Starfleet Tactical Marine Corps

[Shamrock Holmes]

Despite the issue that the version of the "Operation Retrieve" chart used as evidence for the "Starfleet Marines" may actually be incorrect (more recent photos of the actual prop show the notion 'Effective Limit of Surface Containment Force Field' rather than 'Standby Ground Troops Starfleet Tactical Marine Corps Entry Point') there is a certain logic within limits to the 'error'.

Starfleet Tactical was introduced in dialogue as a unit/branch in Best of Both Worlds, this established that they were tasked with military R & D and in peach time with co-ordinating military/defense operations (or advising Starfleet Operations on same). Therefore it's not much of a stretch that they would have been involving in "Operation Retrieve". [NB it is possible indeed probable that they are descended from the TrekLit's Defense Service (Andorian Guard)]

We know that there is a Tactical Analysis Division (Shelby was likely assigned here prior to BoBW), so it reasonable to assume that they also have a number of field units, potentially including something called a "Marine Corps".

So I would suggest that the STMC is a corps (or potentially demi-division ala the Royal Marine Commandos)-sized rapid reaction/special operations force specifically tailored to polar/mountain warfare and referred to as the 'Marine Corps' because while army units can specialise in either desert warfare (as the similar unit from TFF likely did) or polar/mountain warfare, marines (especially the Royal Marine Commandos and the Dutch Korps Mariniers) tend to prioritise the latter, though most are certainly capable of engaging in desert warfare rather than a general purpose 'ship's security and boarding team' which IMO is better suited to HRT-style units drawn from Starfleet Security (cf USAF Security Forces with elements of RAF Regiment).

 

[Mysterion]

I would prefer that is was "Starfleet Tactical/Marine Corps" implying the two organizations in a joint operation. Properly, I would think it should by the United Federation Marine Corps". "Starfleet Tactical Marines" probably wouldn't any further than if you renamed the current guys the "US Navy Marine Corps". Go ahead, find a Marine and try it out and see how it works.

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

I would prefer that is was "Starfleet Tactical/Marine Corps" implying the two organizations in a joint operation. Properly, I would think it should by the United Federation Marine Corps". "Starfleet Tactical Marines" probably wouldn't any further than if you renamed the current guys the "US Navy Marine Corps". Go ahead, find a Marine and try it out and see how it works.

No, Starfleet Tactical and Marine Corps were definately intended to be one unit. The rank of their nominal commander (Colonel) might suggest a relatively small unit, perhaps more like DEVGRU (lead by a Navy Captain) or Delta Force (lead by an Army Colonel) within JSOC (a joined capabilties command lead by a Lt General/Vice Admiral) rather than the full Marine Corps of modern day (lead by Marine General), this would also fit with the idea that ST as a whole is lead by a Vice Admiral (Hansen was a 'three pipper' like Nechayev, Brand and Ross).

A larger, Marine Corps analogue may exist in the Starfleet Ground Forces although again, Lt Colonel is the highest specific rank given there, so we may be back to "small specialist unit" again. A larger United Federation of Planets Marine Corps* (or Federation Marine Corps) may exist, however per canon, Starfleet is a 'combined organisation' that by the nature of its activities must include tactical operations units (which the STMC would be part).

* It's Federation Starfleet (also Federation Security [Agency], Federation Diplomatic Corps etc) so the addition of United to the title would seem unlikely.

 

[Timo]

Why should we assume Colonel West would be the top man of this speculative organization? A secret meeting with the President need not involve the top dog, especially if there's a tight schedule there, as in this particular case.

Also, neither Hansen nor Leyton were identified as Starfleet top bosses - defending Earth may well be a specific job, or then just the job for the boss of the 3rd Fleet who, like other Fleet bosses, is a two- or three-pipper.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

I think it's reasonable to assume that Colonel West was either the 'top man' or at least the 'field commander' of the Starfleet Tactical unit that was going to be deployed to Rura Pente, and given that it was intended as a rescue mission, not an occupation I can't see any reason why the operation would require more than a reinforced brigade (perhaps broadly similar to the USMC MEB), which is a little big for a Marine Colonel (they usually command a smaller MEU) but perhaps a Starfleet Colonel (can be) more in line with a Commonwealth Brigadier depending on billet and seniority?.

The script and various TrekLit references (including the Encyclopedia) identify Leyton as Chief of Starfleet Operations (responsible for day-to-day operations within Starfleet) as Kirk was during TMP, which is fairly senior.

