The UFP should have dedicated ground forces

[evilalienbraga]

Alisium said:

The simple answer why not....hippies are writing military stories and Trek has no credible military advisors involved in the writing process, therefore we get a subtle demonization of the military.

Guns and Military = Evil

That's Trek!
You get military elements in Trek, and the movies tend to be more war / combat oriented to pull in the crowds, but it's not really a military-based show. You have SG1, BSG, Starship Troopers or (remember me?) Space: Above and Beyond for that.

 

[evilalienbraga]

Angel4576 said:

Again re TNG, and Insurrection, Picard chose not to harvest the Baku, but Vice-Admiral Dougherty was quite prepared to. No doubt after the event the Federation would have shaken their heads and backed Picard, but I doubt they'd have been overly concerned had Dougherty succeeded.

Utopian's been done to death in Star Trek IMO, time to go back down the darker route, like DS9, so if that's the way XI ultimately goes, I for one won't be complaining too much!

But we're talking about the theme of the show here - Insurrection the movie is saying to us the audience: what the federation proposed was wrong, and Picard is a hero. It's complete conjecture as to what people in the Federation thought about Picard's actions. That's irrelevant to us, the audience. You may disagree, but the theme of the film is: exploiting a minority for the greater good is wrong.

As for moving away from the utopian ideal: that's Trek. That is it's strength as well as its weakness. Hope for the future. A progressive belief in improvements in society and humanity. Realistic? Perhaps not - but uplifting nontheless. There are plenty of darker SF shows out there for you. BSG, for example.

 

[Alisium]

Nardpuncher said:
My little Treksplanation was that the MACOs were eventually absorbed into Starfleet and that all Starfleet personnel are well trained in combat of all sorts. Kinda like navy SEALs mixed with astronauts!

That's just not feesable.

There is so much work that goes into maintaining a group of proficient warfighters. They just wouldn't have time to be a full time anything else as well.

You just can't have semi-annual infantry training.

 

[Unicron]

But training for such a group would undoubtedly be different in Trek's era, and perhaps simplified in some respects. So there's no reason to assume the amount of time or resources needed to maintain the unit would be the same as they are today.

 

[Alisium]

Tatics is what takes a lot of time to train and up-keep.

It's took a lot of time 2000 years ago it will take a lot of time 2000 years hence.

People don't realize it but there is a lot, a lot of knowledge and skills that must be mastered in order to make a good warfigter. Then you have to get all those guys working together like a well-oiled machine. That in itself takes a long time. Think of any sports team and how often, intense and long they train before a single game. Now quadruple that.

 

[Daedalus12]

Alisium said:
Tatics is what takes a lot of time to train and up-keep.

It's took a lot of time 2000 years ago it will take a lot of time 2000 years hence.

People don't realize it but there is a lot, a lot of knowledge and skills that must be mastered in order to make a good warfigter. Then you have to get all those guys working together like a well-oiled machine. That in itself takes a long time. Think of any sports team and how often, intense and long they train before a single game. Now quadruple that.

What you are thinking of are special forces. Regular army recruit doesn't receive nearly that much training.

 

[Alisium]

Daedalus12 said:

Alisium said:
Tatics is what takes a lot of time to train and up-keep.

It's took a lot of time 2000 years ago it will take a lot of time 2000 years hence.

People don't realize it but there is a lot, a lot of knowledge and skills that must be mastered in order to make a good warfigter. Then you have to get all those guys working together like a well-oiled machine. That in itself takes a long time. Think of any sports team and how often, intense and long they train before a single game. Now quadruple that.

What you are thinking of are special forces. Regular army recruit doesn't receive nearly that much training.

Dude,

I am US Marine Infantry. Just regular infantry, not special forces. While you're right, the inital phase of training is short, from recruit training to the School of Infantry. When you get to your first real unit (the Fleet for us) you pretty much don't know crap.

It takes a good two years of training and experience to make a good basic infantryman. And it takes about that long to mold a platoon, squad, fireteam into an effective fighting unit.

Your taining is ongoing and continuous. Plus all your knowledge and skills are perishable. What you don't use you lose. That's why you have to constantly do again and again and agian. To achive perfection and maintain.

I have a stack next to me about 3 feet high of weapons and tactics manuals. And that's not nearly all the knowledge I need to know to be a basic leader.

There is just sooo much. The general public thinks that we just put rifles in the hands of idiots and say "go shoot" and that's all that is needed to make a warfighter. Wrong. Besides the extreme physical challange, it takes a lot of inteligence to make a good warfighter.

It's the same reason people don't graduate with a four year degree in one year. Theres lots of knowledge that takes a long time to learn and master and lots of practice to maintain.

