to handle the "bayonet in their teeth" aspect of training the new people. The training at SBU at Little Creek was pretty comprehensive from what I saw of it.

Then again I'm one of those who looked at the RAC platoons and SCCo thought they were duplicating a Navy capability anyway.

[KSM]

I think you guys are too hung up on the image of a fat sailor in dungaries eating a twinky with his fat sweaty hands all over a LBFM.

I agree. I think some of you guys think that just because someone joined the Navy, they must be a candy-ass who can't hack it. It just aint true.

[funkythumm]

What about SBT-22? I am curious to see how this all turns out. Seems like a pretty quick turnaround to stand up this new unit in a year.
What about SBT-22?. What about 12 and 20?. A SWCC is a SWCC, or at least they should be. The only difference is that the coastal guys are used to taking an asswhoopin more often from the big water. The reason why I dont think SWCC's would fill the position is that when I left in 03 our Command was at %63... I dont think they have the bodies to spare.

[funkythumm]

I think you guys are too hung up on the image of a fat sailor in dungaries eating a twinky with his fat sweaty hands all over a LBFM.
[/QUOTE]
MMMMM Twinkies.... MMMMMM Brown Girls... Im getting all sweaty just thinking about it...

[CREWSAFE]

I can just see it now:

Picture this...some wannabe Crusty USN Chief, standing there with a cup of coffee in one hand & a Twinkie in the other, with pictures of his LBFM (I Love You No Shit!), in the background, while he commences to deliver career guidance on some young Seamen Apprentice in A-school.

"Let me give it to you straight, Son...if you don't get with the program & pass 'Food Service Specialist School,' I'm sending your sorry butt right down the pipeline to the "Naval infantry", they'll make a Man out of your soft, baker's dough body."

The entire idea is waaaay beyond ridiculous...so it will probably happen.:cool:

[Fred]

I agree. I think some of you guys think that just because someone joined the Navy, they must be a candy-ass who can't hack it. It just aint true.


True, but someone once said to "never confuse enthusiasm with capability". Where is the resident expertise going to come from to stand this unit up? You cannot create an NCO corps or training cadre for this unit out of thin air.

[Matchanu]

I think you guys are too hung up on the image of a fat sailor in dungaries eating a twinky with his fat sweaty hands all over a LBFM.

MMMMM Twinkies.... MMMMMM Brown Girls... Im getting all sweaty just thinking about it...[/QUOTE]


Oh man, the old days, of SBU before SWCC.

Females and fat bodies.

That is why I say I don't think the idea of a Naval Infantry is that far fetched. SBU used to be a cess pool of BUD/S quitters and general rejects. Although there were a few guys that were GTG, the reputation of SBU was less than steller. Then came SWCC. I was sceptical and downright pissed that SBU wanted to be anexed into the NSW family. I had serious reservations about having what I remember of SBU being intergrated into special operations.

I did a 180 in my thinking on the next deployment I did with the SWCC trained boat guys. Proffessional, motivated, knowledgable, hard chaging are only some of the words I would use to describe them. I was impressed to say the least.

If you would have seen SBU from 88-95, I would have completely agreed about this Naval Infantry. After seeing what a program like SWCC will do to the avarge sailor, I say it's a very likely possiblity.

[Matchanu]

You cannot create an NCO corps or training cadre for this unit out of thin air.


My thoughts?

SEAL Reserve and contractors.

[CTA]

When I first heard about this I thought what about the Marines and SWCC, but based on some of the comments, it appears that the Boat Guys are already spread too thin as well as the USMC. I wonder if the reserve side of the house could do something with the IBUs too…? I also thought about the Seabees and MAs, which would be another pool to tap regarding candidates.

I also like your suggestion Match about using contractors. Once the unit has been trained up, and experienced gained, rotate senior NCOs to take over as the training cadre: train-the-trainer. If there is a need, and the Marines are not in the position to do it, then why not? I know that I would have been interested about serving in a unit like this and I am sure there are others currently serving that would too.

Fred, I remember you posting way back during the old Tom Hunter days. Good to see you posting again and stay safe!

CTA out

P.S. Regardless, I think the Navy needs to do a better job at training sailors during basic, which means focusing on more proficient weapons training, combat life saving… etc. I’m not talking about turning them into quasi-infantrymen but give them better skills than what they are currently receiving. In other words, provide sailors with rudimentary combat skills for lack of better words, which appeared to happen once upon a time circa WWI and WWII.

[Matchanu]

A lot of units are using contractors for training now, or another government entity.

