Starfleet Marine Corps

[Timo]

Ron Moore even claimed in a DVD commentary this is how it's done in the US Navy

He would have been correct until the 1990s. But US Marines were gradually withdrawn from USN shipboard security assignments after WWII, lingering the longest aboard ships that carried strategic weapons. The deployment of tactical or strategic nukes on surface ships has been drastically scaled back now, and while there no doubt are live warheads available to select vessels at select times, the training of the manpower to have them there has been scaled back, too, so probably very few ships actually carry such "secret" weapons nowadays.

Supposedly, nukes were rare strategic assets aboard the nuBSG battlestars, too, so perhaps Marine guard was warranted as standard for that reason? Perhaps lesser vessels, or battlestars armed with conventional weapons, would have been guarded by units without special status and/or less in the way of special training?

Timo Saloniemi

[Darkwing]

Longinus wrote:

---

I understant that it wouldn't be a stratetigally best possible arrangement, but I still think it would be something Federation might do. I could easily believe Federation not expecting needing an army.

Back when it was founded, yes. By Pike's & Kirk's time, they'd have realized the necessity.

UFP is not an unified nation state but an alliance of different worlds. It's more like EU than USA. Member worlds might not like the idea of large numbers of UFP troops permanently stationed on their territory. And yes, having a permanent army would make Federation more militaristic.

By TOS, it was a lot tighter than the EU. I grew up in a military town, and I'm sure the member worlds would look on it more like the US looks at our own bases (an economic boon) than the Japanese look at our bases there - and even they want them for the money more than they resent them for the "occupation", except when a flashpoint occurs, like the recent rape. And finally, no, having a military is not militaristic. It's what you do with it. Various states and territories brandished their state troops as a threat before federal troops replaced them, which IS militaristic. Also, please remember, not all of Starfleet is made up of touchy-feely big-idea idealists, and the civilian population would be even less so. I'm a more conservative idealist, and I'm constantly disgusted by the fellow sailors who believe in revenge more than justice. "Hang Manning, kill all the terrorists in Gitmo, etc". And civilians are just as bad. "OJ was framed/ OJ shoulda been convicted the first time". Politicians may start as idealists, but over time become pragmatic, then apathetic or corrupt, and prate about ideals they don't follow, and quietly change things behind the scenes.

Oh, and NATO and UN forces kinda operate the way I suggested, and they seem to work just fine. NATO has no army, UN has no army. Their member nations have armies that occassionally perform joint operations.

Which just means that, instead of having AN army, you now need to have 150 smaller armies, a recipe for divisiveness. And now they must have a lot more wargames to practice working together - which is one reason why, in addition to often being war criminals, UN peacekeepers are useless militarily - divided chain of command, jealousies between rivals, and lack of common training and coordination.

[Darkwing]

Longinus wrote:

---

I cannot understand where this hardon for marines comes from.

Marines are soldiers on a ship. They fight. Starfleet security are dudes on a ship who fight. They fill the exact role marines would be used for.

Not really, MAs and Marines are nowhere near the same, even though a cursory glance makes it seem that way to a civilian.

[Longinus]

Darkwing wrote:

---

Not really, MAs and Marines are nowhere near the same, even though a cursory glance makes it seem that way to a civilian.

Considering the wide variety of duties a single Starfleet officer is expected to perform, they are easily roles similar enough. In real world people specialice way more than in Star Trek. See Timo's excellent post on O'Brien's duties.

[J.T.B.]

Hanukkah Solo wrote:

---

I can't speak for the others, but I'm not arguing that there is or might be a Federation naval infantry/marine corps based on possible canon, only that there should be one based on logic.

Based on logic from what we've seen onscreen, I'm not sure I see a "should" there. The orbital capabilities of starships are shown to be so powerful and accurate, it seems quite possible that once you've won control of the orbital space, you've won everything.

Hanukkah Solo wrote:

---

I don't particularly care for the "canon is the only thing that matters" argument, either, because in the end it's all fictional. It's all just made-up. No one part of it is really more valid than the rest except in our own minds.

Well, if you take that line of thought to its extent, it doesn't matter whether one episode completely contradicts the next, because it's all fictional.

The Wormhole wrote:

---

I personally don't think they are, sicne they don't have seperate rank structure and we've seen security officers eventually rise to command positions and indeed, engineers and security are interchangeable. Which wouldn't really make sense if they were seperate branches.

Officers seem to have a specialties which aren't interchangeable but aren't necessarily exclusive of command, Spock and Scotty being prime examples. Why couldn't security just be another specialty like science or engineering?

