Criteria The Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal may be awarded to service members who, while serving in any capacity with the Navy or Marine Corps, distinguish themselves by heroism, outstanding achievem... The Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal may be awarded to service members who, while serving in any capacity with the Navy or Marine Corps, distinguish themselves by heroism, outstanding achievement or meritorious service (but not of sufficient nature to warrant a higher decoration). MoreHide
Criteria The Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces in the grades of lieutenant commander (or major) and below. It is awarded for meritorious service or achieveme... The Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces in the grades of lieutenant commander (or major) and below. It is awarded for meritorious service or achievement in either combat or noncombat based on sustained performance or specific achievement of a superlative nature but which does not warrant a Navy Commendation Medal or higher. It may not be awarded for service involving participation in aerial flight after January 1, 1969. MoreHide
Criteria The Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces in the grades of lieutenant commander (or major) and below. It is awarded for meritorious service or achieveme... The Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces in the grades of lieutenant commander (or major) and below. It is awarded for meritorious service or achievement in either combat or noncombat based on sustained performance or specific achievement of a superlative nature but which does not warrant a Navy Commendation Medal or higher. It may not be awarded for service involving participation in aerial flight after January 1, 1969. MoreHide
Criteria The Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces in the grades of lieutenant commander (or major) and below. It is awarded for meritorious service or achieveme... The Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces in the grades of lieutenant commander (or major) and below. It is awarded for meritorious service or achievement in either combat or noncombat based on sustained performance or specific achievement of a superlative nature but which does not warrant a Navy Commendation Medal or higher. It may not be awarded for service involving participation in aerial flight after January 1, 1969. MoreHide
Criteria The Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces in the grades of lieutenant commander (or major) and below. It is awarded for meritorious service or achieveme... The Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces in the grades of lieutenant commander (or major) and below. It is awarded for meritorious service or achievement in either combat or noncombat based on sustained performance or specific achievement of a superlative nature but which does not warrant a Navy Commendation Medal or higher. It may not be awarded for service involving participation in aerial flight after January 1, 1969. MoreHide
Criteria The Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces in the grades of lieutenant commander (or major) and below. It is awarded for meritorious service or achieveme... The Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces in the grades of lieutenant commander (or major) and below. It is awarded for meritorious service or achievement in either combat or noncombat based on sustained performance or specific achievement of a superlative nature but which does not warrant a Navy Commendation Medal or higher. It may not be awarded for service involving participation in aerial flight after January 1, 1969. MoreHide
Criteria The Joint Meritorious Unit Award is presented in the name of the Secretary of Defense to Joint Activities of the Department of Defense for meritorious achievement or service, superior to that which is... The Joint Meritorious Unit Award is presented in the name of the Secretary of Defense to Joint Activities of the Department of Defense for meritorious achievement or service, superior to that which is normally expected, under one of the following conditions: During action in combat with an armed enemy of the United States, For a declared national emergency or Under extraordinary circumstances that involve the national interest. MoreHide
Criteria The Navy Unit Commendation may be awarded by the Secretary of the Navy to any unit of the Navy or Marine Corps that distinguishes itself by outstanding heroism in action against an enemy (but not suff... The Navy Unit Commendation may be awarded by the Secretary of the Navy to any unit of the Navy or Marine Corps that distinguishes itself by outstanding heroism in action against an enemy (but not sufficiently to justify the award of the Presidential Unit Citation). It may also be awarded to a unit that distinguishes itself by extremely meritorious service not involving combat (but in support of military operations), which renders that unit outstanding when compared to other units performing similar service. MoreHide
Criteria The Navy Good Conduct Medal (NGCM) is a decoration presented by the United States Navy to recognize members who have completed three years of honorable service. Medals awarded before January 1, 1996 r... The Navy Good Conduct Medal (NGCM) is a decoration presented by the United States Navy to recognize members who have completed three years of honorable service. Medals awarded before January 1, 1996 required four years of service. MoreHide
Criteria The Navy Good Conduct Medal (NGCM) is a decoration presented by the United States Navy to recognize members who have completed three years of honorable service. Medals awarded before January 1, 1996 r... The Navy Good Conduct Medal (NGCM) is a decoration presented by the United States Navy to recognize members who have completed three years of honorable service. Medals awarded before January 1, 1996 required four years of service. MoreHide
