"All philosophy and physics first come from plausibility."
See my paper
on Seal CRT training school (the alternative to U.S. Navy SEAL School or B.U.D./S. Training) at the bottom of this website....
As the author of this website, my name is Michael Llenos; please read the following...
Four of my favorite Frenchmen are Nostradamus, Napoleon, Louis Pasteur, and Napoleon the 3rd.
Summary of my 5 part (7 appendix) book 'A Defense of Popular Monotheism':
"It is a woven tapestry made up of platonist-bones and stoic-like-gristle. A soothing Platonic intellect blows throughout it; it would be boorish to denounce it."
I am currently a practicing Catholic and have been so most of my life.
I received my History degree from the University
of Hawaii: West Oahu many years ago.
And I believe
that all three Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam are true religions and that
their main religious writings are the Word of God.
If any college in the United States or its various branches, or if
any higher institution wishes to buy philosophical or fictional rights from me,
then please contact me:
I am trying to sell my young adult novellas to a publishing company who will publish them.
I believe Crilium and The Elf that Met his Equal and More should be published as one book titled:
Two Novellas by Michael Llenos. I do know, however, that my novellas can be published
at a petty, low price. But I am also trying to sell my publishing rights to my
5 part philosophy book 'A Defense of Popular Monotheism' for a gigantic monetary amount: 4 million U.S. dollars.
Part four of my philosophy book, on Daniel 7:1-7, is worth in itself a great deal.
It explains what the 4 nations mentioned truly are. The older interpretation is obsolete. What does the
older version say? That the four nations are: 1) Babylon empire, 2) Median-Persia empire, 3) Greeks,
and finally 4) the Romans. My paper replaces this interpretation with a more accurate explanation. The
person who first publishes my philosophy book will make a fortune off part four of my book.
By the way, I've just recently noticed that my philosophy book has five parts to it like
the Ethics book by Benedict De Spinoza. I just want to say that I wasn't trying to imitate Spinoza.
But if I were ever dubbed the Christian Spinoza I would feel very honored indeed.
I believe cause and effect (and the Ether) are valid. Spinoza based his entire philosophy on cause
and effect reasoning.
I give a simple explanation for the bridge between cause and effect in: Appendix Four of my philosophy
I have decided to name my 5-part book 'A Defense of Popular Monotheism'. It is basically an
instruction and philosophical defense of Abrahamic Monotheism, or Judaism, Christianity and Islam
and all of their sub-divisions.
"If there is no center to the universe, then the Earth is the center of the universe
for the human race." ---see bottom of Appendix 4 of 'A Defense of Popular Monotheism'.
Have a safe and happy 2016 everyone! I have posted a note on SEAL CRT TRAINING
school (found in Demi Moore's G.I. Jane movie) below....
A Brief Summary on the Ether-wind [Copyright Michael Llenos November-December 2015]
[If my theory is true, that light operates differently when a person travels at the speed of light or faster upwind or downwind
from its light source, then that is proof enough that the medium of ether-wind exists in space.]
"Traveling at the speed of light, if I were downwind from a light beam, I could see it. If I were traveling at the speed of light,
upwind from a light beam, and looked at it behind me, I would see no light beam at all but rather darkness instead."
'The edited following is based on Einstein's picture-analogy he first imagined when he was 16 years of age. If I were traveling
at the speed of light, a light beam I wished to observe would travel away from me at the speed of light (as Einstein comments),
but only if I were either racing parallel to that light beam or behind (meaning before) that light beam's source: meaning I would see
that light beam travel away from me from my left or right side or see it come towards (or away from) me--from in front of my direction of travel.
However, if I were traveling ahead of that light beam source (meaning I was also traveling at the speed of light, ahead of that light beam source,
and at the same speed and direction) and I looked back 180 degrees at that same light beam, I would not be able to visually detect that
light beam with my eyes. I would just see complete darkness. In a similiar law of science, a moving submarine cannot detect (via sound)
another submarine that is in its rear baffles. However, if a submarine comes to a full stop, it could now detect another submarine following
it from behind or in its baffles. In the same way, we can detect starlight on Earth coming toward us from 180 degrees from the Earth's direction
of orbit, because the Earth is not traveling at the speed of light--just like the submarine could hear behind it because it has come to a full stop.