The Wormhole wrote:

---

But, I also don't get this attitude that pops up in this discussion all the time of "Marines can't handle security, that makes no sense." Like I said, no one complained when BSG had Marines covering all shipboard security, and Ron Moore even claimed in a DVD commentary this is how it's done in the US Navy.

Until the 1990s, USN cruisers, battleships and fleet carriers had an assigned Marine Detachment. Their shipboard duties originally included serving as gun crews as well as handling security, but after WW2 their role became largely traditional and ceremonial, and by the 1990s it was realized they would be better used elsewhere. The last carrier MarDet was reassigned in 1998.

Justin

[neozeks]

Darkwing wrote:

---

Back when it was founded, yes. By Pike's & Kirk's time, they'd have realized the necessity.

I think you're overestimating the centralization of the Federation. Even in the 24th century, it still strikes me as more similar to 19th century USA than today's USA. And at that point, if I'm not mistaken, most American ground troops were still state-raised.

Which just means that, instead of having AN army, you now need to have 150 smaller armies, a recipe for divisiveness. And now they must have a lot more wargames to practice working together - which is one reason why, in addition to often being war criminals, UN peacekeepers are useless militarily - divided chain of command, jealousies between rivals, and lack of common training and coordination.

There are ways to minimize the problems, like requiring every member planet military to train, organize and equip their troops according to Starfleet ground forces guidelines and having Starfleet oversee and command them (perhaps through an official umbrella organization called "the Federation Army"). Besides, I think it would be rather rare for these local armies to ever really work with one another. Defending the surface of one planet would be a mostly independent and self-reliant affair, largely unconnected to the defence of another planet (but connected to the naval war in space). And these troops would be stationary and wouldn't deploy "overseas" - Stafleet's own ground troops would be used for expeditionary missions, like you said yourself. Local troops could get federalized and deployed in support of Starfleet but I don't think there'd be much need for that. I have the feeling the Federation never really needed to fight a large ground war before the Dominion War.

Darkwing wrote:

---

Not really, MAs and Marines are nowhere near the same, even though a cursory glance makes it seem that way to a civilian.

True, but how do we know to which category Starfleet security belongs?

Anyway, I don't think determining whether Starfleet security are Marines or not and whether they can fight well on land is all that important to the greater question of the existence of separate ground units. It doesn't matter. Even if they are Marines, they're still needed on their ships and starbases. Sure, you can use them for small scale short-term actions - but anything more than that (it doesn't have to be anything "militaristic", say you're conducting a large humanitarian mission on a war-torn planet and you need to protect your humanitarian workers) and you'll be leaving your ships and facilities vulnerable and undermanned. You need to have independent ground units.

[Mr. Laser Beam]

neozeks wrote:

---

Local troops could get federalized and deployed in support of Starfleet but I don't think there'd be much need for that.

Actually, there was supposed to be a scene in Homefront / Paradise Lost where that exact thing happens: we would have seen Jaresh-Inyo "federalizing" United Earth forces to assist in the crisis. But it got cut for time.

[timmy84]

I have no doubt several worlds have independent military worlds. I'm also willing to believe several worlds have disbanded anything resembling a military since they are deep within the Federation and therefore don't need a military (so border worlds and worlds with strong military traditions probably still have planetary militaries).

I still don't believe that Starfleet (or the Federation) has a dedicated Army/ Naval Infantry/ Marine Corps / whatever you want to call it. We can debate this by todays standards, but thats us trying to put our beliefs on a fictional universe thats supposed to be better then us.

And if grade schoolers are learning calculus, then I think Red Shirt (Gold Shirt?) Number 52 also knows how to flank the enemy when needed and throw a photon grenade.

[Darkwing]

[/QUOTE]
I think you're overestimating the centralization of the Federation. Even in the 24th century, it still strikes me as more similar to 19th century USA than today's USA. And at that point, if I'm not mistaken, most American ground troops were still state-raised.[/QUOTE]
They were recruited by locale, but trained by federals and employed federally. Regardless, the UFP seems to me to be a mix of 18th century fleet, 19th century colonies, and 21st century metropolisi. Earth seems like a melange of NY, SF, and other major cities.