Criteria The Navy Good Conduct Medal (NGCM) is a decoration presented by the United States Navy to recognize members who have completed three years of honorable service. Medals awarded before January 1, 1996 r... The Navy Good Conduct Medal (NGCM) is a decoration presented by the United States Navy to recognize members who have completed three years of honorable service. Medals awarded before January 1, 1996 required four years of service. MoreHide
Criteria The Navy Good Conduct Medal (NGCM) is a decoration presented by the United States Navy to recognize members who have completed three years of honorable service. Medals awarded before January 1, 1996 r... The Navy Good Conduct Medal (NGCM) is a decoration presented by the United States Navy to recognize members who have completed three years of honorable service. Medals awarded before January 1, 1996 required four years of service. MoreHide
Criteria The Navy Good Conduct Medal (NGCM) is a decoration presented by the United States Navy to recognize members who have completed three years of honorable service. Medals awarded before January 1, 1996 r... The Navy Good Conduct Medal (NGCM) is a decoration presented by the United States Navy to recognize members who have completed three years of honorable service. Medals awarded before January 1, 1996 required four years of service. MoreHide
Criteria The National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service as a member of the Armed Forces during the Korean War, Vietnam War, the war against Iraq in the Persian Gulf, and for service... The National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service as a member of the Armed Forces during the Korean War, Vietnam War, the war against Iraq in the Persian Gulf, and for service during the current War on Terrorism. In addition, all members of the National Guard and Reserve who were part of the Selected Reserve in good standing between August 2, 1990, to November 30, 1995, are eligible for the National Defense Service Medal. In the case of Navy personnel, Midshipment attending the Naval Academy during the qualifying periods are eligible for this award, and Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps (NROTC) Midshipmen ae only eligible if they participated in a summer cruise that was in an area which qualified for a campaign medal. MoreHide
Criteria The Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal is awarded to members of the Armed Forces who, after July 1, 1958, participate in specified United States operations or those in direct support of the United Natio... The Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal is awarded to members of the Armed Forces who, after July 1, 1958, participate in specified United States operations or those in direct support of the United Nations or friendly foreign nations MoreHide
Criteria Individuals authorized the award of this medal must have participated in or served in support of Global War on Terrorism operations on or after September 11, 2001 and to a future date to be determined... Individuals authorized the award of this medal must have participated in or served in support of Global War on Terrorism operations on or after September 11, 2001 and to a future date to be determined. MoreHide
Criteria The Humanitarian Service Medal is an individual award, presented to individuals who are physically present at the site of immediate relief and who directly contribute to and influence the humanitarian... The Humanitarian Service Medal is an individual award, presented to individuals who are physically present at the site of immediate relief and who directly contribute to and influence the humanitarian action. The Humanitarian Service Medal is only awarded for service during the identified "period of immediate relief;" eligibility for the Humanitarian Service Medal terminates once (if) the humanitarian action evolves into an "established ongoing operation beyond the initial emergency condition." MoreHide
Criteria The Sea Service Deployment Ribbon is awarded to members of the Navy and Marine Corps assigned to U.S. homeported (including Hawaii and Alaska) ships, deploying units, or Fleet Marine Force commands, f... The Sea Service Deployment Ribbon is awarded to members of the Navy and Marine Corps assigned to U.S. homeported (including Hawaii and Alaska) ships, deploying units, or Fleet Marine Force commands, for 12 months accumulated sea duty, or for duty with the Fleet Marine Force that includes at least one deployment of 90 consecutive days. MoreHide
Criteria The Sea Service Deployment Ribbon is awarded to members of the Navy and Marine Corps assigned to U.S. homeported (including Hawaii and Alaska) ships, deploying units, or Fleet Marine Force commands, f... The Sea Service Deployment Ribbon is awarded to members of the Navy and Marine Corps assigned to U.S. homeported (including Hawaii and Alaska) ships, deploying units, or Fleet Marine Force commands, for 12 months accumulated sea duty, or for duty with the Fleet Marine Force that includes at least one deployment of 90 consecutive days. MoreHide
Criteria The Sea Service Deployment Ribbon is awarded to members of the Navy and Marine Corps assigned to U.S. homeported (including Hawaii and Alaska) ships, deploying units, or Fleet Marine Force commands, f... The Sea Service Deployment Ribbon is awarded to members of the Navy and Marine Corps assigned to U.S. homeported (including Hawaii and Alaska) ships, deploying units, or Fleet Marine Force commands, for 12 months accumulated sea duty, or for duty with the Fleet Marine Force that includes at least one deployment of 90 consecutive days. MoreHide
