Forgive me if my question sounds naive (I know very little about the military anyways 
), but what exactly is the difference between the United States Navy and the United States Marines? According to their names, they both are on water at some point or another. So how does one function differently from the other that there has to be two of them?
Thank you in advance to all who reply
I will start with the obvious answer before the hundreds of years of details start coming. The Marines are part of the Navy. The tradition is that they are the ground force that lands via the Navy ships and takes land via that route. The actual Navy is concerned with fighting via the ships themselves. The reality today is a little different in that the Marines are often used as a primary ground fighting force in ways that have little to do with the Navy. The Marines share this role with the Army although the Marines like to bill themselves as the elite ground fighting force and some of them tend to get put in the most precarious ground fighting situations out of all military personnel.
At the most basic level, the Marines are amphibious assault troops and the Navy’s job is to control the seas and project our forces to wherever necessary in the event of a threat to U.S. interests.
US Navy
US Marine Corps.
And, I know you didn’t ask, but…
US Coast Guard (it ain’t what you think)
This emphasis on seapower should not seem strange. Americans view the Atlantic & Pacific Oceans, correctly, as defensive barriers.
Until recently, the United States Marine Corps actually was part of the United States Navy. Now, however, they are a separate service, although both services are part of the Navy Department, itself part of the Department of Defense.
To address the OP’s question: Essentially, it’s a difference in mission as mentioned above.
hmmm
Everyone, so far, skipped the historical aspect.
Back in the days of sail, the marines were the “soldiers” who were carried on naval ships to perform fighting without being involved in the sailing of the ship. During a sea battle, marines usually went into the rigging to fire down on the decks of the opposing ship and/or were used as boarding parties. When a ship (or squadron) needed to put a force ashore to assault fortresses, protect dignitaries, or hold territory that had surrendered in the face of the naval guns, the marines were the unit assigned to that duty. (Note that the USMC is not the only force of marines in the world: most navies have them and the Royal Marines have an honorable tradition of serving with Britain’s Royal Navy.)
In the U.S., as “gunboat diplomacy” became an active extension of U.S. power overseas, the Marines were given increasingly greater roles in those activities. (Why send the Army down to work with the Navy when you already have a land force under the control of the Navy?) By the time of WWI, the U.S. Marines were already being used for more than simple landing party activity and between WWI and WWII, they developed their own large-scale assault tactics that were used with great effectiveness (with a concurrent increase in size) during WWII. (In contrast, the Royal Marines, while maintaining their role as a highly effective strike force, never developed into their own army.) Following WWII, no one saw a need to eliminate the “amphibious army” aspect of their role, and they have continued as an increasingly independent force ever since.
That’s probably because they never developed enough of a separatist, elite culture – however high their esprit de corps. After the USMC nearly got eliminated after Korea, they determined never to let that happen again – basically by changing their training-and-doctrine tradition into something close to a warrior cult.
In reference to the above, please recall–South & Central American nations tend to keep their Capitols away from the ocean. The Marine Corps is rumored to be the reason why.
The Marines also had some luck along the way. They did not always enjoy the special status they have today. During the Civil War their role was insignificant. During World War I, the Marines fought as regular infantry alongside the Army. In the 1920’s, there was an increasing sense that the Marine Corps was a relic of the era of sailing ships and was no longer necessary. There was a growing movement to disband the Corps as a seperate service and turn most of its mission over to the Army and Navy. The leadership of the Marine Corps decided they needed to find a unique mission that was relevant to modern warfare - the one they decided on was to develop a force capable of amphibiously assaulting a fortified island or coastline. (Most past amphibious “attacks” had relied upon finding an undefended area to disembark on and then fighting in conventional fashion.) Throughout the 1930’s, the USMC developed this new type of warfare. And then in 1941, the United States entered a war that, because of the geography involved, was fought as a series of amphibious assaults.
I’m not sure what you mean by “recently,” Monty, but the USMC has been a separate service and not a part the USN (though both services are part of the Department of the Navy, as you state) since at least 1947.
Here is a basic organizational chart for the DoD:
That link is a PDF, but it’s only one page.
By separate service, I meant “not part of the US Navy.” Yes, as of 1947 it was its own service, but still under the US Navy. Now, it’s a part of the Department of the Navy, not part of the Navy as it had been in the past.
Maybe 1947 is recent in my memory. :slaps self:
More likely a cost issue, the Navy is having a hard enough time keeping an air arm, never mind having a spin off army of its own.
I also read that back in the eighteenth and nineteenth century marines were housed in the ships in such a way as to separate the officers from the rest of the crew. This was because many of the crew were pressed men who really didn’t want to be there, and would have harmed the officers if they could have got their hands on them.
Previous thread/shitstorm on the subject:
I would think they are still housed in this manner. Not because the enlisted will kill them, but because they get certain perks. One of which is better pay and billettng. (Okay that’s two)
The Marines also guard the White House.
Which leads to an interesting point (pure conjecture from here on): throughout history, various empires have employed highly trained military forces (often infantry) seperate from their regular army, with closer ties to the center of power. Unlike other units, which were often territorial or feudal, these were directly loyal to the ruler. These served as royal bodyguards, as elite strike forces, and occasionally, a way for the ruler to keep an eye on his generals. The Persians had the Immortals; the Macedonians had the Sacred Band; the Romans had the Praetorians; the Byzantines had the Varangians; the Egyptian Caliphs had the Mameluks; the Ottomans had the Jannissaries; the British have the various Guard units. Might the Marines fill a similar role?
Hmmm…And I thought the only difference was that one taught you not to piss on your hands.
-d&r-