 

[Daedalus12]

Alisium said:

Dude,

I am US Marine Infantry. Just regular infantry, not special forces. While you're right, the inital phase of training is short, from recruit training to the School of Infantry. When you get to your first real unit (the Fleet for us) you pretty much don't know crap.

It takes a good two years of training and experience to make a good basic infantryman. And it takes about that long to mold a platoon, squad, fireteam into an effective fighting unit.

Your taining is ongoing and continuous. Plus all your knowledge and skills are perishable. What you don't use you lose. That's why you have to constantly do again and again and agian. To achive perfection and maintain.

I have a stack next to me about 3 feet high of weapons and tactics manuals. And that's not nearly all the knowledge I need to know to be a basic leader.

There is just sooo much. The general public thinks that we just put rifles in the hands of idiots and say "go shoot" and that's all that is needed to make a warfighter. Wrong. Besides the extreme physical challange, it takes a lot of inteligence to make a good warfighter.

It's the same reason people don't graduate with a four year degree in one year. Theres lots of knowledge that takes a long time to learn and master and lots of practice to maintain.

I was talking about the recruit training portion. We can assume that every non-security starfleet personnel probably went through the 24th century equivalent of basic training while the security personnel probably went through a more rigorous training regime. As far as I could tell a lot of security guys in starfleet don't serve any other purpose (as in scientists or explorers) so it's possible that they are the "dedicated" soliders of starfleet. Seriously I just don't see ship security occupying those guys' time very much so we can imagine that they are as you mentioned continuously training in various combat tactics. Think of them as Macos in yellow.

IMO ground combat in the 24th century should be mostly mechanized with heavy air support from space (too bad this was never shown on ST). I believe this would reduce the amount of infantry required to wage an effective ground war.

 

[TeutonicNights]

I think it's very obvious from the script in "Nor the battle to the strong" that Lt. Burke is some kind of Starfleet Marine.
The script mentions the guy as a "seasoned combat veteran", and I also believe the "platoon" of his that he mentions in the dialog isn't a squad of engineers.

Also, the script of "the Siege of AR..." makes a distinction between "soldiers" and "engineers".

Just sayin'

 

[Alisium]

Daedalus12 said:

Alisium said:

Dude,

I am US Marine Infantry. Just regular infantry, not special forces. While you're right, the inital phase of training is short, from recruit training to the School of Infantry. When you get to your first real unit (the Fleet for us) you pretty much don't know crap.

It takes a good two years of training and experience to make a good basic infantryman. And it takes about that long to mold a platoon, squad, fireteam into an effective fighting unit.

Your taining is ongoing and continuous. Plus all your knowledge and skills are perishable. What you don't use you lose. That's why you have to constantly do again and again and agian. To achive perfection and maintain.

I have a stack next to me about 3 feet high of weapons and tactics manuals. And that's not nearly all the knowledge I need to know to be a basic leader.

There is just sooo much. The general public thinks that we just put rifles in the hands of idiots and say "go shoot" and that's all that is needed to make a warfighter. Wrong. Besides the extreme physical challange, it takes a lot of inteligence to make a good warfighter.

It's the same reason people don't graduate with a four year degree in one year. Theres lots of knowledge that takes a long time to learn and master and lots of practice to maintain.

I was talking about the recruit training portion. We can assume that every non-security starfleet personnel probably went through the 24th century equivalent of basic training while the security personnel probably went through a more rigorous training regime. As far as I could tell a lot of security guys in starfleet don't serve any other purpose (as in scientists or explorers) so it's possible that they are the "dedicated" soliders of starfleet. Seriously I just don't see ship security occupying those guys' time very much so we can imagine that they are as you mentioned continuously training in various combat tactics. Think of them as Macos in yellow.

IMO ground combat in the 24th century should be mostly mechanized with heavy air support from space (too bad this was never shown on ST). I believe this would reduce the amount of infantry required to wage an effective ground war.

Plausible,

On both points. You'll always need actual infantry but their role could be greatly reduced by technology in the future.

Starfleet security could have several different types of jobs withing their structure. See my post above about the naval infanty. There could be a contigent aboard that deals with the more coeds and law inforcment stuff (like PMO or MP's) and another thats more like an infantry with special capabilties.

 

[Daedalus12]

Burke was wearing some dark uniform with a red stripe across the chest in that episode. Yeah he could be a member of starfleet marine corp. One thing is for sure they are not exactly an effective ground force. The same can be said for the Klingons and the forces in Siege of AR.

 

[Nebusj]

Now, the tough question is: should the UPN have had dedicated ground forces?

 

[timmy84]

Alisium said:

Nardpuncher said:
My little Treksplanation was that the MACOs were eventually absorbed into Starfleet and that all Starfleet personnel are well trained in combat of all sorts. Kinda like navy SEALs mixed with astronauts!