Criteria The Sea Service Deployment Ribbon is awarded to members of the Navy and Marine Corps assigned to U.S. homeported (including Hawaii and Alaska) ships, deploying units, or Fleet Marine Force commands, f... The Sea Service Deployment Ribbon is awarded to members of the Navy and Marine Corps assigned to U.S. homeported (including Hawaii and Alaska) ships, deploying units, or Fleet Marine Force commands, for 12 months accumulated sea duty, or for duty with the Fleet Marine Force that includes at least one deployment of 90 consecutive days. MoreHide
Criteria The Sea Service Deployment Ribbon is awarded to members of the Navy and Marine Corps assigned to U.S. homeported (including Hawaii and Alaska) ships, deploying units, or Fleet Marine Force commands, f... The Sea Service Deployment Ribbon is awarded to members of the Navy and Marine Corps assigned to U.S. homeported (including Hawaii and Alaska) ships, deploying units, or Fleet Marine Force commands, for 12 months accumulated sea duty, or for duty with the Fleet Marine Force that includes at least one deployment of 90 consecutive days. MoreHide
Criteria Awarded for active duty, Selected Reserve, or any combination of active or Selected Reserve service after 15 August 1974 aboard a Naval Reserve Ship or its Reserve unit or an embarked active or Reserv... Awarded for active duty, Selected Reserve, or any combination of active or Selected Reserve service after 15 August 1974 aboard a Naval Reserve Ship or its Reserve unit or an embarked active or Reserve staff, for a cumulative total of 24 months. MoreHide
Criteria The U.S. Navy has issued two marksmanship ribbons: the Navy Pistol Marksmanship Ribbon and Navy Rifle Marksmanship Ribbon, since 1920. The pistol ribbon is currently awarded for qualification on the B... The U.S. Navy has issued two marksmanship ribbons: the Navy Pistol Marksmanship Ribbon and Navy Rifle Marksmanship Ribbon, since 1920. The pistol ribbon is currently awarded for qualification on the Beretta 9mm pistol, while the rifle ribbon is currently awarded for qualification on the M14 and M16 assault rifle variants. The Navy issues the marksmanship ribbon in three levels, that of Marksman, Sharpshooter, and Expert. The basic ribbon is awarded for the Marksman level while the specific Marksmanship Device is awarded for qualification as a Sharpshooter or Expert. Those receiving an Expert qualification receive the Marksmanship Medal, in addition to the Marksmanship Ribbon. MoreHide
Criteria The U.S. Navy has issued two marksmanship ribbons: the Navy Pistol Marksmanship Ribbon and Navy Rifle Marksmanship Ribbon, since 1920. The pistol ribbon is currently awarded for qualification on the B... The U.S. Navy has issued two marksmanship ribbons: the Navy Pistol Marksmanship Ribbon and Navy Rifle Marksmanship Ribbon, since 1920. The pistol ribbon is currently awarded for qualification on the Beretta 9mm pistol, while the rifle ribbon is currently awarded for qualification on the M14 and M16 assault rifle variants. The Navy issues the marksmanship ribbon in three levels, that of Marksman, Sharpshooter, and Expert. The basic ribbon is awarded for the Marksman level while the specific Marksmanship Device is awarded for qualification as a Sharpshooter or Expert. Those receiving an Expert qualification receive the Marksmanship Medal, in addition to the Marksmanship Ribbon. MoreHide
Description Operation Northern Watch (ONW), the successor to Operation Provide Comfort, was a Combined Task Force (CTF) charged with enforcing its own no-fly zone above the 36th parallel in Iraq. Its mission begaOperation Northern Watch (ONW), the successor to Operation Provide Comfort, was a Combined Task Force (CTF) charged with enforcing its own no-fly zone above the 36th parallel in Iraq. Its mission began on 1 January 1997.
The coalition partners of the United States, United Kingdom, and Turkey provided approximately 45 aircraft and more than 1,400 personnel to support Operation Northern Watch. The joint U.S. forces of some 1,100 U.S. personnel, included airmen, sailors, soldiers, as well as aircraft from every arm of the United States Armed Forces.
The original mandate from the Turkish government allowed the operation to continue for six months. Turkey subsequently approved two 6-month extensions, but indicated that it would not become a permanent mission.
For the first year of the mission, northern Iraq was quiet, with no combat between Coalition aircraft and Iraqi forces.
Operation Northern Watch forces did not take part in Operation Desert Fox in December 1998. After Desert Fox, Iraq announced they would no longer recognize the no-fly zones and urged their troops to attack Coalition aircraft. On December 28, 1998 Iraq fired SA-3 surface to air missiles against coalition aircraft patrolling the northern no-fly zone. In response, U.S. Air Force (USAF) F-15Es, F-16Js, and U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) EA-6Bs launched anti-radiation missiles and dropped precision guided munitions (PGMs) on the SA-3 ground-based missile site that fired on the ONW aircraft, and destroyed it. From December 1998 to March 1999, U.S. aircraft over northern Iraq came under almost daily fire from Iraqi surface-to-air missile sites and anti-aircraft guns. U.S. aircraft responded by bombing Iraqi air-defense sites, using laser-guided bombs as well as AGM-88 HARM missiles and AGM-130 long range air-to-surface missiles. The first combat use of the AGM-130 was conducted during ONW.
Coalition aircraft flew patrols on an average of 18 days per month, and were usually fired upon. The most common threat was from anti-aircraft guns. Despite Saddam Hussein offering a $14,000 reward for downing a Coalition aircraft, no warplanes were shot down.
