Navy Names New Amphibious Assault Ship Makin Island
Otis Willie
(EXCERPT) No. 713-03 IMMEDIATE RELEASE Sep 29, 2003
(703)697-5131(media) (703)428-0711(public/industry)
Navy Names New Amphibious Assault Ship Makin Island
The U.S. Navy has selected the name Makin Island for its next
amphibious assault ship, which honors the daring raid carried out by
Marine Corps Companies A and B, Second Raider Battalion, on
Japanese-held Makin Island, in the Gilbert Islands, Aug. 17-18, 1942.
The raid was launched from the submarines USS Nautilus and USS
Argonaut and succeeded in routing the enemy forces based there,
gaining valuable intelligence. The raid's leader, Marine Corps Lt.
Col. Evan Carlson was awarded the Navy Cross for his actions, while
Marine Corps Sgt. Clyde Thompson, was awarded the Medal of Honor for
heroism and was the first enlisted Marine to be so honored during
World War II.
The Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. Michael Hagee, cited the
transformational nature of the engagement in a letter to Secretary
Johnson and noted that many considered the raid the Marine Corps'
first action in the realm of special operations.
In 2001, the bodies of 19 Marine Corps raiders who died during the
operation or were executed after being captured were recovered on the
island of Kwajalein and returned to the United States for burial.
An amphibious warship is uniquely designed to support assault from the
sea against defended positions ashore. The 844-foot ship weighs more
than 40,500 tons and carries a crew of approximately 1,000 Sailors and
1,900 Marines. Aircraft normally carried by this class of ships
include a mix of Marine Corps helicopters and the Harrier attack
aircraft.
The United States maintains the largest and most capable amphibious
force in the world, and the Wasp-class ships are the largest
amphibious ships in the world. The lead ship USS Wasp was commissioned
in July 1989 in Norfolk, Va. Other ships in the class include USS
Essex (LHD 2) [
http://www.essex.navy.mil/, Sasebo, Japan, USS Kearsarge (LHD 3) [
http://www.kearsarge.navy.mil/, Norfolk, USS Boxer (LHD 4) [
http://www.boxer.navy.mil/, San Diego, USS Bataan (LHD 5) [
http://www.bataan.navy.mil/, Norfolk, USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD 6) [
http://www.lhd6.navy.mil/, San Diego, and USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7) [
http://www.iwo-jima.navy.mil/, Norfolk.
The Makin Island will be built at Northrop-Grumman Ship Systems in
Pascagoula, Miss, and is expected to be christened in 2006.
http://www.dod.mil/releases/2003/nr20030929-0488.html
---------------------------
Otis Willie
Associate Librarian
The American War Library
http://www.americanwarlibrary.com
Thomas Schoene
news:ifrjnv83fa0rj97bu...@4ax.com
> Navy Names New Amphibious Assault Ship Makin Island
>
> (EXCERPT) No. 713-03 IMMEDIATE RELEASE Sep 29, 2003
> (703)697-5131(media) (703)428-0711(public/industry)
>
> Navy Names New Amphibious Assault Ship Makin Island
>
> The U.S. Navy has selected the name Makin Island for its next
> amphibious assault ship, which honors the daring raid carried out by
> Marine Corps Companies A and B, Second Raider Battalion, on
> Japanese-held Makin Island, in the Gilbert Islands, Aug. 17-18, 1942.
YHGTBSM! They're naming an amphibious assault ship after an unsuccessful
and perhaps even counterproductive diversionary raid? Makin was not a high
point for the Marines Corps by any reanosable standard. Heck, Carlson tried
to surrender to a nearly non-existent enemy and the whole thing avoided
becoming a total fiasco only because he couldn't find any Japanese to
surrender to.
Even the Raiders don't have a whole lot positive to say about the Makin
raid.
http://www.usmarineraiders.org/makin.html
--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)
Ogden Johnson III
>> Navy Names New Amphibious Assault Ship Makin Island
>YHGTBSM! They're naming an amphibious assault ship after an unsuccessful
>and perhaps even counterproductive diversionary raid? Makin was not a high
>point for the Marines Corps by any reanosable standard. Heck, Carlson tried
>to surrender to a nearly non-existent enemy and the whole thing avoided
>becoming a total fiasco only because he couldn't find any Japanese to
>surrender to.
>
>Even the Raiders don't have a whole lot positive to say about the Makin
>raid.