However, if the Earth did travel at the speed of light, we would not be able to see any stars directly 180 degrees behind our direction of travel.
We would only see darkness. A submarine uses the medium of water to detect things around it, while we look up at the night sky and detect
star light through a medium (like water: since both a submarine traveling in the water and a person traveling in space at the speed of light share
which could only be the ether-wind.'
[Time's "present" (or the time that we exist in) holds objects in their universal place. In fact, the present tries to hold onto all matter in the universe. This force that tries to hold onto all matter is an invisible aether. Time's present grasp (or aether) can only hold onto things, in time's present, in a finite way, since the present is not infinite in size or degree. The smallest quantum particles evade present's hold (or aether). These smallest quantum particles cannot escape to the future that doesn't exist but must escape further and further into the past where the aether is very weak. This piling up of quantum particles in the past could have created a Big Bang--thus, the universe is self-creating. In fact, God could have made the main elements and building blocks of the universe self creating. Copyright Michael Llenos 2016.]
--see bottom page of Appendix 1.
[You could call the "aether wind" the continuous motion of time's future turning into the present and the continuous motion of time's present turning into the past--while the "aether" is time's "present" trying to hold onto all matter in the universe in the universal present. The reason why light has a constant velocity throughout the universe is because the aether cannot take hold of (or influence) quanta-light-particles because they are so small to begin with, which is why the Michelson-Morley experiment does not prove that aether (and an "aether wind") do not exist.]
"Two Crilium Short Stories..."
"The Elf That Met His Equal and More Part I: A Failed Quest..."
"The Elf That Met His Equal and More Part II: The Book in the Library..."
"The Elf That Met His Equal and More Part III: The Old Tower..."
"The Elf That Met His Equal and More Epilogue: The Longships...."
"A story: The Squire..."
Introduction to A Defense of Popular Monotheism [Copyright Michael Llenos 2016]
There already exists many apologies and instructional texts for Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Instead it has been the purpose
of my philosophical instruction
to validate the generalized
arguments for belief in those three religions' shared identity of God, his existence, and our future in the universe concerning ourselves.
If I take a subjective viewpoint on any of the three religions' theologies at any point in the text, I do apologize; especially,
since I have been more Catholic (and Christian) in my religious life a great deal more than any other religion mentioned.
This sways me more towards a bent on Christendom. And I thought that in some instances I would weaken the argument for belief in
God for everyone if I did not inject some examples of specific theology into the text itself as well.
Any extra miscellaneous texts and appendixes that have nothing to do with God are really just added to give the work more meat on its bones.
Now truth can also be found in people who don't share one's religious views, and that notorious antagonist of traditional religion,
Thomas Paine, which I quote and also take out of context, writes this:
"The Jews have their Moses; the Christians their Jesus Christ, their apostles and saints; and the Turks their Mahomet... Each of those churches shows certain books, which they call revelation, or the Word of God. The Jews say that their Word of God was given by God to Moses face to face; the Christians say, that their Word of God came by divine inspiration; and the Turks say, that their Word of God (the Koran) was brought by an angel from heaven. Each of those churches accuses the other of unbelief...." --Thomas Paine ‘The Age of Reason: Chapter 2' (Public Domain)
It is my belief that the reason all monotheistic religions use this method of incrimination
concerning unbelief is because it keeps such religions alive for the next generation. However, although
there exists this necessary evil in Abrahamic religion and their subdivisions, I believe all three Abrahamic religions
and their subdivisions to be true religions and their sacred texts to be the Word of God. And that is why in this book I
defend these religions philosophically.
Readers may notice that sometimes I will contradict myself in one part of my philosophy book with another.