Low level conflict continued up until the invasion of Iraq in 2003, although the number of response incidents declined dramatically after 1999. The final combat air patrol occurred on 17 March 2003 (from the Incirlik Air Base). Six weeks later the operation concluded with an official stand down on 1 May 2003.
A grand total of 36,000 sorties were flown during Operation Northern Watch, and 40,000 personnel had been deployed at some point during the operation. Operation Northern Watch was the longest combat operation in the history of the European Command.... More
Description On October 7, 2001 with the beginning of punishing aerial bombardments, missile attacks and special forces commando missions against the Taliban and bin Laden's forces by the United States and the UniOn October 7, 2001 with the beginning of punishing aerial bombardments, missile attacks and special forces commando missions against the Taliban and bin Laden's forces by the United States and the United Kingdom (the Allies). An informal alliance between the Northern Alliance and the Allies developed, with coordination between Allied air attacks and ground attacks by the Northern Alliance.
These attacks led to the fall of Kabul on Nov. 13, 2001, as the Taliban retreated from most of northern Afghanistan.
By November 25, 2001, the last Taliban/Al-Qaida stronghold in the north, Konduz, had fallen to the Northern Alliance. American and British special forces, numbering only in the hundreds, are on the ground in Afghanistan to liaison with the Northern Alliance as well as to conduct raids, ambushes and reconnaissance in order to destroy the Taliban and Al-Qaida forces.... More
Description The United Nations authorized an international force – the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) – with a mandate to help the Afghans maintain security in Kabul and surrounding areas. OperatiThe United Nations authorized an international force – the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) – with a mandate to help the Afghans maintain security in Kabul and surrounding areas. Operating under U.S. General Joseph F. Dunford, Jr., ISAF included soldiers from 46 countries, with U.S. troops making up about half its force. ISAF was initially established as a stabilization force by the UN Security Council on 20 December 2001, to secure Kabul. Its mandate did not extend beyond this area for the first few years. On 11 August 2003, NATO assumed political command and coordination of ISAF. On 31 July 2006, ISAF assumed command of the south of the country, and by 5 October 2006, of the east.
Following a Loya jirga, tribal leaders and former exiles established an interim government in Kabul under Hamid Karzai. U.S. forces established their main base at Bagram airbase just north of Kabul. Kandahar airport also became an important U.S. base. Outposts were established in eastern provinces to hunt for Taliban and al-Qaeda fugitives.... More
Criteria The Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces in the grades of lieutenant commander (or major) and below. It is awarded for meritorious service or achieveme... The Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal may be awarded to members of the Armed Forces in the grades of lieutenant commander (or major) and below. It is awarded for meritorious service or achievement in either combat or noncombat based on sustained performance or specific achievement of a superlative nature but which does not warrant a Navy Commendation Medal or higher. It may not be awarded for service involving participation in aerial flight after January 1, 1969. MoreHide
In 1990, fellow Arab Gulf states refused to endorse Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's plan to cut production and raise the price of oil, leaving him frustrated and paranoid. Iraq had incurred a mountain o
In 1990, fellow Arab Gulf states refused to endorse Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's plan to cut production and raise the price of oil, leaving him frustrated and paranoid. Iraq had incurred a mountain of debt during its war with Iran that had lasted for most of the previous decade, and the Iraqi President felt that his Arab brothers were conspiring against him by refusing to raise oil prices. Therefore, after weeks of massing troops along the Iraq-Kuwait border and accusing Kuwait of various crimes, Hussein sent seven divisions of the Iraqi Army into Kuwait in the early morning hours of 2 August 1990. The invasion force of 120,000 troops and 2,000 tanks quickly overwhelmed Iraq's neighbor to the south, allowing Hussein to declare, in less than a week, that Kuwait was his nation's nineteenth province. The United Nations responded quickly, passing a series of resolutions that condemned the invasion, called for an immediate withdrawal of Iraqi troops from Kuwait, imposed a financial and trade embargo on Iraq, and declared the annexation void.
Regarding Iraq's actions as a threat to a vital interest of the US, namely the oil production capability of the Persian Gulf region, President George Bush ordered warplanes and ground forces to Saudi Arabia after obtaining King Fahd's approval. Iraqi troops had begun to mass along the Saudi border, breaching it at some points, and indicating the possibility that Hussein's forces would continue south into Saudi Arabia's oil fields. Operation DESERT SHIELD, the US military deployment to first defend Saudi Arabia grew rapidly to become the largest American deployment since the Southeast Asia Conflict. The Gulf region was within US Central Command's (CENTCOM) area of responsibility. Eventually, 30 nations joined the military coalition arrayed against Iraq, with a further 18 countries supplying economic, humanitarian, or other type of assistance.
