Posted on 06/10/2005 7:24:38 AM PDT by areafiftyone
The "seabasing" capability being developed for the Marine Corps will enable the service to deploy 15,000 troops anywhere in the world in as little as 10 to 12 days, according to the commandant of the Marine Corps.
"And when you are able to respond that fast, it is going to change the calculus of the battlefield," Gen. Michael W. Hagee explained during an interview with the Pentagon Channel.
The concept, expected to be in full swing within the next 10 to 15 years, involves pre-positioning ships with critical wartime assets. In the event of an operation, the Marines would fly directly to the ships and begin preparations.
"We'll do the rehearsal, the arrival (and) assembly at sea, and then launch them to wherever they need to go," Hagee said. "It is essentially using the sea as maneuver space."
This will significantly reduce the time it takes to deploy Marines to operations, whether they're major combat operations or humanitarian relief efforts, the general said.
"For example, during Operation Iraqi Freedom, we put about 60,000 to 70,000 Marines and sailors into Kuwait, with all their equipment, ready to cross the line of departure (into Iraq) in less than 60 days," he said.
Despite that impressive speed, which Hagee said "no one else in the world" can match, seabasing will make deployments even faster.
"With seabasing, we will be able to put 15,000 Marines and sailors anywhere in the world in 10 to 12 days," he said. "We can't do that today, but ... between 2015 and 2020, we are going to be able to do that."
Seabasing will eliminate the need for a land base when conducting military operations. During Operation Iraqi Freedom, the Marines used Kuwait as their initial ground base to launch their operations.
"If, in 2020, we had to do Operation Iraqi Freedom," Hagee said, "ships would come into the (Persian) Gulf, we'd do the arrival and assembly at sea, (and) the Marines would launch - instead of from Kuwait, from the sea base - directly into ... Iraq."
The ability to respond more quickly to operations or contingencies can have a big impact on how they proceed, the commandant said. "You might be able to get there so quickly that you may not need large follow-on forces," he said.
"At the same time, you keep your footprint very small ashore," Hagee said, reducing the likelihood of force-protection problems and better recognizing the host country's autonomy.
"What we want to do is erase that line between the sea and land," the general said. "That's the vision."
Back to the future?
Read this one carefully and you'll see what I was telling you in it.
With the 'media' who needs spies any more ? Between this press release and the one on the Navy's new high speed littoral vessels the enemy pretty much knows what advantages the US military are going to have in the future.
IS it just me, or does this seem like a bad idea? It sounds like we're prepositioning our assests as a statioary, long term target.
At the rate we're going by 2020 the marines will still be there.
For instance suppose that two days after the Iraqi had invaded Kuwait a US Marine regiment showed up and tossed them out of Kuwait? That would have changed the complection of the Mid-east dramatically good or bad.
Second, the ability to move that sort of force along the coastlines of the world unimpeded is simply impossible to defend against. I'm not certain that the US could even do it (if there were any other nation in the world that could project that sort of force which there isn't). Of course this pre-supposes continued American control of the sea.
Lastly simply the proven threat of our ability to deploy this sort of force makes military adventures not only risky but borderline foolish for the various dictators and loonies running some of the many cesspools of the world. For this to be effective as a deterent the baddies have to know its there. One of the most effective uses of Marines is to wave them like as stick when engaging in diplomatic chats with the various heroes of moveon.org and the DU.
>> "It sounds like we're prepositioning our assests as a statioary, long term target." <<
Ships are NOT stationary, and they surely will have defensive capabilities.
Sweet .... Inchon style landings anywhere in the world in 10-12 days.
You really can't max this concept out without the forward based "concrete carriers" concept. Basically, floating mile and a half long bouyant islands of concreted capable of taking in thousands of aircraft and troops positioned in the Pacific, Atlantic, and the Indian Oceans. Revolutionary idea. Kept over the horizon.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
In one of the proposals I've seen the "seabase" consisted of huge building blocks that get put together at sea. They are flat on top so they can land large troop transports. Sort of like a building kit to make your own island.
Seem to recall these "building blocks" cost about $8 billion dollars each, and they need at least 4 to do the job.
Sweet is right. Numbers of troops simply won't matter much any longer.
Static warfare is so passe' :)
Damned betcha! That'll give some of these petty Hitlers something to think about.
You have to remember that Marine amphibious operations aren't out there on their own. They usually operate with at least one carrier battle goups, several subs with guided missle capability, not to mention the Mariine's own Super Harriers support from the landing ships themselves.
There are all sorts of threats that the Marines would have to face coming ashore but you have to remember that such defensive weapons have to be in the right place at the right time and not be known the ther invaders. I'd rather be the guys picking where to attack than the guy trying to guess where the other guy will attack.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.