I agree that we can't necessarily assume that Hanson is the head of Starfleet Tactical (that's probably a 'four pip' billet) but IMO he's probably at least the Deputy Chief for R & D (either 2-i-C or at least equal in rank to them).

IRC some early script revisions (and the TUC novel) indicate that the character of "West" was originally intended as two characters, a senior Admiral/General (whose uniform West wore) and the 'junior' planning officer (who contributed most of West's dialogue), which would make a certain amount of sense as the Lt General would be the Deputy Chief (Polar/Maritime Operations) and "Commandant of Marines", whereas Colonel West would be a commander of the ground combat element within Task Force Retrieve.

 

[Longinus]

It is reasonable to assume Colonel West is not actually an colonel as he has normal Starfleet uniform and Vice Admiral rank insignia. Maybe 'colonel' is just his name or nickname. Besides, he doesn't necessarily even exist as his scene was deleted in the theatrical version and newer DVD and Blue ray versions. Personally I'd prefer if whole Starfleet/Federation Marines would not exist. I hated the MACOs in ENT and I really don't need militaristic stuff like that in my Star Trek.

 

[Tenacity]

and I really don't need militaristic stuff like that in my Star Trek.

How do you feel about the frequent use of phasers (both hand held and ship mounted) and torpedoes we see from Starfleet?

 

[Timo]

Indeed, wouldn't Marines or the like actually bring back exploration to Star Trek, what with walking tall among aliens, visiting new worlds and directly interacting with new civilizations - as opposed to some sailor hailing these spatial wonders via a viewscreen?

I think it's reasonable to assume that Colonel West was either the 'top man' or at least the 'field commander' of the Starfleet Tactical unit that was going to be deployed to Rura Pente

Possibly. But that wouldn't yet place him all that high in the command of the organization conducting the mission, unless we assume the best the organization can ever hope to do is raids like this one, and not even two at the same time. That is, Major Hayes wouldn't command all of MACO, just the team deployed on NX-01, and Colonel West wouldn't command all of whatever branch of Starfleet we're talking about, at most just the Rura Penthe strike force.

The script and various TrekLit references (including the Encyclopedia) identify Leyton as Chief of Starfleet Operations (responsible for day-to-day operations within Starfleet) as Kirk was during TMP, which is fairly senior.

But since Kirk was fairly junior, this probably isn't true in Starfleet...

Leyton seemed to have a lot of clout near Earth, but there's little need for him to have more than that, wider than that. Having just his beck-and-call starship and no others near Earth isn't exceptional or calling for orders from SF COps as far as we can tell.

I agree that we can't necessarily assume that Hanson is the head of Starfleet Tactical (that's probably a 'four pip' billet) but IMO he's probably at least the Deputy Chief for R & D (either 2-i-C or at least equal in rank to them).

We can't necessarily assume he's got anything to do with SF Tactical, really. Perhaps SFT has just sent their employee Shelby to liaison with the fighting arm of Starfleet, in this case represented by 3rd Fleet boss Hanson.

But "BoBW" is easier reading if we assign Hanson to SFT. Which really sounds more like DARPA than USMC here, what with the big emphasis on R&D.

[/quote]IRC some early script revisions (and the TUC novel) indicate that the character of "West" was originally intended as two characters, a senior Admiral/General (whose uniform West wore) and the 'junior' planning officer (who contributed most of West's dialogue), which would make a certain amount of sense as the Lt General would be the Deputy Chief (Polar/Maritime Operations) and "Commandant of Marines", whereas Colonel West would be a commander of the ground combat element within Task Force Retrieve.[/QUOTE]

As matters stand, it sounds as if a man named Cornell West is an Admiral, or as if a spook named West thinks himself awfully clever for misusing a uniform, Jack Ryan style...

Would either of the above two characters actually take part in the raid? Wouldn't that ship already literally have sailed, to be those "thousand lightyears away" in case the President raised a thumb?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Longinus]

How do you feel about the frequent use of phasers (both hand held and ship mounted) and torpedoes we see from Starfleet?

Depends. I dislike overemphasising military stuff in Trek but that doesn't mean that there can't be any combat ever (TWOK is obviously great even though there's quite a bit of fighting, but I really didn't care for the Dominion war or Xindi war stories for example.) My main point is that I prefer Starfleet to be mainly an exploration force with some military duties. Marines' whole point is that they're soldiers first and foremost, so they don't fit in that picture.

