Why were Marines chosen for Inchon?

Capt Richard I P. — Wed, 07 Jan 2015 15:42:41 -0500

Inspired by discussions generated in the thread started by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member:
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/why-weren-t-marines-chosen-for-normandy?urlhash=406436

Particularly some comments by LTC Paul Labrador pointing out that the Army really did execute significant numbers of complex amphibious landings. Given these facts, why did General McArthur, who commanded the campaign in the Philippines in WWII assign an amphibious landing of such critical importance nearly exclusively to Marines? (only involving Army SF and supporting arms, and some follow-on army Armor, and the overall command staff of the X Corps?)

Why weren't Marines chosen for Normandy? | RallyPoint

Without using Google,Wiki, or any other search engine...using only what you know the second you read the question -- Give your opinion why Marines, trained in Amphibious landing, were not used at Normandy on D-Day. Let's keep this civil, because this is a topic that could easily go awry. Thoughts? Opinions? Facts? Insider information?

Response by CPT Zachary Brooks made Jan 7 at 2015 3:48 PM

CPT Zachary Brooks — Wed, 07 Jan 2015 15:48:10 -0500

It appears from what I have reread (to recall the battle) that other forces from the UN and South Korea were also involved. Likely the best choice was that the Area of Operations was owned by the 5th Marine Regiment and their joint forces and was therefore given the mission to operate due to the land they commanded.

The beach heads (Red Blue and Green) appeared to also consist of a smaller amount of real estate than had the aforementioned Normandy. Marines are efficient in smaller groups, arguably more than any other normal force sans special forces, and therefore would be well chosen to dominate small areas of beach effectively.

And maybe in this case, they just wanted to end the battle as quickly as possible and make the North Korean generals crap themselves.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jan 7 at 2015 5:29 PM

LTC Paul Labrador — Wed, 07 Jan 2015 17:29:38 -0500

I think a big part of it was due to the state of the Post-WW2 Army and who was actually prepared and immediatley available to conduct an Amphibious assault and what else was going on in Korea at the time the landings were conducted. The post WW2 Army was severly gutted and readiness/training of remaining units was not in good repair (see Task Force Smith). Most available Army units in the Far East had already been committed to the Pusan Perimeter and were barely hanging on. If you study the operation, it is interesting that the Marines were not MacArthur's first choice of troops. The original plan was to use 1st Cav Div, the unit that MacArthur relied heavily upon during his landings in WW2, but they were rerouted to holdling the Perimeter. The same happened to 2ID and 7ID (which was in reserve status and would need significant rebuilding) would not be ready in time. Stateside Army units could not be mobilized, trained, equipped and moved fast enough to conduct the operation as the hold on Pusan was tenous and the forces fighting there needed to be relieved ASAP. So who was left that was not already engaged and could realistically pull off this operation on relatively short notice with a good chance of success? The Marines were. So I would hesitate to read into MacArthur's choice of using Marines at Inchon to infer that "it was a job only Marines could do." It is more accurate that MacArthur, begrudgingly because there was still a lot of interservice rivarly happening, used the Marines because that's all he had left available who had the training to conduct Operation Chromite within the time frame needed. This is not taking anything away from the Corps. I've visited the Inchon landing sites on a staff ride. The Marines did a brilliant job of overcoming not only the North Koreans, but the unique geographic challenges of Inchon.

Response by LTC David S. Chang, ChFC®, CLU® made Jan 7 at 2015 5:53 PM

LTC David S. Chang, ChFC®, CLU® — Wed, 07 Jan 2015 17:53:01 -0500

Much of the tactics involved depends on the availability of units. The US Army had unfortunately been ill-equipped to handle the beginning of the Korean conflict. Task Force Smith near Pusan was a disaster where our soldiers had machine guns against tanks.

As the Army massed at the Pusan Perimeter, MacArthur originally wanted the 1st Cav division and 2nd ID to spearhead the amphibious assault. But it was clear both units were needed at the Pusan Perimeter or else the North Koreans would have taken the peninsula.

The amphibious assault would not have worked if Pusan was lost. The marines were also short-handed. X Corps was a combination of forces with the 5th marines that landed at Inchon. Marines are primarily supposed to be used for amphibious assaults.

The second day the Army's 7th ID arrived and pushed through to Seoul. Other forces cleared the mines, weakened some of the NK defenses, and bombed the areas. What I see is that all branches were needed to make it successful.

It isn't a matter of one better than the other. They have different mission sets and each requires the help of the other.

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Jan 7 at 2015 5:53 PM

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Wed, 07 Jan 2015 17:53:05 -0500

If I had to guess...(without my google fu or reading other's answers:

What is they were already in the AOR, Capt Richard I P.?

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 7 at 2015 5:57 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 07 Jan 2015 17:57:35 -0500

David Habersham's book "The Coldest Winter; America and the Korean War" goes into this very well. He postulates it was a political move on McArthur's part to bring in support from the Marines, especially related to the Joint Chiefs.
Very complicated relationships and I would have to go back and re-read that section, but if I remember correctly, by bringing in a Marine Division, McArthur could effectively gain support for the mission from another branch (and therefore the Marine Commandant).
I highly recommend this book BTW.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Jan 7 at 2015 6:24 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:24:31 -0500

Because Doug was PISSED!

Response by Cpl Brad MarkW made Apr 16 at 2015 9:59 AM

Cpl Brad MarkW — Thu, 16 Apr 2015 09:59:29 -0400

It's been a while and I apologize for not remembering the source, but the author argued that it just came down to the cutbacks after WWII. The army (and the Navy who supported them) of 1950 no longer had the same capabilities as it did in Normandy. Remember also that the massive invasion of Normandy was staged in England, just a few miles away from Normandy. Inchon is on the eastern side of Korea and more or less surrounded by China. Not exactly friendly territory.

In 1950, the only force that was capable of conducting a self-supporting beach landing, in the time line needed, were the Marines. That may be an over simplification but that’s what really mattered to MacArthur. That it be done and that it be successful. Remember the 8th Army was desperate to get some relief.

Response by LCpl Mark Williams made Apr 17 at 2015 7:38 PM

LCpl Mark Williams — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 19:38:58 -0400

Because like the boxer rebalion, we are the most able to handle a hard situation and most prepared.

Response by SPC James Fie made Jun 1 at 2015 3:12 AM

SPC James Fie — Mon, 01 Jun 2015 03:12:55 -0400

"RallyPoint | Why weren't Marines chosen for Normandy?

Without using Google,Wiki, or any other search engine...using only what you know the second you read the question -- Give your opinion why Marines, trained in Amphibious landing, were not used at Normandy on D-Day. Let's keep this civil, because this is a topic that could easily go awry. Thoughts? Opinions? Facts? Insider information?"

Why weren't Marines used on D-Day. Hmm....

Because they were too busy running amphib landings from one ISLAND to the next, in the Pacific?

And yes, they'd had a lot more practice at it than the Army, even including North Africa, Sicily, Anzio and points north, AND Normandy. And the Army was indeed rather busy elsewhere at the time.

Response by SFC Kenneth Hunnell made Dec 27 at 2017 8:55 PM

SFC Kenneth Hunnell — Wed, 27 Dec 2017 20:55:45 -0500

If i had a crystal ball, i would all General MacArthur why he choose the Marines, maybe they were part of the department of the Navy

Response by SPC Nancy Greene made Dec 16 at 2019 12:36 AM

SPC Nancy Greene — Mon, 16 Dec 2019 00:36:49 -0500

Excellent Information
Capt Richard Porter! You share some extremely valid points!