Carriers in the Gulf of Oman and the Red Sea responded, US Air Force interceptors deployed from bases in the United States, and airlift transports carried US Army airborne troopers to Saudi Arabia. Navy prepositioning ships rushed equipment and supplies for an entire marine brigade from Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean to the gulf. During the next six months the United States and its allies built up a powerful force in the Arabian peninsula. The navy also began maritime intercept operations in support of a US-led blockade and United Nations sanctions against Iraq.
Coalition forces, specifically XVIII Airborne Corps and VII Corps, used deception cells to create the impression that they were going to attack near the Kuwaiti boot heel, as opposed to the "left hook" strategy actually implemented. XVIII Airborne Corps set up "Forward Operating Base Weasel" near the boot heel, consisting of a phony network of camps manned by several dozen soldiers. Using portable radio equipment, cued by computers, phony radio messages were passed between fictitious headquarters. In addition, smoke generators and loudspeakers playing tape-recorded tank and truck noises were used, as were inflatable Humvees and helicopters.
On 17 January 1991, when it became clear that Saddam would not withdraw, Desert Shield became Desert Storm.
Description U.S. and The Bahamas has permitted establishment of a significant interdiction and investigation infrastructure involving U.S. aircraft, ships, and personnel. Supported by INL, Operation Bahamas and TU.S. and The Bahamas has permitted establishment of a significant interdiction and investigation infrastructure involving U.S. aircraft, ships, and personnel. Supported by INL, Operation Bahamas and Turks and Caicos (OPBAT) is a combined effort by The Bahamas and Turks and Caicos Islands police and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to intercept loads of cocaine and conduct investigations. OPBAT employs U.S. Coast Guard, Navy and Army helicopters assigned to joint interdiction bases in Nassau, George Town, Great Inagua, and elsewhere. INL is assisting Bahamian security forces to develop a more effective maritime end-game capability. ... More
Description Operation Praying Mantis was an attack on 18 April 1988, by U.S. forces within Iranian territorial waters in retaliation for the Iranian mining of the Persian Gulf during the Iran–Iraq war and the subOperation Praying Mantis was an attack on 18 April 1988, by U.S. forces within Iranian territorial waters in retaliation for the Iranian mining of the Persian Gulf during the Iran–Iraq war and the subsequent damage to an American warship.
On 14 April, the guided missile frigate USS Samuel B. Roberts struck a mine while deployed in the Persian Gulf as part of Operation Earnest Will, the 1987–88 convoy missions in which U.S. warships escorted reflagged Kuwaiti oil tankers to protect them from Iranian attacks. The explosion blew a 4.5 m (15-foot) hole in Samuel B. Roberts's hull and nearly sank it. The crew saved their ship with no loss of life, and Samuel B. Roberts was towed to Dubai on 16 April. After the mining, U.S. Navy divers recovered other mines in the area. When the serial numbers were found to match those of mines seized along with the Iran Ajr the previous September, U.S. military officials planned a retaliatory operation against Iranian targets in the Persian Gulf.
According to Bradley Peniston, the attack by the U.S. helped pressure Iran to agree to a ceasefire with Iraq later that summer, ending the eight-year conflict between the Persian Gulf neighbors.
On 6 November 2003, the International Court of Justice ruled that "the actions of the United States of America against Iranian oil platforms on 19 October 1987 (Operation Nimble Archer) and 18 April 1988 (Operation Praying Mantis) cannot be justified as measures necessary to protect the essential security interests of the United States of America." However, the International Court of Justice dismissed Iran's claim that the attack by United States Navy was a breach of the 1955 Treaty of Amity between the two countries as it only pertained to vessels, not platforms.
This battle was the largest of the five major U.S. surface engagements since the Second World War, which also include the Battle of Chumonchin Chan during the Korean War, the Gulf of Tonkin incident and the Battle of Dong Hoi during the Vietnam War, and the Action in the Gulf of Sidra in 1986. It also marked the U.S. Navy's first exchange of anti-ship missiles with opposing ships and the only occasion since World War II on which the US Navy sank a major surface combatant.