[ratamojada]

The more I read the posts on this, the more it makes sense. Its one of the reasons I read this board.

I for one a former A.D. SWCC from 22, now a NSW reservist would love to take on the challenge of training up a group for something like this. The problem will lie in politics. Some senior enlisted or fleet "O" will get their feelings hurt during training and demand a change to the training program. I am being overly pessimistic, but I take great pride in my SWCC heritage, which as Match has pointed out, comes from the fleet. Riverine Sections and PT boats man! thats what its all about.
We earned the rep of being Dirty Boat Guys from our fleet history....now we are DBG's who can PT.

The reason SWCC's won't take on this role, in answering to an above post, is because we fall under SOCOM and the hierarchy of a SOF mission. Unfortunatly it has kept the Boat Teams out of alot of missions because it cannot be determined to fit SOF profiles for a mission. Thats why the USMC and the Army Engineers took over the riverine mission in Iraq after the invasion. The real bummer was that the Boat Teams (22) in particular missed a great opportunity to get some more comprehensive combat experience.

Keeping all that in mind I woulld love to see the Navy enter into this thing on the conventional side. It would allow us as SWCC's and SEALs to more readily access the combat environments we love, i.e. the water.

Rata

[gator28]

funkythumm,
I didn't mean any offense to the coastal teams. That was pretty ignorant of me to write. When I read "river" I immediately thought of 22. My bad. Of course, all SWCC teams could be utilized, I'm sure. Is SWCC still so undermanned? Take care.

Respectfully,
Gator

[funkythumm]

funkythumm,
I didn't mean any offense to the coastal teams. That was pretty ignorant of me to write. When I read "river" I immediately thought of 22. My bad. Of course, all SWCC teams could be utilized, I'm sure. Is SWCC still so undermanned? Take care.

Respectfully,
Gator
No offense taken Gator. Its not the Unit. As an individual, all SWCC personnel should be equally trained and capable. And as far as the manning goes Im two years removed from SBT-12. I only talk to the guys anymore to see how they are doing.. The longer Im gone the more I miss it. I miss the smell of ocean,diesel exaust, fuel, sweat, CLP, cordite.. Ya know? So my calls are getting fewer and farther between. I guess I could make a gunpowder, JP-5, CLP mixture and rub it all over my wife before I go to bed.. That might work..

[Xdeth]

....I guess I could make a gunpowder, JP-5, CLP mixture and rub it all over my wife before I go to bed.. That might work..

please let us know how that works out for you :).

[Jago]

hello first off I am not an expert I am GM3 in a reserve NMCB .Part of me says if this means the bees get some more money so we will be better trained before going on deployments,that would be a good thing.This fiscal year the Bees ran out of ammo (lack of money) for our quailfiing shoots.To the question should the Navy be doing riverine work myself say yes because this is were the SBU came from in my understanding.As for the Naval infatry the Bees are attemping to stand up what we are calling Tactical Movement Teams along with the Seabee Engineering Reconnaisse Team.The two big questions is one were is the money going to come from? Will this be a permament community or a special sea duty ?
v/r
GM3 Glenn Francis II NMCB 26 Det 13

[merc]

15997Gee this sounds familiar, and i feel invisible again. Maybe they can use this for a pin....
wait first cut the surface waves off the SWCC pin then give it to them since we want to cut our ties to the surface fleet...Oh wait they want ties to the NSW side...

[Snake]

Bump.

Did the Naval Infantry concept ever get off the ground?

[navman]

Hi all, it has been a while since I posted. I'm not sure what the original idea was behind a Naval Infantry as that role is already filled by the Marines. However, the Riverine Squadrons have been successfuly stood up (3 of us) and are conducting combat operations in Iraq. I am a sailor (riverine) with Squadron 2 currently supporting and conducting ops with the Marines. We are the second squadron to deploy, building on what RIVRON 1 started.

Our training is no where near as arduous as SWCC, and we understand the difference. I for one am proud of the fact that I completed USMC School of Infantry, as well as the RMIO course for the Ground Combat Element.

As Rata pointed out Riverine/Brown water navy has a distinct history, and I am damn proud of the fact that I am a part of it. Each of us have skills not available to the common sailor, but we are not part of NSW. We are part of NECC, providing a different infrastructure and mission profile than SWCC.

[jw]

If possible, please give us a breakdown of the mission.

[Tracy]

If possible, please give us a breakdown of the mission.

http://www.necc.navy.mil/

[jw]

Thanks Tracy,
I'm in NECC. I was looking more at what is actually taking place, and less at the PR .