>http://www.usmarineraiders.org/makin.html
Ahhhh. But *that* was yesterday, and today The Buzzword of the Day is
SpecOps. And by the ghods and at FDR's command, the Raiders were
created as the Marine's SpecOps forces in WWII. So I suspect the
Makin Island is the Navy's idea of a subtle way of saying "See guys,
we in the Naval Service been doin' this SpecOps stuff since long
before we created the SEALs. We and the Marines ain't no
Johnny-come-latelys on this stuff, nosireebob."
--
OJ III
[Email to Yahoo addy burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast]
Jeffrey Smidt
> "Otis Willie" <war...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:ifrjnv83fa0rj97bu...@4ax.com
> > Navy Names New Amphibious Assault Ship Makin Island
> >
> > (EXCERPT) No. 713-03 IMMEDIATE RELEASE Sep 29, 2003
> > (703)697-5131(media) (703)428-0711(public/industry)
> >
> > Navy Names New Amphibious Assault Ship Makin Island
> >
> > The U.S. Navy has selected the name Makin Island for its next
> > amphibious assault ship, which honors the daring raid carried out by
> > Marine Corps Companies A and B, Second Raider Battalion, on
> > Japanese-held Makin Island, in the Gilbert Islands, Aug. 17-18, 1942.
>
> YHGTBSM! They're naming an amphibious assault ship after an unsuccessful
> and perhaps even counterproductive diversionary raid? Makin was not a high
> point for the Marines Corps by any reanosable standard. Heck, Carlson tried
> to surrender to a nearly non-existent enemy and the whole thing avoided
> becoming a total fiasco only because he couldn't find any Japanese to
> surrender to.
>
> Even the Raiders don't have a whole lot positive to say about the Makin
> raid.
> http://www.usmarineraiders.org/makin.html
Well I don't think the problem was with the Raiders so much as with
Carlson himself. His approach was at best, untraditional. The
raiders themself did okay, but were more useful in traditional Marine
regiments. Shock troops weren't and still aren't all that effective
of a tool for the US. The raids could and probably would have been
just as successful from a regular battalion instead of trying to pull
the best out.
Andrew Toppan
<tasc...@earthlink.invalid> wrote:
>YHGTBSM! They're naming an amphibious assault ship after an unsuccessful
>and perhaps even counterproductive diversionary raid? Makin was not a high
I'm sure puzzled. The usual reason for silly naming is politics, but to
paraphrase Rickover, "Makin Island don't vote".
The press release talks about "transformational" (YIKES!) and "special
operations", but is SpecOps REALLY that important? Is there some sort of
internal SpecOps war going on, which requires the Marines to stake a claim in
this area?
--
Andrew Toppan --- acto...@gwi.net --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/
Arved Sandstrom
news:7bf1d707.03100...@posting.google.com...
SNIP ]
Well I don't think the problem was with the Raiders so much as with
> Carlson himself. His approach was at best, untraditional. The
> raiders themself did okay, but were more useful in traditional Marine
> regiments. Shock troops weren't and still aren't all that effective
> of a tool for the US. The raids could and probably would have been
> just as successful from a regular battalion instead of trying to pull
> the best out.
If I can quibble a bit, "shocktroops" simply refers to troops specially
trained and armed to lead an assault. It's more of an important distinction
for armies like the German Army of WW1 (to a lesser degree the German Army
of WW2) or the Russian Army of WW2. Any number of other examples. At least
with the modern USA and USMC I'd like to think that _all_ combat arms are
trained to lead assaults, so it is a term that is not so meaningful now.
Let's face it, modern armies don't observe a distinction between assault,
trench and fortress troops anymore.
AHS
Arved Sandstrom
news:f5umnvsshs924n7ps...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 02:07:28 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
> <tasc...@earthlink.invalid> wrote:
>
> >YHGTBSM! They're naming an amphibious assault ship after an unsuccessful
> >and perhaps even counterproductive diversionary raid? Makin was not a
high
>
> I'm sure puzzled. The usual reason for silly naming is politics, but to
> paraphrase Rickover, "Makin Island don't vote".
>
> The press release talks about "transformational" (YIKES!) and "special
> operations", but is SpecOps REALLY that important? Is there some sort of
> internal SpecOps war going on, which requires the Marines to stake a claim
in
> this area?
Sure (with reference to the internal war). Between the MEU (SOC)s, Force
Recon and regular recon, I'll be damned if I know what Detachment One (the
Marine unit under Special Operations Command) is going to do that the others
can't. So it's got to be mostly politics, with the USMC wanting to get a
symbolic presence in USSOCOM. Consider the MSPF(Maritime Special Purpose
Force) in each MEU (SOC) - how is that highly different from Detachment One?
AHS