By the end of the operation, U.S. air and surface units had sunk, or severely damaged, half of Iran's operational fleet.... More
Description RIMPAC, the Rim of the Pacific Exercise, is the world's largest international maritime warfare exercise. RIMPAC is held biennially during June and July of even-numbered years from Honolulu, Hawaii. ItRIMPAC, the Rim of the Pacific Exercise, is the world's largest international maritime warfare exercise. RIMPAC is held biennially during June and July of even-numbered years from Honolulu, Hawaii. It is hosted and administered by the United States Navy's Pacific Fleet, headquartered at Pearl Harbor, in conjunction with the Marine Corps, the Coast Guard, and Hawaii National Guard forces under the control of the Governor of Hawaii. The US invites military forces from the Pacific Rim and beyond to participate. With RIMPAC the United States Pacific Command seeks to enhance interoperability between Pacific Rim armed forces, ostensibly as a means of promoting stability in the region to the benefit of all participating nations. Described by the US Navy as a unique training opportunity that helps participants foster and sustain the cooperative relationships that are critical to ensuring the safety of sea lanes and security on the world’s oceans.... More
Description Operation Earnest Will (24 July 1987 – 1 August 1990) was the American military protection of Kuwaiti-owned tankers from Iranian attacks in 1987 and 1988, three years into the Tanker War phase of the Operation Earnest Will (24 July 1987 – 1 August 1990) was the American military protection of Kuwaiti-owned tankers from Iranian attacks in 1987 and 1988, three years into the Tanker War phase of the Iran–Iraq War. It was the largest naval convoy operation since World War II.
The U.S. Navy warships that escorted the tankers, part of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, were the operations' most visible part, but U.S. Air Force AWACS radar planes provided surveillance and U.S. Army special-operations helicopters hunted for possible attackers.
Other U.S. Navy vessels participated in Operation Earnest Will. They were then under the command of the U.S. Navy's Seventh Fleet which had primary responsibility for combat operations in the Persian Gulf region. The numerous ships used in Operation Earnest Will mostly consisted of Battleship Battle Groups, Carrier Battle Groups, Surface Action Groups and ships from the Pacific's Third and Seventh Fleets and the Mediterranean-based Sixth Fleet. They generally operated in and near the Gulf for parts of their normal six-month deployments.
This was the first tactical operation of the United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) that involved Navy SEALs, Special Boat Units, and 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne) ("Nightstalkers") aviators all working together.... More
Description The USS Stark incident occurred during the Iran–Iraq War on 17 May 1987, when an Iraqi jet aircraft fired missiles at the American frigate USS Stark. Thirty-seven United States Navy personnel were kilThe USS Stark incident occurred during the Iran–Iraq War on 17 May 1987, when an Iraqi jet aircraft fired missiles at the American frigate USS Stark. Thirty-seven United States Navy personnel were killed and twenty-one were wounded.
USS Stark was part of the Middle East Task Force assigned to patrol off the Saudi Arabian coast near the Iran–Iraq War exclusion boundary. An Iraqi pilot attacked USS Stark in a Dassault Falcon 50 modified business jet armed with two Exocet missiles.[1] Even though it did not have the capability at the time, American Intelligence was convinced the attack was made with a Dassault Mirage F1.[2] It took off from the airbase of Shaibah at 20:00 and headed south into the Persian Gulf also along the coast. The aircraft was flying 5,000 feet (1,500 m) above the water at 550 mi (890 km) per hour.[citation needed] An AWACS plane on patrol nearby, with an American and Saudi Arabian crew, first detected the incoming Iraqi jet and informed the Stark, which picked up the aircraft on radar, 200 miles (320 km) out.[citation needed] When it came within view just before 22:00, the attacker was off Stark's port side beam.
Initially not alarmed, at 22:09 Captain Brindel followed protocol[citation needed] and ordered a radioman to send the message: "Unknown aircraft, this is U.S. Navy warship on your 078 (degrees) for twelve miles. Request you identify yourself." The Iraqi Falcon pilot did not respond to the message. The ship's captain ordered a second message sent, to which there was no reply. At 22:10 hrs Captain Brindel was informed the Iraqi aircraft had targeted his ship, locking his Cyrano-IV fire-control radar onto Stark. The Falcon 50 then fired the first Exocet missile 22 miles (35 km) from the ship, and the second Exocet from 15 miles (24 km). The pilot then banked left and began to withdraw.
Stark's search radar and ESM systems failed to detect the incoming missiles. Captain Brindel suspected a possible Exocet attack but did not convey this clearly to the crew. He calmly requested a systems check including whether the Phalanx Close-In-Weapon-System (CIWS) system was "live". The crew reported no issue, he questioned again, however the crew repeated themselves believing he had simply not heard their first reply. Additionally due to miscommunication, the Captain believed the CIWS was "live" which to his mind meant; set to auto-targeting mode, but the crew were just reporting it was reading as operational (The CIWS was likely set to a passive mode waiting on the EMS.) Reassured falsely in the state of the ship, no further orders or evasive action was taken. It was not until seconds before the first hit that the Americans realized they were under fire.[citation needed] The first Exocet missile tracked in a little over 10 feet (3.0 m) above the sea surface[citation needed], and struck the port side of the ship near the bridge. Although it failed to explode, rocket fuel ignited and caused a large fire that quickly spread throughout the ship's post office, a store room, and the critical combat operations center (where the ship's weapons are controlled).
