Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Sailors Are Weapons Systems

The direct support element at NIOC Georgia is a nimble force that supports some of the most hostile areas in the world. "Our Sailors in themselves are weapons systems, and are the very best in their field, true information warriors," said Commander James H. Henderson-Coffey, NIOC Georgia operations officer.

As a nation, our policies demand the capability to operate on or below the world's waterways. In addition, our flexible military force requires highly specialized intelligence personnel to augment the seaborne assets within the Navy's fleet. Both of these capabilities are sustained in part by utilizing specially trained personnel such as those found within direct support elements located at Navy Information Operations Command Georgia.
The whole story is HERE.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Sailors as weapons systems. B.S. USMC always; SEALS always; Sailors hardly ever. The CDR has had too much Kool Aid.

Anonymous said...

The CDR's Sailors may very well operate weapons systems, but he is stretching even there...what weapons do his Sailors operate to cause what effects?

Anonymous said...

Gentlemen, gentlemen,

You are splitting hairs here. NMCI and other information systems are now part of the Navy weapons system arsenal. We have YNSN and ITSN operating weapons systems 24/7/365. And, they have the warfare insignia to prove it.

Anonymous said...

Designating something as a "weapon system" is a very specific action and means some very specific actions. Recommend ALCON do some research.

Anonymous said...

By God, the Commander said his Sailors are weapons systems. He wasn't just giving lip service to some foolish Navy theme. His Sailors are weapons systems and ALL Sailors are leaders and they are all our most important asset.

Anonymous said...

Johnny Sailor was out sick today. Better put out a CASREP on him. He was one of our best 240 weapons systems.

Anonymous said...

NMCI and other information systems are not weapons systems. Some of them may be connected in some support but certainly not weapons systems.

CAPTAIN Shawn Hendricks said...

Anon @ 1:11 PM

Beg to differ with you...

"The Navy Marine Corps Intranet is the largest WEAPONS SYSTEM in the world. It touches more Marines, Sailors and civilians each day than any other system in our arsenal. It accomplishes tasks as mundane as entering maintenance data following an engine change or building a PowerPoint presentation, to tasks as life changing as the issuance of orders into battle and, probably more importantly to many, the delivery of a picture of a newborn to a father many miles from home, or the news to a wife or father that their husband or daughter was safe following an aircraft mishap."

Anonymous said...

Captain Hendricks can't really believe that his NMCI network is a weapons system. I know why he is saying it but I don't believe that he even believes what he is saying.

LCDRLDO/6440 said...

In a broader context, weapons may be construed to include anything (trained and qualified IW Sailors for example) used to gain a strategic, material or mental advantage over an adversary. Think "left of bang".

Anonymous said...

With all due respect to Captain Hendricks, Commander Henderson and LCDRLDO/6440...
While I agree that DIRSUP Sailors are an integral part of our mission, to call them a "weapon system" is simply hyperbole. The Navy pays me a pretty fair wage to listen to and interpret communications, if I were to hear the word “Sailor” and report it as “Weapon System”, I’m pretty sure that would constitute a mischaracterization. This is not to disparage what we Information Dominance Warriors bring to the fight, but if we start broadening what it means to be a "weapon system" too wide, we will dilute the meaning of the phrase entirely. Are we to believe that it is a "weapon system" that tracks maintenance or delivers that newborn baby's picture? "Left of bang" is the right phrase for what we’re doing, but let’s leave the word “weapon” for the bang itself.

CTI1(IDW/SW), NIOC GA

Jack Napier said...

An inherent theme underpins the differences of opinion in the responses to the original post. At least superficially, our Navy has tacitly acknowledged the archaic nature of Unrestricted and Restricted areas of warfare. Unfortunately, this appears to be nothing but "lip service" since we have not yet put forth an honest effort to overcome the parochial constraints resisting the required changes to move forward and embrace the impact of a new warfare reality.

Simply stated - and sure to cause more disagreement - I believe that our Navy must accept the radical changes resulting from technology and inculcate the necessary structural reforms that have been talked about and advertised for the past few years. Specifically, numerous leaders have stated that technology has changed the battlespace (e.g. Cyber, Information Dominance, networks, etc...), but few have truly changed their approach to naval warfare in the 21st Century. This should not be too surprising since "ducks pick ducks" and few, if any, of our senior Navy leaders are willing to let go of their own pedigrees and personal community identities. Most seek to protect their individual heritage rather than see the harm this does to the Navy as a whole.

In my opinion, the creation of the Information Dominance Warfare qualification (for both officer and enlisted) has been nothing more than a superficial band-aid. In rather blunt terms, a select few senior personnel had device-envy and sought to assuage their wounded egos. If this were a true warfare device, then the US Navy leadership would have actually altered the Primary Mission Areas to align IDW alongside STW, AMW, ASW, ASuW, etc...

Standing by for heavy rolls and turbulent air...

Disclaimer: These are solely my opinions and are intended as "respectful dissent" (to paraphrase former Secretary of Defense Gates).