However, as a finite being I can only judge by probability. And since my book was written over a period of many
years there is bound to be contradictions in the text itself. I do have one defense for doing this, though. I am trying to
cover all of the bases concerning the probability of God's existence. I have no problem with saving souls at the judgment through the
cause of having a low intellect and a low acumen in life. St. Paul said something to the effect that the wisdom of God is foolishness
to the world. The truth is I would rather enter the kingdom of heaven as a foolish philosopher than enter into hell as a wise philosopher according
to mankind. With contradictions I am being more liberal or generous minded. Not everything is black and white in life.
I believe part of the appeal of this philosophy book is that I (the author) do not think anyone evil (or misguided) for not belonging to
the same exact religion that I practice.
A Defense of Popular Monotheism
Introduction to the Five Parts of this philosophy book (and Seven Appendixes):
1. Part One: How do we logically know God exists? Read the following.
2. Part Two: How do we know that only God is infinite and omnipotent? Read the following.
3. Part Three: Are there any more original arguments for God's existence? Read the following.
4. Part Four: What does the Bible say will happen geopolitically before the Messiah comes?
Read the following.
5. Part Five: What must a person ethically do to prepare themselves for the coming of the Messiah
and Judgment Day?
Read the following.
[Appendixes: The following are extra material on miscellaneous subjects not necessary
for the discussion on God.]
Appendix 1. The Michael Llenos Paradox. On why the Universe and Time are Finite, not Infinite.
Appendix 2. The Art of War. Warfare during Medieval Times.
Appendix 3. Stealth Hiking Theory. Expert advice for the Casual Hiker.
Appendix 4. On Metaphysics: How Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton's Ether (and Cause and Effect) is justified,
starting with Platonic Probability, and how the geocentric theory is just as valid as the heliocentric theory because of relativity.
Appendix 5. Opine in daily conversation.
Appendix 6. Anti-Prolegomena.
Appendix 7. On the Goodness of God.
A Defense of Popular Monotheism
"Part One: 4 Platonic Dialogues on the Existence of God..."
"Part Two: Part A Proof of God. Only God is infinite..."
"Part Three: Part B Proof of God. More proofs on God's existence..."
"Part Four: An Interpretation of The Book of Daniel..."
"Part Five: The Ethics (or) The Complete 613 Sayings...."
Extra Miscellaneous Papers:
"Appendix 1: The Michael Llenos Paradox. The Finitude of Space-Time..."
"Appendix 2: The Art of War. A Companion Piece to The Prince..."
"Appendix 3: A Theory on Stealth Hiking based on Aristotle's Writings and Junior ROTC..."
"Appendix 4: On Metaphysics.
Einstein and Newton's Ether (and cause and effect) justified, starting with
"Appendix 5: Opine in Conversation..."
"Appendix 6: The Anti-Prolegomena: An Introduction for
the Refutation of Immanuel Kant's Philosophy..."
"Appendix 7: A Very Short, Personal Dissertation on God's Goodness...."
"The One Dollar Bill, John Hagee, and our Jewish Roots..."
"The Durable Rosary..."
"Myths and Fables..."
"Christian offerings to God the Father...."
VISITORS (since 23/7/11):
All texts are copyrighted by Michael Llenos 2016
[Photo Copyright Michael Llenos 2013]
The Education of a Navy Seal: Is there a need for a new Navy Seal/UDT school in the United States Navy? Read
On GI Jane 
There has been a lot of speculation about the SEAL CRT (Combined Reconnaissance Team) course/school training, but there have been no real leads.
I will try, with my history degree background, to make some sense of the mess.
1. What is SEAL CRT school in the movie G.I. Jane (starring Demi Moore)? It has got to be both similar and different from BUD/S:
Basic. Underwater. Demolition. Seal. school.
2. In the mid 1990s, when good things were more plentiful than they are now, military analysts were trying to
figure out how to make the training programs for our top soldiers, marines, airmen and sailors more efficient:
so many training programs were being envisioned for the future. One of these theoretical schools inspired the
1997 movie GI Jane which was directed by Ridley Scott.