The second Exocet also struck the port side. This missile did detonate, leaving a 10 ft (3.0 m) by 15 ft (4.6 m) hole in the frigate's left side. Electronics for Stark's Standard Missile defense went out and Captain Brindel could not order his men to return fire. The AWACS plane was still in the area and just after witnessing the attack, it radioed a nearby Saudi airbase to send aircraft for an interception, but the ground controllers did not have the authority to order a sortie and the Iraqi jet escaped unharmed. The USN rules of engagement applicable at the time allowed Stark to defend herself after sufficiently warning the hostile aircraft. A total of 37 crew were killed in the attack, 29 from the initial explosion and fire, including two lost at sea. Eight would later die from their injuries. Twenty-one others survived their wounds.
Throughout the remainder of the night and the following day, Stark's crew, along with sailors from the destroyer USS Conyngham fought the fire, which burned for almost 24 hours. Captain Brindel ordered the starboard side flooded to keep the hole on the hull's port side above water. This helped prevent the Stark from sinking. Brindel quickly dispatched a distress call after the first missile hit. It was received by USS Waddell, which was in the area, and Conyngham with 2⁄3 of its crew on liberty in Bahrain. Waddell and Conyngham arrived to provide damage control and relief to Stark's crew. Temporary Electronics Communications were installed by ETC Perry and team while Conyngham provided an escort for Stark as she slowly made her way to Bahrain.
Aftermath
Stark arrived at Bahrain the following day on 18 May 1987, under her own power. There she was temporarily repaired by the destroyer tender USS Acadia before setting a course for Mayport Naval Station, Florida, the ship's home port. A court of inquiry under Rear Admiral Grant Sharp was formed to investigate the incident and later Captain Brindel was recommended for court-martial. It was found that Stark was 2 miles (3.2 km) outside the exclusion zone and had not violated neutrality as the Iraqis claimed. Iraq apologized, and Saddam Hussein said that the pilot mistook Stark for an Iranian tanker. American officials claimed that the Iraqi jet's pilot was not acting under orders from his government, and that he was later executed. This has been disputed, as an Iraqi Air Force officer later stated that the pilot was not punished and that he was still alive.
Iranian Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi called it a "divine blessing" and reiterated the standard Iranian view that Persian Gulf "is not a safe place for the superpowers and it is in their interest not to enter this quicksand". Iraq Foreign Ministry spokesman said Iraq would never intentionally attack any target in the Gulf unless it was Iranian, and laid the blame on Iran.
Washington used the incident to turn up the heat on Iran, which later it blamed for the whole situation. President Reagan said "We’ve never considered them [Iraq's military] hostile at all", and "the villain in the piece is Iran".
Ironically, the Pentagon said that an Iranian helicopter had joined a Saudi Arabian vessel in rescue operations. Adding to the irony, the Joint Chiefs of Staff investigation into the incident recommended that Iraq be held accountable, a finding the government of Iraq eventually complied with.
Captain Brindel was relieved of duty and retired for not defending his ship and Tactical Action Officer Lieutenant Basil E. Moncrief resigned. Back in the United States, President Ronald Reagan was criticized for putting American sailors in harm's way.... More
The U.S. Multinational Force (USMNF) operated in Beirut, Lebanon from 25 August 1982 to 26 February 1984. During this period four different MAUs served as peacekeepers. The terrorist bombing of the US
The U.S. Multinational Force (USMNF) operated in Beirut, Lebanon from 25 August 1982 to 26 February 1984. During this period four different MAUs served as peacekeepers. The terrorist bombing of the US Marines barracks became a quintessential exemplar of the conditions under which military intervention may not be effective.
Israeli-Palestinian fighting in July 1981 was ended by a cease-fire arranged by U.S. President Ronald Reagan's special envoy, Philip C. Habib, and announced on July 24, 1981. The cease-fire was respected during the next 10 months, but a string of incidents, including PLO rocket attacks on northern Israel, led to the 06 June 1982, Israeli ground attack into Lebanon to remove PLO forces. Israeli forces moved quickly through south Lebanon, encircling west Beirut by mid-June and beginning a three-month siege of Palestinian and Syrian forces in the city.
Throughout this period, which saw heavy Israeli air, naval, and artillery bombardments of west Beirut, Ambassador Habib worked to arrange a settlement. In August 1982, he was successful in bringing about an agreement for the evacuation of Syrian troops and PLO fighters from Beirut. The agreement also provided for the deployment of a three-nation Multinational Force (MNF) during the period of the evacuation, and by late August 1982, U.S. Marines, as well as French and Italian units, had arrived in Beirut. On 10 August 1982 the alert posture of the Mediterranean Amphibious Ready Group was heightened in light of a likely deployment as part of a peacekeeping force to oversee the evacuation of Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) forces from West Beirut.
