Lind has been calling it as he see it for a long time.
When the US Army has 13% of its soldiers as officers, there is something very fundamentally flawed with it. It should at MOST be 3% and that is pushing it.
All that information collected via the most modern communication technology, all those levels of centralized bureaucracy is simply asking for paralysis by over-analysis. It's the French Army of 1939, awaiting the enemy with an Army perfectly suited for the last war and completely inappropriate for the next.
It's real easy for armchair quarterbacks to take potshots. Chew on this FACT: No military on this planet would have a prayer against the US military. Even in the debacle of Iraq, a FUBAR plan if ever there was one, the training, skill and gumption of the US military pulled it out. French Army of 1939? I don't think so, Mac... Not close.
The PLA does not need tank landing ships to make landings in Diaoyu Islands or the Spratly Islands; they need these ships to make a landing on Taiwan.
And I personally don't think the US would try to make a recovery landing on Taiwan once the PLA troops land on Taiwan, the US tried its best and that's it.
I agree that most out of the box thinking, reflections on past conflicts and what the heck we should do to prepare for the next war has been the domain of blogs like yours and a couple of others. Everyone else is just stuffing their faces at the military industrial trough.
Now here is an untested force or process even. Will the US militarily defend/intervene if the chinese use a crippling blokade against taiwan and then force an aggressive landing ?
PLA and PLAN are just "buying" for time and those arm-chair-generals know it. The very moment China starts fielding Zubr en-masse, Taiwan is done.
You don't need a large fleet of Zubr. All you need is more than enough to get the first and second wave across. And being China, they are probably re-designing the Zubr to make this model carry more armour and infantry.
The BMT Defense Caiman 200 LCT design (more like our LSM) has been posted for some time now. A good one, but I have NOT heard of any sales? They have two smaller designs which might fit into USN rqmts. See this link: http://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/bmt-design-portfolio/bmt-caimen-landing-craft/ Some Warboats guys and myself produced a large coastal gunboat called PGE based on the Caiman design. Not too many folks interested in coastal gunboats these days~
Off topic but:
ReplyDeleteIMHO, this is one of the most well thought out, no holds bar talk about the officer corps in the US military.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/an-officer-corps-that-cant-score/
Lind has been calling it as he see it for a long time.
DeleteWhen the US Army has 13% of its soldiers as officers, there is something very fundamentally flawed with it. It should at MOST be 3% and that is pushing it.
All that information collected via the most modern communication technology, all those levels of centralized bureaucracy is simply asking for paralysis by over-analysis. It's the French Army of 1939, awaiting the enemy with an Army perfectly suited for the last war and completely inappropriate for the next.
It's real easy for armchair quarterbacks to take potshots. Chew on this FACT: No military on this planet would have a prayer against the US military. Even in the debacle of Iraq, a FUBAR plan if ever there was one, the training, skill and gumption of the US military pulled it out. French Army of 1939? I don't think so, Mac... Not close.
Deleteyeah Eric at ELP Blog sent that to me, but to be honest I can't get too impressed.
ReplyDeleteALL THEY'RE DOING IS SAYING WHAT WE'VE BEEN SAYING FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS OR MORE!!!!
we'll know they're serious about defense reforms when they slice the number of generals by 3/4ths.
The PLA does not need tank landing ships to make landings in Diaoyu Islands or the Spratly Islands; they need these ships to make a landing on Taiwan.
ReplyDeleteAnd I personally don't think the US would try to make a recovery landing on Taiwan once the PLA troops land on Taiwan, the US tried its best and that's it.
Taiwan would be a contested beach, and currently we could take it but the lives lost would be great.
DeleteI agree that most out of the box thinking, reflections on past conflicts and what the heck we should do to prepare for the next war has been the domain of blogs like yours and a couple of others. Everyone else is just stuffing their faces at the military industrial trough.
ReplyDeleteNow here is an untested force or process even. Will the US militarily defend/intervene if the chinese use a crippling blokade against taiwan and then force an aggressive landing ?
ReplyDeletePLA and PLAN are just "buying" for time and those arm-chair-generals know it. The very moment China starts fielding Zubr en-masse, Taiwan is done.
ReplyDeleteYou don't need a large fleet of Zubr. All you need is more than enough to get the first and second wave across. And being China, they are probably re-designing the Zubr to make this model carry more armour and infantry.
The BMT Defense Caiman 200 LCT design (more like our LSM) has been posted for some time now. A good one, but I have NOT heard of any sales? They have two smaller designs which might fit into USN rqmts. See this link:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/bmt-design-portfolio/bmt-caimen-landing-craft/
Some Warboats guys and myself produced a large coastal gunboat called PGE based on the Caiman design. Not too many folks interested in coastal gunboats these days~