That's just not feesable.

There is so much work that goes into maintaining a group of proficient warfighters. They just wouldn't have time to be a full time anything else as well.

You just can't have semi-annual infantry training.

So, the reserves and national guard are not feasible?

Anyway, I think the simplest answer is probably the right one. Starfleet Security provides the bulk of the 'Starfleet Infantry' corps. Since the Federation is almost never in a state of war, and it seems most conflicts are resolved in space since planetary invasions are large, expensive endeavors, this corps is not standing.

With the advent of holodeck technology especially. Security wouldn't need to be rotated off a ship to receive combat training.

Of course, during the Klingon border conflict and Dominion War Starfleet organized its security forces into larger units. We saw them twice. Plus, we saw that Earth itself had enough Security personnel prior to the war to enforce martial law across the entire planet.

Starfleet infantry exist, but not in the way some may hope.

 

[Star Wolf]

Daedalus12 said:

Alisium said:

Dude,

I am US Marine Infantry. Just regular infantry, not special forces. While you're right, the inital phase of training is short, from recruit training to the School of Infantry. When you get to your first real unit (the Fleet for us) you pretty much don't know crap.

It takes a good two years of training and experience to make a good basic infantryman. And it takes about that long to mold a platoon, squad, fireteam into an effective fighting unit.

Your taining is ongoing and continuous. Plus all your knowledge and skills are perishable. What you don't use you lose. That's why you have to constantly do again and again and agian. To achive perfection and maintain.

I have a stack next to me about 3 feet high of weapons and tactics manuals. And that's not nearly all the knowledge I need to know to be a basic leader.

There is just sooo much. The general public thinks that we just put rifles in the hands of idiots and say "go shoot" and that's all that is needed to make a warfighter. Wrong. Besides the extreme physical challange, it takes a lot of inteligence to make a good warfighter.

It's the same reason people don't graduate with a four year degree in one year. Theres lots of knowledge that takes a long time to learn and master and lots of practice to maintain.

I was talking about the recruit training portion. We can assume that every non-security starfleet personnel probably went through the 24th century equivalent of basic training while the security personnel probably went through a more rigorous training regime. As far as I could tell a lot of security guys in starfleet don't serve any other purpose (as in scientists or explorers) so it's possible that they are the "dedicated" soliders of starfleet. Seriously I just don't see ship security occupying those guys' time very much so we can imagine that they are as you mentioned continuously training in various combat tactics. Think of them as Macos in yellow.

IMO ground combat in the 24th century should be mostly mechanized with heavy air support from space (too bad this was never shown on ST). I believe this would reduce the amount of infantry required to wage an effective ground war.

Well as an ex US Army tank commander let me say tactics depend upon technology and with the trek level of tech large units needing large coordination will just be targets.

The power available to the individual security officer should make her employment more in line with the first combat scenes of the book, not the movie Starship Troopers. In that one Mobile Infantryman, or armored mechanised infantryman if you prefer, "on the bounce" controls entire nations, in trek terms a Worf maybe with a spotter teleporting and employing a WMD then teleporting to the next priority target he has to engage.

For that level of combat expertise and lethality ground forces will consist of the equvalent of SEAL teams controling a planet not of fire teams controlling intersections.

 

[Alisium]

timmy84 said:

Alisium said:

Nardpuncher said:
My little Treksplanation was that the MACOs were eventually absorbed into Starfleet and that all Starfleet personnel are well trained in combat of all sorts. Kinda like navy SEALs mixed with astronauts!

That's just not feesable.

There is so much work that goes into maintaining a group of proficient warfighters. They just wouldn't have time to be a full time anything else as well.

You just can't have semi-annual infantry training.

So, the reserves and national guard are not feasible?

Anyway, I think the simplest answer is probably the right one. Starfleet Security provides the bulk of the 'Starfleet Infantry' corps. Since the Federation is almost never in a state of war, and it seems most conflicts are resolved in space since planetary invasions are large, expensive endeavors, this corps is not standing.

With the advent of holodeck technology especially. Security wouldn't need to be rotated off a ship to receive combat training.

Of course, during the Klingon border conflict and Dominion War Starfleet organized its security forces into larger units. We saw them twice. Plus, we saw that Earth itself had enough Security personnel prior to the war to enforce martial law across the entire planet.

Starfleet infantry exist, but not in the way some may hope.

Big difference.

The Reserves and National gaurd train monthy and will spend one or two months training intensly before they go to war. And once they get their they "augment" active forces. They arn't being asked to be the whole kit and kaboodle. If that were feesable we wouldn't even have active forces.

Also, we take reservist and national guardsmen from civilian jobs. That does not affect the functionabilty of any active duty component.