[navman]

Thanks Tracy,
I'm in NECC. I was looking more at what is actually taking place, and less at the PR .

Not a problem. Without violating OPSEC, our mission has evolved since the original inception. While the river security piece is still a huge part of it we also operate on land in small elements (specifically trained), sometimes as part of a larger op, but mostly within our own battlespace. Operations include sweep and clear of islands and peninsulas, setting security for other elements, and some basic small unit infantry missions. Our boats provide security on the water as well as gun platform support for units in our battlespace. Dam security and water denial as well. We can also perform CASEVAC and unit transport.

We have conducted bilateral missions with host nation elements.

hope that clarifies. Shoot me an email if you have any questions.

[GummyBear0311]

Hello to all, its been awhile since i posted in the forum. How about creating more infantry battalions in the Marines.

[Outofcontrol]

Navman-- Did the Navy do any collaboration with the CG's PSU's? Sounds like there are some similarities in the mission profiles.

OOC

[CAMedic]

OOC,

Right now, the PSU's are not doing Riverine Ops. We are still working the PSU mission OCONUS, under NCW. We do have similar mission profiles, and there has been some crossover in the coastal areas.

I'm a PSU guy.

[jw]

Navman, thanks for the info. Stay safe.

[Outofcontrol]

Medic...right on...former MSST/MSRT guy here.

[CAMedic]

OOC,

Plankowner, 91103 and 312.

[Outofcontrol]

medic

pm inbound

[Brnw4tr]

Hey navman, badger badger badger, anyways....this thread has its good and bad. As a fellow Riverine with Navmans unit and done a few over here now I can say that though the start was rough we are finally falling into our stride. As many (Rata and others) stated almost 3 years ago in this very thread the curve was almost vertical. Oddly it damn near went in reverse when we first got here. However, you never learn more than when your in the pot boiling and learning has indeed occured. We have a ways to go logistically but we are getting there. Having been around long enough to remember where SBT came from it is not to hard to make comparisons and see that we will eventually pull our heads out. Our mission is relevant and battle tested. Now its the bits and pieces that need to be worked out. That being said, lets stop bitching and get in the fight.

[Metalchica]

Expeditionary Command Marks Progress, Plans for Future (http://www.news.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=34285)

Story Number: NNS080111-11
Release Date: 1/11/2008 4:09:00 PM

By Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Jen Smith, Navy Expeditionary Combat Command Public Affairs

NORFOLK, Va. (NNS) -- Navy Expeditionary Combat Command plans to celebrate its two-year anniversary on Jan. 13, 2008, just as its leader over that time retires. Rear Adm. Donald K. Bullard, who led the command since its inception, retired Jan. 11 at Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek, Va.

As one of the Navy's type commanders, NECC centrally manages the current and future readiness, resources, manning, training and equipping of approximately 40,000 expeditionary Sailors – including Navy individual augmentees – who are currently serving in every theater of operation.

During Bullard's tenure, NECC has become a global force provider of adaptive force packages of expeditionary capabilities to maritime and joint warfighting commanders. Expeditionary Sailors are deployed around the globe in support of the new "Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower," a joint maritime strategy signed by the Chief of Naval Operations, Commandant of the Marine Corps and Commandant of the Coast Guard that applies maritime power to the crucial responsibility of protecting U.S. assets in an increasingly interconnected and multi-polar world.

NECC forces and capabilities are integral to executing the new maritime strategy which is based on expanded core capabilities of maritime power: forward presence, deterrence, sea control, power projection, maritime security and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. To enable these, NECC provides a full spectrum of operations, including effective waterborne and ashore anti-terrorism force protection; theater security cooperation and engagement; and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.

"NECC is right in the middle of that strategy and a major contributor across the full spectrum of maritime security operations," Bullard said.

The Navy Expeditionary Combat Command's capabilities include: explosive ordnance disposal; maritime expeditionary security; riverine; expeditionary diving and salvage; naval construction; expeditionary logistics; maritime civil affairs; expeditionary training; expeditionary intelligence; expeditionary combat readiness; combat camera; expeditionary guard battalion; and soon, expeditionary medical.

Although many of these capabilities have existed for more than six decades, some have recently been established as part of NECC. In two years, all NECC's capabilities have been established, with Sailors properly trained and equipped. Now, all capabilities are currently deployed in support of worldwide maritime security operations. In its short history, NECC's expeditionary Sailors have operated in more than 40 countries.