There are ways to minimize the problems, like requiring every member planet military to train, organize and equip their troops according to Starfleet ground forces guidelines and having Starfleet oversee and command them (perhaps through an official umbrella organization called "the Federation Army"). Besides, I think it would be rather rare for these local armies to ever really work with one another. Defending the surface of one planet would be a mostly independent and self-reliant affair, largely unconnected to the defence of another planet (but connected to the naval war in space). And these troops would be stationary and wouldn't deploy "overseas" - Stafleet's own ground troops would be used for expeditionary missions, like you said yourself. Local troops could get federalized and deployed in support of Starfleet but I don't think there'd be much need for that. I have the feeling the Federation never really needed to fight a large ground war before the Dominion War.

Exactly what I described, except that having a UFP Army means that those soldiers rotate from one planetary garrison to another, helping keep them from stagnating or developing excessive local loyalty that might override loyalty to the UFP overall.

True, but how do we know to which category Starfleet security belongs?

I'd assume Security were like Masters-at-Arms, based on seeing them in action, and not being impressed with the combat abilities of redshirts in most episodes. That, and marines have a clannishness that differs from sailors and soldiers.

Anyway, I don't think determining whether Starfleet security are Marines or not and whether they can fight well on land is all that important to the greater question of the existence of separate ground units. It doesn't matter. Even if they are Marines, they're still needed on their ships and starbases. Sure, you can use them for small scale short-term actions - but anything more than that (it doesn't have to be anything "militaristic", say you're conducting a large humanitarian mission on a war-torn planet and you need to protect your humanitarian workers) and you'll be leaving your ships and facilities vulnerable and undermanned. You need to have independent ground units.

I also liked the Diplomatic Protection Group we saw in Rules of Engagement (Morwood).

timmy84 wrote:

---

I have no doubt several worlds have independent military worlds. I'm also willing to believe several worlds have disbanded anything resembling a military since they are deep within the Federation and therefore don't need a military (so border worlds and worlds with strong military traditions probably still have planetary militaries).

Possible, but I'd think that in the early days, the UFP would exert a lot of pressure to consolidate forces into the federal level - and we see that somewhat with the Green Fleet - those Starfleet ships crewed solely by Vulcans - and the Blue Fleet, FASA's proposed Andorian-crewed ships. They're Starfleet vessels, but operated under the aegis of a founding race FOR the UFP.

I still don't believe that Starfleet (or the Federation) has a dedicated Army/ Naval Infantry/ Marine Corps / whatever you want to call it. We can debate this by todays standards, but thats us trying to put our beliefs on a fictional universe thats supposed to be better then us.

And how is it "better" to disarm and forego a military? That's foolhardy. Trying to make a more enlightened, responsible military makes sense, as long as it doesn't get out of hand and render that force useless. We did that in history, with the Society of Cinncinatus establishing the primacy of civilian control over the military, with the Nuremburg ruling, the Geneva convention, etc.

And if grade schoolers are learning calculus, then I think Red Shirt (Gold Shirt?) Number 52 also knows how to flank the enemy when needed and throw a photon grenade.

Based on episodes, I'd say about as well as a vidiot playing Call of Duty could

[Longinus]

Seeming occassional incompetence of the Starfleet security people is just a TV thing. Writers and actors are not experts of military tactics. It is not like the supposed super warriors like Klingons and Jem'Hadar appear much more competent.

[The Wormhole]

J.T.B. wrote:

---

[

Officers seem to have a specialties which aren't interchangeable but aren't necessarily exclusive of command, Spock and Scotty being prime examples. Why couldn't security just be another specialty like science or engineering?

I based my comment on the fact that when Captain Jellico took command of the Enterprise, he immediately re-assigned half the engineers to security. Security is obviously not a different branch from the rest of Starfleet.

[Nerys Myk]

The Wormhole wrote:

---

I based my comment on the fact that when Captain Jellico took command of the Enterprise, he immediately re-assigned half the engineers to security. Security is obviously not a different branch from the rest of Starfleet.

I would assume there is some cross training between engineering and security. Both would have some expertise on the function and operation of the ship weapons. So pulling engineers off other areas to focus on maintaining the ships weapons makes sense.

[Drago-Kazov]

Longinus wrote:

---

Seeming occassional incompetence of the Starfleet security people is just a TV thing. Writers and actors are not experts of military tactics. It is not like the supposed super warriors like Klingons and Jem'Hadar appear much more competent.

I bet there are some former military guys who would help them even for free. I hope they will use some better military tactics in all future Trek. This is not the 60s.

[T'Girl]

And fighting ability/martial art too. I'll give TOS a pass, but there's no excuse for TNG (and later series) not hiring a professional trainer to work with the actors for fight scenes on some of the episodes, especially Worf.

[Drago-Kazov]

It would be nice to see some asian martial arts in Trek.