3. If BUD/S, or Basic Underwater Demolition Seal school, is the Navy version of Army Ranger School,
then SEAL CRT school would be the
Navy version of mini-Ranger School (or what was known as Recondo School) for
LRRPs [or LRPs pronounced Lurps] during the Vietnam War. SEAL CRT school would
last 3 months, while BUD/S lasts for 6 months, and Special Forces Combat Diver school lasts 6 weeks.
4. And although I have a deep respect for SEAL CRT school, I also have a great deal of respect for
Special Forces Combat Diver school, and I heard, by one Army NCO, that it was called SEAL school
in the U.S. Army. I also have a deep respect for Air Force Combat Diver school.
5. But what makes SEAL CRT school so special? It must have its own good qualities.
6. If a trainee wants
the SEAL experience,
and they already are a soldier, sailor, airman or marine who understands the basics of land warfare, and they want to
be trained by Navy Seals, it would be better for a soldier or marine (or in Moore's case: Navy Intelligence) to go to SEAL CRT school.
If a trainee already has had some training with small arms weapons (like zeroing an M-16 rifle), it would be better not to
learn everything from scratch.
Some may say, however, that in the movie, Moore learns basic landwarfare skills, like putting together a machine gun.
But my response would be that most service personnel are qualified in rifles but not machine guns.
I would say that SEAL CRT is divided into 3 months this way: 1st month is PT stage, 2nd month is scuba stage, and the 3rd month
is land warfare and SERE stage.
7. A service person could, in other branches, go to their own branches' Combat Dive School.
But the truth of the matter is that the Green Berets, PJ's and Force Recon Marines that run these schools are not Navy Seals.
In SEAL CRT training, a trainee would be trained by Navy Seals who have each gone through BUD/S.
8. What about the non-realism in GI Jane of Moore going on a mission with her instructor near the end of the
training period? It seems totally unrealistic when first hearing about it.
9. You have to remember that this is
not BUD/S but rather SEAL CRT training.
At the end of Recondo school, for LRPs in Vietnam (a course that lasted 4 weeks) a student would have to go out (with his instructors)
behind enemy lines and actually do almost a week long mission: while the instructors visually graded that student and his 6 man team.
So it was probably the most dangerous Special Ops school in U.S. history, not because a trainee couldn't make it physically or mentally,
but because he was tested in a real war time mission the last week.
Meaning, sometimes instructors and students did not come back to Recondo school during the end of the 4th week of
testing in the field because they were killed by enemy combatants.
Therefore, when the commanding officer, of SEAL CRT, said that his school was harder than BUD/S,
he could be telling the truth, especially if one considers the fact that the trainees go with their instructors to an enemy hot zone
for the last week of their 3 months of training.
10. Although, it has been reported that during the Vietnam War, many Navy SEALS said some of the missions they
went on were not as tough as some of the things they did in BUD/S.
11. And that is exactly what SEAL CRT training is all about. They send a trainee into a real war zone at the end of their 3
months of training. So all of this bad talk about how unrealistic it is for Moore and her SEAL instructor to go out on a real mission
near the end of training is based on false opinions. Remember, SEAL CRT school is not BUD/S, and BUD/S is not SEAL CRT school.
12. But, alas, SEAL CRT training is fictional. There is no SEAL CRT program (or school) in the military.
With a drop out rate of 60-65% it would not be as tough or as long as BUD/S, which I believe has a drop out rate of 75-95%. However,
SEAL CRT would be a lot longer than most Combat Diver schools throughout the military: and a trainee gets
to be trained by Navy Seals
who went through BUD/S--just as the LRRPs were trained by Green Berets: meaning, SEAL CRT school
does not make U.S. Navy SEALS (in the traditional sense), which is why the trident pin is different in design (I think Moore was wearing
silver instead of gold),
while Recondo school does not make Green Berets,
but rather high speed army Lrps.