Prior to his retirement, Bullard reflected on several of the accomplishments the force has made since its establishment. Among them are the equipment upgrades throughout the force. Across the command, the priority was ensuring proper force protection for expeditionary Sailors who often work in unstable and possibly hostile, near shore and inner coastal maritime environments. All of NECC in theater now has Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles (MRAP). The MRAPs will help protect the expeditionary forces, particularly those close to action like individual augmentees, Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) technicians, and Seabees – two of the most stressed, in-demand forces in the Navy today.

For Seabees, NECC-related upgrades meant replacing existing, outdated equipment with state-of-the-art heavy machinery. NECC procured many new boats, including new command and control platforms that can be used by Riverine or Maritime Expeditionary Security Forces.

In addition to properly equipping the force, Bullard and his staff have worked to professionalize the force. A key initiative included developing the Expeditionary Warfare qualification. Now, enlisted Sailors serving in expeditionary forces can earn the qualification, entitling them to wear this new warfare pin.

"The establishment of the EXW pin recognizes how critical these skills are and how mature our Sailors are. We need fully trained and qualified Sailors to operate in this dynamic expeditionary maritime environment," said Bullard.

To date, more than 1,200 Sailors have earned the EXW qualification.

Going into its third year, one goal for the command is to establish an expeditionary community which would allow officers and enlisted Sailors the opportunity to stay in the expeditionary realm throughout their entire careers. If established and institutionalized, the expeditionary community will provide warfighter identity, gain efficiency, foster diversity and increase warfighter effectiveness of both active and reserve forces.

"We need to capitalize on the skills and experience these expeditionary Sailors are gaining during their NECC-related tours, and we need to maximize all the training we've invested in them, including our extensive cultural and language training. [The establishment of an expeditionary community] will take the NECC warfighter to another level," Bullard said.

Another area in which NECC has made remarkable strides was integrating active duty and Reserve Sailors. According to Bullard NECC has become the standard and the ultimate success story of integration. The combined forces' ability to operate together in real-world situations has increased force capability and capacity in the expeditionary environment.

"Reserves are essential to NECC's combat capability and are necessary to meet mission requirements around the world," said Bullard whose force is made up of 47 percent Reserve Sailors.

The command Bullard helped build is now fully established and ready to enable the current maritime strategy and working to meet the Secretary of the Navy's current objectives, which include optimizing NECC; increasing interdependencies with the U.S. Marine Corps, U.S. Coast Guard and Naval Special Warfare units; provide combatant commanders with Navy EOD tools and professionals who will help counter the threats of improvised explosive devises; and instituting critical family readiness programs.

"If a Sailor's family isn't ready, it's hard for the Sailor to be ready. To ensure our total force – including our families – is prepared at every stage of our deployment cycle, I've put together a team charged with establishing a forcewide family readiness policy," Bullard said.

"Ours is a unique and diverse force, but this overarching policy will standardize the processes, expectations and deliverables with regard to NECC's total family readiness and the overall warrior continuum," added Bullard. "This warrior continuum includes educating our families and ensuring sustained maintenance and development – whether professional, physical, mental, emotional or spiritual – at every phase of the [Fleet Readiness Training Plan] training cycle."

Although NECC provides combatant commanders with skilled forces for the full spectrum of operations in the Global War on Terror, Bullard and his team are also committed to preventing war and increasing the United States' maritime security cooperation with other navies around the globe.

Through the Maritime Civil Affairs Group and the Expeditionary Training Command, both of which are deployed now in support of the Africa Partnership Station, NECC is helping expand regional navies' capabilities so those navies can ultimately achieve long term security and have credibility among their own populations.

"Many other countries around the globe don't have big, traditional navies; their navies may look more like our expeditionary forces. But they all have maritime security concerns, and we can help them build their capability," Bullard said.

Bullard says he's honored to have been at the helm, working with NECC Sailors who provide a continuum of capability in the expanded – near coastal, inner harbor, and riverine – maritime battlespace.

"The Sailors who go into the world and accomplish the NECC missions are some of the finest Sailors I have ever known," he said. "The past two years would not have been this successful had it not been for them and their efforts."

Bullard, a career aviator, retires after 35 years of service. Rear Adm. Mike Tillotson – the Navy's first EOD admiral – assumed responsibility for the command.
For more news from Navy Expeditionary Combat Command, visit www.navy.mil/local/necc/.