 

[Timo]

But that's also the Navy's whole point. Until and unless we put a Star Trek twist to it, which is easily done, as Star Trek stands proof. And it's not as if the US Cavalry or the Royal Navy haven't been put through similar spin for some pretty enjoyable essentially nonmilitary adventures in the past century.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

I'm going to split my response here into two parts for clarity as it discusses two related issues but is quite long:

But that wouldn't yet place him all that high in the command of the organization conducting the mission, unless we assume the best the organization can ever hope to do is raids like this one, and not even two at the same time. That is, Major Hayes wouldn't command all of MACO, just the team deployed on NX-01, and Colonel West wouldn't command all of whatever branch of Starfleet we're talking about, at most just the Rura Penthe strike force.

A USMC Marine Expeditionary Brigade includes Regimental Combat Team (commanded by a Colonel) with a total of 4,500 to 5,000 personnel, which is a regiment or demi-brigade but roughly equivalent to the fighting strength of the Royal Marines (the Commandant General of the RM is a Major General due to also being the Commander UK Amphibous Forces, his deputies are Brigadiers).

Do you see the ground element of the Rura Pente Strike Force needing to be bigger than that?

But since Kirk was fairly junior, this probably isn't true in Starfleet...

Leyton seemed to have a lot of clout near Earth, but there's little need for him to have more than that, wider than that. Having just his beck-and-call starship and no others near Earth isn't exceptional or calling for orders from SF COps as far as we can tell.

I think that Leyton (and Kirk) certainly sector commanders, possibly COpsCore, but the limited starship resources available would on reflection suggest that they (particularly Kirk) aren't the 'big cheese'.

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

Second part:

We can't necessarily assume he's got anything to do with SF Tactical, really. Perhaps SFT has just sent their employee Shelby to liaison with the fighting arm of Starfleet, in this case represented by 3rd Fleet boss Hanson.

But "BoBW" is easier reading if we assign Hanson to SFT. Which really sounds more like DARPA than USMC here, what with the big emphasis on R&D.

Actually, it's fairly safe to say that Hanson is at least a ranking member of Starfleet Tactical.

Captain's log, Stardate 43992.6. Admiral Hanson and Lieutenant Commander Shelby of Starfleet Tactical have arrived to review the disappearance of New Providence colony. No sign remains of the nine hundred inhabitants.

[Ready room]

HANSON: The truth is, hell, we are not ready. We've known they were coming for over a year. We've thrown every resource we have into this, but still
RIKER: Then you're convinced it is the Borg?
SHELBY: (blonde woman) That's what I'm here to find out. The initial descriptions of these surface conditions are almost identical to your reports from system J two five.
PICARD: Commander Riker wrote those reports. He agrees with you.
HANSON: Commander Shelby took over Borg tactical analysis six months ago. I've learned to give her a wide latitude when I want to get things done. That's how I intend to operate here.
SHELBY: My priority has been to develop some kind, any kind of defence strategy
RIKER: Obviously nothing we have now can stop them.
SHELBY: We've been designing new weapons but they're all still on the drawing board.
HANSON: We expected much more lead time. Your encounter with the Borg was over seven thousand light years away.
PICARD: If this is the Borg, it would indicate they have a source of power far superior to our own.
SHELBY: I'd like to see the colony site as soon as possible, Captain.
RIKER: It'll be dark there in thirty minutes. We've scheduled an away team for dawn.
PICARD: Number One, why don't you show the Commander to her quarters?
RIKER: It's our poker night, Admiral. There's always an open seat for you.
HANSON: Another time, Commander. Your captain and I have a lot to cover. But rumour has it Commander Shelby's played a hand or two.
(Riker and Shelby leave)
HANSON: Keep your eye on her, Jean Luc. She's one very impressive young lady.
PICARD: You seem rather taken with her, JP.
HANSON: Just an old man's fantasies. When Shelby came into Tactical, every admiral's uncle had a take on this Borg business. She cut through it. She put us on track.

Hanson could be referring to Starfleet in general as "us" (that Shelby of ST put "on track") but the rest of the dialogue supports the idea that he is her line manager.

Starfleet probably has millions of "soldiers" that they can call on during a state of war, but in keeping with the official line that they "not a military" I'm assuming that their "tactical teams" are configured for high-speed rescue operations and "behind enemy lines" recon which would lend itself to a larger number of medium-sized units flagged for different purposes rather than one monolithic "fighting force" (Starfleet Tactical would therefore be a hybrid of DARPA, MARSOC/Special Forces, DoE NEST, FBI HRT, USCG DOG, CIA SAD and potentially even the CDC's Outbreak Response Team (in combination with SMed)) with a regiment to brigade-sized unit assigned to each at HQ level and smaller, perhaps company or battlion-sized units positioned at strategic locations throughout the Federation.