13. Women who have conditioned themselves to be very tough throughout their careers in the Marine Corps or Army or Navy or Air Force would probably find it more appealing to go through a SEAL CRT school than BUD/S because SEAL CRT school goes through the scuba and land warfare sections quickly and is not as long as BUD/S. And the reason, I believe, BUD/S is so long, is because they are mostly taking sailors who know little to nothing about combat training and turning them into experts in almost every field of small unit sea, air, and land combat operations.
14. Of course, with this world of scarcity that we live in today, I doubt we would see a real SEAL CRT school in the near future. However, that shouldn't discourage young women from wanting to become SEALS. BUD/S will be open to women applicants in 2016 (plus Ranger School will accept women in 2015), and just as many men cannot have babies, but some do; many women will not be able to become SEALS, but some will. There is an exception to every rule. And, of course, that woman who made it through BUD/S, who wrote that autobiography 'Warrior Princess', proves that some women have what it takes to become Navy Seals.
Update: The need for a Seal CRT School in the United States Navy 
"I believe that the United States Military should only sponsor training programs that women can pass. Women can serve on naval
ships, fly jet fighters, work besides combat infantrymen, and even earn the Ranger School tab. But it seems BUD/S is an impossible feat for women because
of all of the upper body physical training involved. If that is the case then a Seal CRT School, which is a little bit harder than
Ranger School because of the ocean element (unlike BUD/S which is a great deal harder because of
its beyond Spartan-like standards), should replace or be an alternative to BUD/S. Women need to feel they are on an equal par with
the men they work with. All of this macho men's only club stuff has no place in the United States Armed Forces."
1. Although Ranger School lasts around 2 months, if a candidate doesn't recycle, it seems that only two women,
out of 19 that started Ranger School, made it through. Although
that is a great milestone,
perhaps it would be unrealistic for female troops to make it through 6 months (without recycling) of BUD/S. Now if President Obama and Congress were persuaded
to set aside funds for a Seal CRT School more women would be able to finish such a school than they would a BUD/S class.
Anyone who completed such a school would be able to wear a silver Trident instead of a gold one on their uniform.
That, of course, would still be bragging rights for a graduate of Seal CRT School in the U.S. Military.
2. The U.S. Navy uses BUD/S to fill Seal platoons with troops--while
Ranger School is much bigger in administrative scope. Ranger School is a combat leadership course for around 1% of the U.S. Army. Only
a small number of that 1% actually serve in a Ranger Regiment. Seal CRT School would be a combat leadership course for the U.S. Navy
and would train members from all branches of the U.S. Military.
3. Now if a new recruit attends Fort Benning, Georgia, Infantry School, they either get stuck with a course difficulty level of
of pain, or in between. If BUD/S is the U.S. Special Ops version of house of pain, that doesn't mean Seal CRT School would be candy-land.
Seal CRT School would definitely be tough--just not as tough or as long as BUD/S. And Seal CRT
School and its training schedule could be practical in the sense that Navy Seals have trained men in other schools:
like the South Vietnamese LDNNs (during the Vietnam War) and even prison inmates for underwater salvage and repair jobs.
4. What is the Silver Trident?
I believe in the early 1970s, Seal officers recieved gold Tridents to wear on their uniform, while Seal enlisted men instead recieved silver Tridents.
Shortly after this all those who
could wear the Naval Special Warfare insignia (or Seal Trident), recieved the gold Trident. The Seal CRT School
graduates would earn the silver
Trident, so that traditional Navy Seals can keep their gold Tridents and not feel cheated for all of the work they did.
In the movie G.I. Jane, Demi Moore recieves some fake, ugly looking Trident for completing the Seal CRT School.
But if you look closely in another scene, she is wearing a silver Trident on her Battle Dress Uniform at the end of the movie.
To get to wear the gold Trident, I believe you need to not only pass BUD/S but you must also serve in a Seal platoon for
one year--or I think at least complete one's Seal training after BUD/S.
This is one reason why BUD/S is not a multi branch friendly school. But Seal CRT School is because you get to wear the
silver Trident just for completing the course--just as you get a Ranger Tab for completing Ranger School.
