via Defense One.
The talk of building around the MEU is fine. The talk of focusing on the MEB is misguided. The MEB is least used formation in the Marine Corps. MEF's and MEU's have been at the vanguard of the Marine Corps since at least Vietnam (in their current configuration), but what is really disturbing is the adoption of Amos' flawed SPMAGTF's as examples of where we go in the future.
Even more disturbing is the continued focus in HQMC with terrorism/COIN type warfare despite indications from the Vice Chairman that the other members don't share that view.
This proposal to reform the Marine Corps with 150,000 Marines would essentially mean shedding even more Infantry Battalions, seeing Tanks and Artillery Battalions go away and to rely entirely on the Wing.
That can't be allowed. The only good that came from this article is that it reveals Amos' true motives. He wants to make the Marine Corps an ocean going 101st that can get their quick but can't hold its own against a true combined arms force.
In his Sept. 16 commentary in Defense One, Gen. James Amos, commandant of the Marine Corps, makes the argument that the Corps would be right-sized at around 174,000 personnel. This comes not long after his office made the argument that a Marine Corps sized at 186,800 Marines was deemed fiscally impossible. I believe that the reason that the Marine Corps is having a difficult time finding the right size is that it remains tethered to the legacy formations of the past. It is possible for the Marine Corps to provide its vital services to the nation for between 120,000 and 150,000 Marines if it embraces a new approach to the future.Read the entire article.
The talk of building around the MEU is fine. The talk of focusing on the MEB is misguided. The MEB is least used formation in the Marine Corps. MEF's and MEU's have been at the vanguard of the Marine Corps since at least Vietnam (in their current configuration), but what is really disturbing is the adoption of Amos' flawed SPMAGTF's as examples of where we go in the future.
Even more disturbing is the continued focus in HQMC with terrorism/COIN type warfare despite indications from the Vice Chairman that the other members don't share that view.
This proposal to reform the Marine Corps with 150,000 Marines would essentially mean shedding even more Infantry Battalions, seeing Tanks and Artillery Battalions go away and to rely entirely on the Wing.
That can't be allowed. The only good that came from this article is that it reveals Amos' true motives. He wants to make the Marine Corps an ocean going 101st that can get their quick but can't hold its own against a true combined arms force.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteyou removed your comment but i'm gonna respond anyway.
Deletei'm not against a new heavy lift lcu.
not by a longshot.
what i'm looking at is the current budget environment, the idea that the Navy doesn't appear to be in the mood to put up with any new concepts if what we have in inventory is "good enough" and i'm also not ignoring the fact that the vehicle we have is almost 50 years old.
everyone is ignoring that fact. the AAV that you're asking Marines to drive into combat is like asking someone to drive a 1970 car today. its possible but extremely difficult unless the car has been babied ...and thats without taking into account constant use and abuse in rough country.
I did not comment in the post about the Marine killed in training but I am suspicious the AAV caught fire as a maintenance not a training issue. The thing is just old and accident go up when using old equipment. I have no facts to base this assumption on other than a gut feeling of what happens when you have a 30 year old combat vehicle.
Deleteagreed. i went with that originally but decided to back away. just hashing it out it really sounds like someone got loose with some type of pyrotechnic or something went off in the vehicle.
DeleteA very significant part of not becoming "an ocean-going 101st" is the capability to deliver and use adequate numbers of MEU's GCE heavy armor up to M1A1/2, plus offering organic barrel and tube close-in shore bombardment (IFS), 'bingo'-platforms for AH/UH helos, tripwires/air-defense against ARG-targeting projectiles, etc.
ReplyDeleteAnd yet you deem there to be no need for a fast heavy-lift LCU that can and would offer this and more, not just to deliver the heavy armor necessary to capture and hold ground but to support and protect the ARG far Over-The-Horizon at OTH-100+ ?
New 'wheels' won't address any of those core-requirements.
Still here, with 4 minutes to spare...
ReplyDeleteYou are preferring shiny new wheels stuck on some ship in hopes of finding a sniper-free friendly port to match the RoRo before putting the GCE to work ?
"Flying Dutchman Rides" anyone ?!
And yet you accuse Commandant Amos of not thinking GCE-correct ideas ?
The reason that Amos can cut the Corps is that he has a way to increase the average fighting power of individual Marines --> women in the infantry.
ReplyDelete"Marine Corps recruiting women at Parris Island for enlisted infantry training"
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/article/20130919/NEWS/309190053/Marine-Corps-recruiting-women-Parris-Island-enlisted-infantry-training
didn't all those women wash out?
DeleteThey were officers. Now they go for the quality -- enlisted.
DeleteYou could get on the Learning Curve on that issue anytime now. Don't fear, since it is not that hard to understand the substantial gains USMC is about to be enhanced by through simply doing the obvious and right thing in any democracy.
DeleteThose unwilling to 'learn' yield the returns of their most personal preferences in divorce-court, ruptured relations with daughters, nieces, aunties, grannies and thus an overall self-impoverished life-'style'.
Of course, as always, to each their own...
Just don't comma-crying in yer brew !
I, think, you may be underestimating what a 120,000 strong Marine Corps would be capable of.
ReplyDeleteThats twice what you had at your peak during the first world war and a quarter of what you had at your peak during the second world war.
At that level, the British Army deployed an Armoured division to Iraq.
I certainly dont love the MEB as structured, but, something like, fully and quickly deployable off LCUs, its a serious force.
I tend to think, what assets are needed to refight Inchon (for you), or the falklands (for us) and the answer tends to be ships to deploy forces to the area and connectors to get the to land.
And do so when and where with surprise and as big a punch as possible - while keeping the ARG well out of reach of shore-defense.
DeleteThat should be the focus of a USMC that is reasserting its unique amphibious character.
And since nobody is planning to do another desert-urban battle-scene any time soon, even certain weaknesses of older APCs will matter less than how you get them where they need to be.
As to the weaknesses of AAV-7, even the Army's M1A2 began to grow TUSK for urban warfare. And BRADLEYS had serious issues there.
Urban warfare, not in the cards anytime soon again - one would hope.