why did the U.S. Marines (an amphibious force) fight in Afghanistan (a landlocked country)?
In: 3742
To sum up a *very* long story, there has been a culture and identity shift for the Marines since WW2 and over the years they basically became a second Army, as they didn’t want to be seen as irrelevant during the Cold War when large, conventional amphibious attacks weren’t a thing, especially not something you could build a whole branch around.
It worked out okay-ish during the GWOT, if a little redundant, but right now as the Pacific theater of operations is becoming a serious potential contender for the next “hot war” the Marines are actively trying to re-invent themselves into what they originally were. They shed all their tanks, invested a ton of money and training into light, amphibious equipment and tactics and are actively embracing their role as naval infantry.
Don’t think of the Marines as a water based fighting force. Each branch of the military has its role in operations. The following were explained to me a while back, so I could be wrong, but I think the broad strokes are correct.
According to US military doctrine, the Marines are the expeditionary and vanguard forces. They go in first, secure the area, make the initial assault.
The Army is the occupation force once a position is established. They bring the heavy stuff like armor, helicopters, artillery, and set up infrastructure and supply lines.
The navy secures sea routes and ports, provides sea (and air) power, and transportation. They’re all about mobilization of a complete force, and quickly.
The Air Force provide direct air superiority, ISR, transportation, and bulk supply. Air superiority and ISR are the things that win wars.
Amphibious means on land and on sea right? Iraq has plenty of land which I believe is covered pretty well in the whole “land and sea” thing
There’s an old saying (that will soon be deleted) Jesus can walk on water, but the US Marines can swim through land.
1. A Marine Corps infantry battalion has (although the latest restructuring changed this a little bit) mostly the same stuff as an Army light infantry battalion, organized somewhat differently (a platoon being three squads of three fire teams rather than four squads if two fire teams like the Army and most foreign militaries, for example). It might not be the main thing that they focus on, but they’re capable of it.
2. They are an expeditionary force, designed to rapidly deploy overseas on short notice. Being an amphibious force is an important part of this, but it’s not everything.
3. If they say out the main war of a generation, this would not help them when politicians start talking about budget cuts.
Marine here:
Marines are an amphibious fighting force but more importantly we are a force that fights on the land, air, and sea. So wherever the war is at the Marines will adjust for it accordingly and be used where they can best perform, and that’s usually as shock troops where they can focus on rapid assaults before the bull of the rest of military arrives. There’s not much water in Afghanistan but there’s a shit load of land and air, so the Marines focused less on amphibious operations while over there.
This was a temporary adjustment though, as we can see that the Marine Corps is now going back to focusing on amphibious operations to focus on combatting future threats around the South China Sea.
I work with a Marine Vet. & his explanation to me was that the military uses the Marines’ smaller more tactile forces to gain & seize territory. While they use the Army’s infantry which is larger & brute to hold or control territories. I myself am not a veteran that’s just what I was told.
I think to specifically answer the question about Afghanistan, I’d say rapid deployment to follow the approved troop surge in Afghanistan with a job of creating space and a foothold for future operations.
I was in an Amphibious Assault Vehicle company that switched gears hard to deploy to Afghanistan in 2009 (not using any amphibious training). We hiked a ton and practiced a lot of helo insertions. On the initial deployment, I was part of operation Khanjar which was a large multi-battalion/joint-forces helo insertion into taliban controlled zones and secured/setup small forward operating bases in completely non-military occupied lands. These small bases started from nothing and slowly became mini bases that created a large “connect the dots” supply lines along the roads of the Helmand river. Later on, we’d have supply convoys from different branches including British forces using the roads and each base was a checkpoint of sorts that kept the roads secured.
TLDR: Afghanistan needed a flash mob to setup operations further in Taliban controlled areas. The USMC is like a group of people waiting to flash mob when they are told to.
I’m going to guess because with two wars going on, the US needed fighting men, and why would you leave the Marines at home if you need trained fighting men in the field?
The marines may have has their origin in fighting from ships but that has very little to do what the usmc does today. Today the marines still have some naval roles but today they’re primarily the us expeditionary force. They are designed to be almost anywhere in the world in a short time, and at least establish a zone for additional forces to land.
Plus the modern military is highly integrated and one branch alone can’t really do much. And of course politics and money, the more things a particular branch does the more political clout they have to get more funding
Latest Answers