And though a person may think a Navy Seal walking down the street with either a gold or silver Trident would look distinguished,
imagine the uniform of a Navy Seal with both Tridents side by side. Now that would look high-speed. Also imagine an
Army Ranger or a Green Beret or a Recon Marine with a silver Trident also on their uniform. A lot of people would be very much
And it would be a great way to advertise The United States Navy.
5. Those in Navy ROTC (or even those at the Naval Academy)
could go to Seal CRT School (probably somewhere in Florida)
during their summer break from college--which is impossible with BUD/S because it lasts 6 months--but
not for Seal CRT School which lasts just 3 months. Seal CRT School could be used by the U.S. Navy like the U.S. Army uses Special
Forces Combat Diver School. By the way, if I could make one change with Seal CRT School in G.I. Jane, it
would be to take out the end scenario of sending troops into harms way at the end of their training. I don't think too many parents would want
their loved ones to go into a hostile war zone just for the sake of training.
6. Why BUD/S is harder than Ranger School and there is a need for an alternative?
Ranger School I have heard is very difficult, but I want to explain something about BUD/S. When I was in Highschool, I had
two buddies whose dad was a Green Beret in charge of all Special Operations in the Pacific. I once asked him the major difference
between Green Berets and SEALs in their training. He told me that whereas Green Berets work their lower bodies in training, Navy Seals work
both their upper and lower bodies in training. Like some of my classmates, I went to Army boot camp in Highschool. You do
a lot of push-ups and upper body work there. So it made me wonder what my friend's dad was talking about? Then it hit me.
At BUD/S you would do so much upper body work that it is in a league of its own. Now if only two women passed Ranger School,
out of 19 women who started, it can be judged as probable that hardly any women will pass BUD/S. This is why President Obama
and the Congress should fund a Seal CRT School. Plus with no combat leadership courses of its own, the Navy
lets down all of those seamen who try out to be Seals but fail. Meaning,
more people would feel happier in the United States Navy if they had the opportunity to try out for a Special Ops
school like Seal CRT School no matter what their M.O.S. or job would be. What does Airborne School and Air Assault School and Ranger School do
for those in the United States Army? It makes soldiers more physically fit and more proud to be in the Army.
7. What is Seal CRT School like?
It would be like BUD/S but with the upper body activities toned down. And physical fitness would be like U.S.
Army Fort Benning Infantry School
but with an ocean/pool element: lots of surf torture, lots of swimming and zodiac boat
handling, pararescue buddy breathing: with mask and snorkel, but
no heavy duty log (telephone pole) physical training--just like in the movie G.I. Jane--although the movie shows endurance running
with the smaller logs, there isn't really any other kinds of log p.t. at Seal CRT School. There is a new physical fitness tool though: i.e.
large metal drums that are used on the sand dunes and in the water.
A trainee will be taught karate but probably not to a black belt. And the standards for the physical training test and
the obstacle course will be lowered. Drown proofing will consist of velcro restraints and no tied cordage.
There will be a Hell Week, but it will only last for four days and three nights.
8. To put Seal CRT 'Hell Week' into perspective, conservative BUD/S 'Hell Week' lasts from Sunday noon to Friday noon,
while Seal CRT 'Hell Week'
lasts from Monday noon to Thursday noon.
9. Now during the second phase of Seal CRT School a trainee will learn only open circuit scuba (or maybe a closed circuit orientation or more)
but the test difficulty will not be as great as Combat Diver School. A trainee will earn their PADI Advanced
Certification--or its military equivalent. And no Seal CRT School would be complete without UDT (Underwater Demolition Team) training. A
trainee would have to learn offshore oceanography.
They must learn how to skillfully map out the surf zone and deeper waters, and how to blow up beach obstacles for a Marine Amphibious landing. Plus,
the skill of being extracted from the ocean by via speedboat and a rubber tube: as seen in the movie G.I. Jane.