You cannot take Starfleet members who are already vital to Starfleet in one job and send them off to war in another without affecting Starfleet's ability to do work.

 

[ntypical]

So, the reserves and national guard are not feasible?

They are not feasible now, why would they be in the future? Just to put this in perspective for you. We were relieved by 1/25 one of the times I was in Iraq. They were operating in the same exact AO as us (obviously as they relieved us) during a “quieter” time of the year, and took three times more casualties than we did, but were engaged about half as much as we were. You can not rely on reserves as your only ground force. That is why they are reserves. They are there for when your main force has taken too much of a beating, or is simply worn the hell down. That is it. True we have used them as normal active duty units of late. But that is because we have to. Call them cannon fodder if you want.

Just like today, mech is not the answer. To steal a line used by a former CO of mine. Our technology can not beat their lack of technology; the only way to beat them is on the ground fighting. If SF solely relied on tech to win wars their enemies would do as the insurgency has done. Go to ground and fight unconventionally.

 

[Daedalus12]

Star Wolf said:
The power available to the individual security officer should make her employment more in line with the first combat scenes of the book, not the movie Starship Troopers. In that one Mobile Infantryman, or armored mechanised infantryman if you prefer, "on the bounce" controls entire nations, in trek terms a Worf maybe with a spotter teleporting and employing a WMD then teleporting to the next priority target he has to engage.

What about a transporter damping field? An enemy could conceivably deploy those throughout the planet or just around the key areas. A single assault with WMD will not be sufficient in that case nor will it be more effective than just bombarding the surface with orbital assets. If the goal is take over the enemy's infrastruture then you'll probably more subtle approaches than just dropping WMDs.

ntypical said:
Just like today, mech is not the answer. To steal a line used by a former CO of mine. Our technology can not beat their lack of technology; the only way to beat them is on the ground fighting. If SF solely relied on tech to win wars their enemies would do as the insurgency has done. Go to ground and fight unconventionally.

Superior technology has certainly enabled us to achieve rapid military victories. Occupying and dealing with resisting insurgency is another matter altogether. In ST bottling up those insurgency on the planet maybe sufficient until the end of the war.

 

[ntypical]

The Dominion war was maneuver warfare at its best. You can not conduct maneuver warfare without a dedicated ground force. PERIOD. No ifs ands or buts about it.

Daedalus12 said:
Superior technology has certainly enabled us to achieve rapid military victories. Occupying and dealing with resisting insurgency is another matter altogether. In ST bottling up those insurgency on the planet maybe sufficient until the end of the war.

Which in itself should tell you that they had to have a large dedicated ground force. I knock you down on a planet. Leave you there, then go knock someone else down, they move in pick those guys up and come in and knock you down. There has to be a ground combat element in there somewhere.

Further more. The end of the Dominion war when the Federation went on the offensive could be called attrition warfare. You DEFINITELY HAVE TO HAVE GROUND UNITS for this type of warfare.

 

[Daedalus12]

ntypical said:

Which in itself should tell you that they had to have a large dedicated ground force. I knock you down on a planet. Leave you there, then go knock someone else down, they move in pick those guys up and come in and knock you down. There has to be a ground combat element in there somewhere.

Further more. The end of the Dominion war when the Federation went on the offensive could be called attrition warfare. You DEFINITELY HAVE TO HAVE GROUND UNITS for this type of warfare.

Starfleet obviously have ground units. Never argued otherwise. The only thing that is arguable is the significance of their role and the number required to bottle up the insurgency forces on a planet. With a large shield perimeter and an active sensor net. The insurgency with the loss of their main logistic support would find themselves in a difficult spot to attempt to take over the occupying forces who can now just stay put. If any insurgency come out of the ground to try such invasion then they would be detected. Hopefully the SF forces have already deployed massive amount of turrets on the perimeter. Some sort of highly-maneuverable aerial vehicle capable of mass ground attack would help too.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Alisium said:

Nardpuncher said:
My little Treksplanation was that the MACOs were eventually absorbed into Starfleet and that all Starfleet personnel are well trained in combat of all sorts. Kinda like navy SEALs mixed with astronauts!

That's just not feesable.

There is so much work that goes into maintaining a group of proficient warfighters. They just wouldn't have time to be a full time anything else as well.

You just can't have semi-annual infantry training.

I hope they're just called 'Starfleet Marines', actually. I like the sound of that.

Reminds me of one of the fan organizations with that name. They had this little bit of fanfic on their website about a planetary governor whose capital city was experiencing a riot. The nearest Starfleet vessel responded and sent down an appropriate Marine force to deal with the situation.

Not ten seconds later the governor hails the ship. "You're crazy! You've sent down only ONE Marine!"

"But sir," the ship's captain replied, "you said there was only one riot."