U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 01-01-2019, 08:39 AM
 
Location: New Mexico U.S.A.
24,518 posts, read 39,689,696 times
Reputation: 28622

Advertisements

Marines Insist Storming A Beach Is Still A Military Option
December 27, 2017 4:58 AM ET
Heard on Morning Edition

Steve Walsh

The Marines' signature military skill, amphibious landing, is rehearsed but has not been used under fire since the Korean War. The corps is working to keep it relevant in a changing world of warfare.

Entire Article: https://www.npr.org/2017/12/27/57373...ilitary-option



And


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYb8W4CvF4E

Thousands of Marines storm U.S. beaches biggest amphibious landing for a decade..!!

Military Colonel Grub
Published on Sep 6, 2017
Marine Corps pilots with Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactic Squadron One (MAWTS-1) and Marines with Echo Company, 2nd Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment fly MV-22B Osprey aircraft during the marine expeditionary unit exercise (MEUEX) at Yuma, Arizona. MEUEX is part of Weapons and Tactics Instructors course (WTI), a seven week training event hosted by MAWTS-1 cadre. MAWTS-1 provides standardized tactical training and certification of unit instructor qualifications to support Marine Aviation Training and Readiness and assists in developing and employing aviation weapons and tactics.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-01-2019, 03:42 PM
 
4,197 posts, read 1,932,973 times
Reputation: 3368
I think it is still relevant.Especially for marines. Who else? The more tools in your tool box....the more things you can "fix"
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2019, 04:01 PM
 
Location: Elysium
6,008 posts, read 3,256,338 times
Reputation: 4135
And then the US Army has its version in maintaining the capability to drop an Airborne Battalion. Only they can point to the Rangers on Grenada and the 82nd Airborne in Panama as more recent examples.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2019, 11:25 AM
 
Location: Central Massachusetts
4,697 posts, read 4,601,711 times
Reputation: 6010
I definitely do agree that it needs to remain relevant. I can see it used should we need to invade Fiji. I am packed and ready for that call.


On a serious note. Thank you marines for your service. We may have a little esprit de corps argument but I would rather have you guys standing near me in a bar fight than an airman.

Semper Fi

Go Army Beat Navy.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2019, 12:32 PM
 
13,610 posts, read 12,539,259 times
Reputation: 18559
I do think it is a rather outdated concept as many are thinking, i.e. WW2 style.

Any country having anything remotely close to a modern military, will easily repel such thing, or make them highly costly to the invading force. A modern military will simply destroy the slow, large, almost stationary ships used to launch the invasion, as anti-ship missile tech has come a long, long way to the point carrier groups are on the brink of vulnerability.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2019, 01:10 PM
 
Location: Texas Hill Country
9,213 posts, read 5,043,181 times
Reputation: 7879
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
I do think it is a rather outdated concept as many are thinking, i.e. WW2 style.

Any country having anything remotely close to a modern military, will easily repel such thing, or make them highly costly to the invading force. A modern military will simply destroy the slow, large, almost stationary ships used to launch the invasion, as anti-ship missile tech has come a long, long way to the point carrier groups are on the brink of vulnerability.

One of the things to keep in mind in ANY attack is that what is being attacked may not be the primary target but it may need to be taken out to ensure success on the primary target.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2019, 02:29 PM
 
9,490 posts, read 16,187,221 times
Reputation: 17612
Amphibious landing technology and support has also evolved from the days of WWII. Highly costly does not mean unsuccessful. The threat of invasion was used successfully to tie up a lot of Iraqi troops during the Gulf War. We also may decide to conduct an amphibious operation against a nation of limited military capability. While it may not be tactically advantageous in a lot of scenarios, I don't think it is an outdated concept.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2019, 05:26 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
30,052 posts, read 48,123,221 times
Reputation: 18079
Military strategy is always changing.

When I was on Active Duty the Navy's big focus was on Carrier battle groups and subs for deep blue combat.

But now look at all the focus on littoral combat.

The Navy has done 'war games' with third world nations for decades [where other nations use old worn-out vessels that the US gave them after we had decomm'ed them]. After so many years of playing against those limited functionality vessels, the 'lessons learned' was that we needed to focus on littoral tactics.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2019, 05:49 PM
 
Location: Wasilla, AK
6,375 posts, read 3,452,420 times
Reputation: 13173
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
I do think it is a rather outdated concept as many are thinking, i.e. WW2 style.

Any country having anything remotely close to a modern military, will easily repel such thing, or make them highly costly to the invading force. A modern military will simply destroy the slow, large, almost stationary ships used to launch the invasion, as anti-ship missile tech has come a long, long way to the point carrier groups are on the brink of vulnerability.

As long as we have a Marine Corps any potential maritime adversary will have to devote resources to defend against any amphibious assault. That means less money available for other defenses.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2019, 02:14 PM
 
1,491 posts, read 2,216,458 times
Reputation: 1596
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
I do think it is a rather outdated concept as many are thinking, i.e. WW2 style.

Any country having anything remotely close to a modern military, will easily repel such thing, or make them highly costly to the invading force. A modern military will simply destroy the slow, large, almost stationary ships used to launch the invasion, as anti-ship missile tech has come a long, long way to the point carrier groups are on the brink of vulnerability.
It is not outdated at all.



Amphibious landing as part of modern military operations is as important as ever. Littoral combat will never lose its importance. Landing troops as part of a full scale conflict is a vital capability and has been since the beginning of time.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top