 

[Longinus]

Actually, it's fairly safe to say that Hanson is at least a ranking member of Starfleet Tactical.

Sure, but 'Starfleet Tactical' is probably just a department of Starfleet that devises tactics. It's like those guys in Pentagon who devise plans in case Canada attacks and whatnot. It has nothing to do with any Marines (which probably do not exist.)

 

[J.T.B.]

My main point is that I prefer Starfleet to be mainly an exploration force with some military duties. Marines' whole point is that they're soldiers first and foremost, so they don't fit in that picture.

Well, for most of their history, marines were just a small security force for navies, which could in come in useful for exploration. TOS security seems to fill a similar role; I don't really see much need for a "separate" Starfleet marine force.

 

[Longinus]

Well, for most of their history, marines were just a small security force for navies, which could in come in useful for exploration. TOS security seems to fill a similar role; I don't really see much need for a "separate" Starfleet marine force.

Yes, agreed. The redshirts already got this covered.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Redshirts - the ones we're used to seeing from TOS - are a strictly starship-based force. They are security guards onboard ship, nothing more.

It is reasonable to assume Colonel West is not actually an colonel as he has normal Starfleet uniform and Vice Admiral rank insignia.

I always assumed Colonel West "should" have gotten a unique uniform - the only reason he didn't, was because the costume designers knew they would never use it again. Why go through all that trouble to design a uniform that would only be used once?

Starfleet does have dedicated ground troops - we've all seen (and heard of) them. Whether or not they are called Marines, has not been definitely established. Personally, I like the term "Starfleet Marine Corps" - it just seems the most efficient.

But it seems clear that, whatever Starfleet's ground troops are called, they ARE a unique division. You can't just take any random starship personnel and put them on the front lines whenever you feel like it - there must always be specialization.

 

[Longinus]

Redshirts - the ones we're used to seeing from TOS - are a strictly starship-based force. They are security guards onboard ship, nothing more.

Those specific redshirts certainly were. But it doesn't follow that if ground forces were required they would be from different organisation or branch. We saw Starfleet ground installations manned by similar personnel.

Starfleet does have dedicated ground troops - we've all seen (and heard of) them. Whether or not they are called Marines, has not been definitely established. Personally, I like the term "Starfleet Marine Corps" - it just seems the most efficient.

But it seems clear that, whatever Starfleet's ground troops are called, they ARE a unique division. You can't just take any random starship personnel and put them on the front lines whenever you feel like it - there must always be specialization.

Why? We certainly have seen Starfleet personnel fighting on ground, doesn't mean they're part of some unique division. Besides, unlike DS9s highly implausible depictions of 24th century ground warfare might lead one to believe, given the technology large scale ground combat would be highly unlikely. Establishing space and air superiority would get 99% of the job done in most cases. Besides, even in DS9 those ground forces seemed to be regular SF personnel.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

large scale ground combat would be highly unlikely. Establishing space and air superiority would get 99% of the job done in most cases.

If you're looking to destroy a planet, I might agree. However if you want to take and hold a planet for later occupation, ground forces are a necessity.

 

[Longinus]

If you're looking to destroy a planet, I might agree. However if you want to take and hold a planet for later occupation, ground forces are a necessity.

Some ground forces yes, but considering that you can stun phaser large areas from orbit there is really not gonna be large scale ground wars. Besides, the Federation does not conquer planets to begin with.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Some ground forces yes, but considering that you can stun phaser large areas from orbit there is really not gonna be large scale ground wars.

Any weaponry that can be laid down from orbit (or from anywhere else), can be defeated by a suitably armored and intelligent ground force. Hell, even transporters can be inhibited. Whatever weapons a naval fleet can bring to bear against an enemy, can be countered. And those countermeasures can themselves be countered. It's a never ending battle.

And besides, ground troops have other uses besides simple warfare. Engineering, field medicine, disaster relief, etc.

Let's put it another way: Going by your logic, why do we even still have ground combat today? Why not just drop a nuke on whatever country you want to defeat? There's a multitude of reasons why you wouldn't want to do that. Same story here.

Besides, the Federation does not conquer planets to begin with.

I didn't say "conquer", did I?