Did you miss the part where I noted that I was in the Navy, too? I was on active duty for more than ten years. My service time included teaching at the Naval Academy Prep School, which has students who are enlisted in the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Marine Corps, the U.S. Coast Guard, as well as candidates for the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. I’m well aware of the relationship between the various sea services.
That being said, I’ve NEVER heard anyone in the Navy or Marine Corps who espoused a notion like “there is a very fine, and sometimes indiscriminate line between what a sailor is, and what a marine is.” I would doubt that someone who stated such a thing ever served a day in either service.
You might note, too that a term often used to emphasize the close relationship between the USN and USMC is the “Navy/Marine Corps team.” We also have the “Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal.” In both of these examples, notice that it is the Navy AND the Marine Corps, two co-equal services.
Please see the title of the thread: What is the relationship of the Marines to the Navy?
In the context of the United States, and the United States alone, the Department of the Navy provides marines who attacks the land from the sea. The Department of the Navy also provides the fleet who get the marines from the sea to the land.
Not understanding the very fine line between what makes a marine and what makes a sailor represents a lack of historical context. Here I will clearly define them for you. All definitions are from the Oxford English Dictionary.
A Marine is:
[ul]
[li]1575: A sailor or mariner.[/li][li]1669:In the governments of certain countries (originally and chiefly France): a department which administers the navy[/li][li]1806: Naut. slang. An incompetent seaman.[/li][li]1829: The collective shipping, fleet, navy, or naval service of a country; seagoing vessels collectively, esp. with reference to nationality or class, as in mercantile marine (now hist.) or merchant marine.[/li][/ul]
I said earlier that if it were the Department of the Marines it would be a qualitative difference, chiefly because this is the case in some foreign countries, but not the USA.
A Mariner is:
[ul]
[li]1300: A person who navigates or assists in navigating a ship; a sailor. In Law, more generally: any person employed on a ship. Also in extended use.[/li][li]1450: A fighting man on board ship; a marine.[/li][/ul]
A Sailor is:
[ul]
[li]1585: One who is professionally occupied with navigation; a seaman, mariner. Also, in narrower sense, applied (like ‘seaman’) to a member of a ship’s company below the rank of officer.[/li][/ul]
Your last sentance doesn’t make any sense. I was a Sailor and have several friends who were Marines. There is a huge very large bold line as to what a Sailor or a Marine is in terms of history, training, mission and day to day responsibilities and duties.
The composition of the Navy and the Marine Corps is not a matter of tradition. It is governed by U.S. law. There is a specific answer to the question under U.S. law. If Admiral Nimitiz himself were to rise from his grave and give a different answer, he would be wrong.
“The Navy” refers to the United States Navy, not the Department of the Navy. It does not include the United States Marine Corps. CITE.
The Department of the Navy is separately organized under the Secretary of the Navy. CITE.
The Department of the Navy is headed by a civilian, not a member of the Armed Forces. CITE.
The United States Navy, or simply “Navy” is an autonomous uniformed military organization within the Department of the Navy. There is a specific law in the U.S. Code regarding the composition of the Navy. There is no Marine Corps within the United States Navy. CITE.
The United States Marine Corps is an autonomous uniformed military organization within the Department of the Navy. There is a specific law in the U.S. Code regarding the composition of the United States Marine Corps. It is not a part of the United States Navy, or simply, “the Navy.” CITE.
I happen to be a retired Sailor. I also am fully capable, as I have evidenced in this very thread, of reading and correctly describing the organizational relationships of two different uniformed services.
You mean we had all this brouhaha because fully-capable analyzers of organizational relationships were unable to realize that the phrase “Department of the Navy” contains people who are enlisted and comissioned in naval service, which means they are part of this country’s naval force, heretofore known as our Navy?
What part of the word “Navy” in “Department of the Navy” do you not understand? If, as pravnik has shown us, “Navy” refers to the “United States Navy” then there are two logical possibilities:
[ol]
[li]The “Department of the Navy” should be expanded to the “Department of the United States Navy”[/li][li]The “Department of the Navy” is our country’s Navy and utilizes the more commonly known, historical, and traditional form of the word[/li][/ol]
The Marine Corps is part of this country’s “naval” services, however you want to say it. Isn’t indirect self-reference grand?
BTW, as the author of the OP I think I do understand now their relationship, regardless of the (apparently) samantic exercise going on here. Thanks to everybody.
If the Marine Corps were part of the Navy, that means your ordinary leatherneck could potentially rise in the ranks to command a ship. Would that ever happen?
The Navy[sub]1[/sub] and Marine Corps are part of the Department of the Navy[sub]2[/sub]. The Navy[sub]1[/sub] and Marine Corps are two distinct naval services. Naval means “belonging to or used in a Navy[sub]2[/sub]”. The Marine Corps are part of the Navy[sub]2[/sub]. Please, please, get this.
As a general rule of construction, when the U.S. Code has specific definitions that conflict with one’s reading of the dictionary, the U.S. Code takes precedence.
You both wonderfully did not address my post. If you want the expansion of the definition of Navy to take place, then “Department of the Navy” becomes “Department of the United States Navy”. I don’t think you want it to mean that - I think you want it to mean exactly what it does mean - that the United States Navy and United States Marines are two distinct naval services in the United States, and that our naval services comprise our country’s Navy[sub]2[/sub]. You can pretend that “naval service” doesn’t mean Navy, but that is clearly disingenuous.
As a general rule of legal construction, when the U.S. Code has specific definitions that conflict with one’s reading of the dictionary, the U.S. Code takes precedence.
I am now walking away from this post with the knowledge that there are people on the Straight Dope Message Board, which is here to fight ignorance, who are content with the belief that the two uniformed services which comprise the “Department of the `Navy’”, and for which they will admit make up the “naval services” or what have you, honestly believe that one of those services is not part of this country’s “Navy”, and I am scratching my head in disbelief, for that is truly ignorant.
BTW, this is one of the most bizarre posts I’ve ever seen in GQ. Do you seriously think anybody is arguing for recursive evaluation of the phrase, “Department of the Navy?” That’s nuttier than a big can of mixed nuts. “Department of the Navy” and “The Navy” are two entirely unrelated proper nouns.