10. The third month will be land warfare and escape and evasion (SERE) phase. During escape and evasion is the only time
a trainee will
be starved for around three days--which is another version of Hell Week.
There would be no long starvation diet that Ranger School is known for so the Seal CRT class will be able to
make their ocean swims and beach exercises. Each class would be as long as 3 months without recycling. But if a person really wants to know
what the training is like than watch the movie G.I. Jane.
11. What are the benefits of Seal CRT School for the United States Navy?
If a sailor fails at BUD/S in California, or even at the preparatory school for BUD/S in Illinois, they would have the option of going to
Seal CRT School in Florida to earn their silver trident. Many taxpaying parents of new sailors would feel pleased if their son or daughter
earned the silver trident if they could not obtain the gold version.
12. The United States Navy should have an alternative school to BUD/S. Some female
soldiers in the U.S. Army can become Ranger qualified, more can become Air Assault qualified and even more can become Airborne qualified.
the U.S. Navy has no back up plan for those sailors who cannot make it through BUD/S. There is a lot of angry feelings by sailors,
who are in great physical shape, but have nothing to show for it because they couldn't complete BUD/S for some reason like
Hell Week etc..They joined only to become Navy SEALs, and they don't even have a tab to show for it. Seal CRT School would be an
outlet for this
frustration. It would also make a great combat leadership course for The United States Navy.
Additional Update: Does the United States Navy need 'Navy Seal Infantry Platoons' (from a Navy SEAL CRT School)
that are not as highly skilled and as highly trained as traditional U.S. Navy SEALs? 
1. In the early part of the United States, the U.S. Navy needed U.S. Marines. For the Navy could not train both sailing
and land warfare to the same units. It was more efficient for units in different military branches to be in charge of their own mission
occupation specialties. Times now have changed, and the U.S. Navy can now both train and equip their very own land warfare experts.
2. For the need for Navy SEALs wasn't just because President Kennedy (in the 1960s) wanted each
military branch to have its own anti-guerrilla warfare capability. Ever since the Korean War (in the 1950s),
Underwater Demolition Teams were pushed further and further into use by the U.S. Navy as Special Operations soldiers.
3. One proof of the need for Naval Special Warfare to train and use Seal CRT (infantry units) comes from Marcus Luttrell's acount
of his SEAL Team in the Afghanistan War. His squad's rescue team comprised only several men inside of
only one helicopter--and they were all destroyed in their helicopter by only one enemy rocket propelled grenade.
Several days later some twenty plus U.S. Army Rangers were successful at rescuing Luttrell from a Taliban village because of their larger numbers.
4. But the United States Navy is not the only institution to learn from this lesson that sometimes quantity trumps quality.
The British S.A.S. were thought to be too small in numbers for their role in Afghanistan. So
the British government decided to train a S.A.S. support unit (not as elite) but in larger numbers than the Regiment.
5. The United States Navy cannot efficiently rely upon the Marine Corps infantry for the
above mentioned role because of chain of command, administrative and logistical problems with Marine units and their commanding officers--even though the United States Marine Corps falls under the Department of the Navy.
6. Plus, the U.S. Navy Special Warfare boat crews cannot possibly be used as land warfare soldiers.
For Navy Seals themselves are too few in number to be used as Navy Seal boat crews.
And what is more ridiculous in administrative combat management: using Navy Seals as boat crews or using boat crews as Navy Seals?
7. So what is my solution to all this? I think it is time we brought back the UDTs, like the Underwater Demolition Teams
that served in the Korean War. The lighter, shorter training can be for the UDTs, and the heavier, longer training for the Navy Seals.
The Navy Seals can focus on land operations, and the UDTs can focus on offshore beach surveys, beach
obstacle demolitions, anti-shipping of enemy vessels, ocean rescues, guiding troops in marine corps beach landings, and help support both Navy
Seals in land operations and naval Explosive Ordinance Disposal units at sea.
The UDTs can wear the silver trident, just as their counterparts, the Navy Seals, wear the gold trident.