The 32d Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) from Camp Lejeune deployed to Beirut to oversee the safe departure of thousands of Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) fighters out of the war-torn city. On 24 August (EDP), the first of 800 Marines began going ashore at Beirut as part of a joint U.S.-French peacekeeping force. When the evacuation ended, these units departed. On 8 September, following the removal of the PLO forces from West Beirut, the Marines redeployed aboard the MARG ships. The US Marines left on 10 September 1982.
In spite of the invasion, the Lebanese political process continued to function, and Bashir Gemayel was elected President in August, succeeding Elias Sarkis. On September 14, however, Bashir Gemayel was assassinated. On 15 September 1982, Israeli troops entered west Beirut. During the next three days, Lebanese militiamen massacred hundreds of Palestinian civilians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in west Beirut. Bashir Gemayel's brother, Amine, was elected President by a unanimous vote of the parliament. He took office 23 September 1982.
MNF forces returned to Beirut at the end of September 1982 as a symbol of support for the government. On 22 September 1982, following the Phalangist Christian force massacre of Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps, the Mediterranean Amphibious ready Group was ordered to the Eastern Mediterranean. President Ronald Reagan ordered the 32d MAU back into Lebanon to support the Lebanese Armed Forces where it was soon relieved by Camp Lejeune's 24th MAU. The 1st Battalion, 8th Marines Headquarters building was located at the Beirut International Airport and housed the Battalion Landing Team (BLT). From 27 September through 21 January 1983, two carriers were tethered to Lebanon to provide support for the Marine Corps forces ashore. On 11 February 1983, the response posture for carrier support was relaxed as the situation had stabilized. In February 1983, a small British contingent joined the U.S., French, and Italian MNF troops in Beirut.
On 17 May 1983, an agreement was signed by the representatives of Lebanon, Israel, and the United States that provided for Israeli withdrawal. Syria declined to discuss the withdrawal of its troops, effectively stalemating further progress.
The USMNF was initially successful; but, as the strategic and tactical situations changed, the peacekeepers came increasingly under fire. Opposition to the negotiations and to US support for the Gemayel regime led to a series of terrorist attacks in 1983 and 1984 on US interests, including the bombing on 18 April 1983 of the US embassy in west Beirut (63 dead), and of the US embassy annex in east Beirut on 20 September 1984 (8 killed).
Just before 6:30 a.m. on Oct. 23, 1983, a Mercedes truck passed a Lebanese checkpoint on the airport road without halting. The truck turned into the airport parking lot, circled twice and picked up speed for a deadly run at the headquarters building. Orders prohibited Marines from being locked and loaded, but small arms fire probably would not have made much difference, according to reports. A sentry did get some shots off with a pistol, however. The driver of the speeding van was determined to put a huge dent in the American presence in Lebanon. After breaking through several barriers, it sped between two sentry boxes and crashed through more obstacles, penetrating the building's first floor before detonating tons of explosives, taking the lives of 241 Marines, Sailors and soldiers, a majority of which were stationed at Camp Lejeune. Most died in their sleep or were crushed as the building collapsed, while a handful have died in the years that followed due to injuries sustained from the bombing.
On 3 December 1983, two F-14s flying over Lebanon were fired upon by Syrian antiaircraft artillery. On 4 December 1983, aircraft from Kennedy and Independence were launched against Syrian targets; two were shot down, and one U.S. airman was taken prisoner by Syrian troops.
The virtual collapse of the Lebanese army in February 1984, following the defection of many of its Muslim and Druze units to opposition militias, was a major blow to the government. As it became clear that the departure of the US Marines was imminent, the Gemayel Government came under increasing pressure from Syria and its Muslim Lebanese allies to abandon the May 17 accord. On 26 February 1984, the withdrawal of the USMC contingent of the international peacekeeping force was completed. The Lebanese Government announced on 05 March 1984 that it was canceling its unimplemented agreement with Israel.
Description UNITAS exercises are sponsored by U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command with the objective to foster cooperation and increase interoperability among the navies of the Americas. Held continuously since 19UNITAS exercises are sponsored by U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command with the objective to foster cooperation and increase interoperability among the navies of the Americas. Held continuously since 1959, UNITAS has become the premier multinational naval exercise in the Southern Command area of operations.
During the two-week exercise, participating units have the opportunity to train as unified force in all aspects of naval operations, from maritime interdiction to anti-submarine and electronic warfare. U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command sponsors UNITAS exercises with the objective to foster cooperation and develop interoperability among the navies of the region.
UNITAS supports U.S. Southern Command objectives for enhanced maritime security in its area of responsibility. It is intended to train participating forces in a variety of maritime scenarios to test command and control of forces at sea, while operating as a multinational force to provide the maximum opportunity to improve interoperability.... More