[Spinner]

I just finished reading The Sand Pebbles, and watching a new release of the movie of the same name. I thought it gave a pretty good historical perspective (the movie got a little hammy, at times) of Navy personnel being used in more of an infantry capacity back during the 20s and 30s. McKenna enlisted at the tail end of the Chinese gunboat missions, but he benefited from the stories of the people who were actually there.

It's not as though the Navy never conducted these types of missions in the past. As long as they keep the edgy side of the bayonet facing away from their mouths...:D

http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/naval_infantry.htm#what

[EOD/FPJ]

As a 29 year Navy EOD guy, Id like to have seen us under SOCOM / NAVSPECWAR as our CC and type commander. We've always been combat support and expeditionary by nature and have augmented SEAL, (UDT until it's transformation), SBUs, Force Recon and Army SF at least during and since Viet Nam. Falling under the NECC may not keep us resourced properly. SEALS have always taken good care of us.

[Metalchica]

Boost career, earn cash with these 15 top jobs (http://www.*********.com/news/2008/03/navy_hotjobs_030908w/)

8. Riverine force

Location: Based in Little Creek and Yorktown, Va., with rotating six-month deployments to Iraq.

Pays and perks: Various, depending on deployment location and could include combat zone tax exclusion, imminent danger pay, hazardous duty pay and family separation allowance.

Tour length: 36 months.

Who’s eligible: Squadrons: male sailors in ratings BM, BU, CE, CM, CS, CS, DC, EM, EN, EO, ET, GM, HM, HT, IS, IT, MA, MM, OS, PS, QM, SK and YN. Group staffs can include female sailors.

Training: Mostly unit training.

Why you want it: This is exciting duty: force protection on rivers and in coastal waters, under threat of hostile fire. And the sailors who do it, love it.

Details: http://buperscd.technology.navy.mil/bup_updt/508/milpers/1306-974.htm

9. Maritime civil affairs

Location: Based in Little Creek, Va., the group operates squadrons located at Yorktown, Va., and Imperial Beach in San Diego, and deploys worldwide.

Pays and perks: Various, depending on deployment location. Could include combat zone tax exclusion, imminent danger pay, hazardous duty pay and family separation allowance.

Tour length: 36 months.

Who’s eligible: BM, BU, CE, CM, CU, EM, EN, EO, ET, GM, HM, IS, IT, LN, MA, MC, MM, OS, PS, SK, and YN.

Training: Mostly unit training

Why you want it: Winning hearts and minds with humanitarian assistance and disaster relief; non-combatant evacuation operations, refugee operations.

Details: Contact Navy Expeditionary Combat Command (757) 462-4316 or at http://www.necc.navy.mil.

11. Expeditionary Training Command

Location: Norfolk, Va., but deploys worldwide, with current focus on Africa.

Pays and perks: Various, depending on deployment location. Could include combat zone tax exclusion, imminent danger pay, hazardous duty pay and family separation allowance.

Tour length: 36 months.

Who’s eligible: E-5 or above, BM, BU, CE, CM, EN, EO, ET, GM, HM, IS, IT, MA, MC, PS, SK and YN.

Training: Unit training.

Why you want it: Mobile training teams instruct host nation militaries in leadership and professional development, small boat maintenance, construction, anti-terrorism and force protection, maritime combat operations, and weapons.

Details: Contact NECC.

[navman]

"And the sailors who do it, love it."

When we saw this we laughed very loudly. Though we all enjoy this job, that statement ....yeah.

[KidA]

I just finished reading The Sand Pebbles, and watching a new release of the movie of the same name.

Damned good book, and agree on the movie assessment as well (though McQueen is awesome as usual in it).

[Metalchica]

Recent DOD teleconference (http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/BloggerAssets/2008-08/08080815443820080808_CaptMcKenna_transcript.pdf) with CAPT McKenna, CO of MCAG - the Maritime Civil Affairs Group, touches upon some of the unit's brief history, supported commands, and current operations.

[Snake]

Expeditionary Guard Battalion?

Analogous to the French Navy's Fusiliers Marins? Navy version of Air Force SFers?

[dsumner]

Expeditionary Guard Battalion?

Analogous to the French Navy's Fusiliers Marins? Navy version of Air Force SFers?

Nope, Guard as in guarding prisoners, they're they guys that were running detainee ops at Bucca and GITMO.

[bravodelta]

Nope, Guard as in guarding prisoners, they're they guys that were running detainee ops at Bucca and GITMO.

Yup. Navy Provisional Detainee Battalion in Bucca. One of my guys is there right now, and he's actually loving life.