8. But if Seal CRT school just makes UDTs, why still call it Seal CRT school?
The reason is that its instructors will be military Seals. Plus, the Seal CRT program is based on BUD/S training--but will
be half its length in time. And the Seal CRT program will emphasize quantity over quality, just as BUD/S emphasizes the opposite or quality
over quantity. Navy Seals will be used for their premiere role as anti-terrorists. But UDTs will be more water based in military role. UDTs can also support Seals on the battlefield because they are also trained in land warfare but on a more limited basis. Seal CRT school will be a multi-branched combat leadership course which will be a great way to advertise the United States Navy. Advertising Navy Seal training (BUD/S) as a recruiting tool for the U.S. Navy is almost a joke because of its high drop out rates and low percentage of Seal trained sailors in the U.S. Navy. Seal CRT school will empower more naval recruits to fulfill an attainable goal. Plus, UDTs are not so distant in mission occupation specialty from their Seal cousins.
9. The minimum Physical Screening Test (PST) scores for the Seal CRT combat leadership course
should be based on the Navy Diver (PST) scores or the Navy AIRR (PST) scores.
10. If anyone wants to know the primary missions of the UDTs, there is a great 1951 movie called ‘The Frogmen' starring
Richard Widmark and Dana Andrews that shows such missions.
11. The UDTs were officially phased out in 1983, unlike the Army LRRPs which were phased out in 1969, but were brought
back as LRSUs in the mid-1980s. Ground troop recon units are at their best in jungle or forest-like environments but are at their worst in
deserts and open spaces where they can be seen for miles. That is why all ground troop recon units need to be deployed
with land vehicles or jeeps, etc., while being used in desert-like environments.
12. I believe the United States Navy needs to bring back the UDTs, or at least bring back the training that makes WW2/Korean War-style
the United States Navy is in desperate need of a Combat Leadership Course for its women sailors that
is practical enough for women sailors. I conceive that a Seal CRT school/course could fulfill such a mission.
Plus, the UDT mission must not be forgotten for any future U.S. conflict by the United States Navy.
13. Will there be a justified backlash if UDTs are given the silver trident on their parade uniforms?
I don't see why. Army Rangers had to give up their black berets for tan berets and they were willing to change for Army cohesion.
Nobody would be asking Navy Seals to give up anything for the UDTs. The Seals of course would keep their gold tridents. The
silver tridents would go to the UDTs however. The silver trident would be better at advertising the United States Navy than the
original UDT insignia (without the eagle) ever could. Unless there existed an active UDT unit,
I think it would be best if UDTs would only wear the left-shoulder badge spelled out U.D.T. on their BDUs like the Army Ranger tab
is worn on the BDUs of soldiers not in a Ranger unit. At graduation, the UDTs would be handed the silver trident for their
parade uniform and a UDT word badge for their BDUs.
14. There are already two combat specialty courses that women have graduated from in the U.S. Army: Sapper School and Ranger School.
In summary: 5 major reasons there is a need for a Seal CRT school in the United States Navy
1. The United States Navy is badly in need of a Combat Leadership Course for its sailors.
2. To make sailors in the fleet (or land based sailors) have more combat leadership skills.
3. So that the UDT mission is known by more sailors and is passed on to the next generation more easily.
4. Plus, more women and men in the United States Navy will be able to become land combat and
diver combat qualified, which is almost
impossible with the current BUD/S program.
5. So that BUD/S will stay BUD/S. The killing of Osama Bin Laden proves that Navy Seals who have gone through
BUD/S are the best at anti-terroism and surgical strikes. A Seal CRT school will take pressure off the
United States Navy to lower the standards of BUD/S for women sailors--even if only one woman
sailor graduates from BUD/S every 4 or 5 years. The Navy can make the argument that lowering the
standards at BUD/S will produce an inferior Navy Seal, and that an easier frogman course is available
for women sailors at Seal CRT school.
I think the following is the only portrait of Jesus I ever drew....
Copyrighted Website: michael.www2.50megs.com