Vietnam looking to upgun its Marines Corps...

via ASEANmildef

TASS news agency, citing sources from the Russian defense industry said, Vietnam is likely to order a batch of BMP-3F armored vehicles to strengthen the Navy reviews.
Specifically, the newspaper wrote, "the Navy beat Vietnam is facing many difficulties due to lack of amphibious armored vehicles can support modern credible firepower amphibious operations.

At the end of July, they have conducted an amphibious maneuvers invade the island, including the mobilization of means such as light tanks PT-76B, armored vehicles carrying military BTR-60PB wheel, they are transported by 2 lander rose project 771 (NATO designation Polnochny layer).At the end of July, they have conducted an amphibious maneuvers invade the island, including the mobilization of means such as light tanks PT-76B, armored vehicles carrying military BTR-60PB wheel, they are transported by 2 lander rose project 771 (NATO designation Polnochny layer).These are already very outdated weaponry, so in the event of a real war, Vietnam is difficult to win over the enemy, "the source said.These are already very outdated weaponry, so in the event of a real war, Vietnam is difficult to win over the enemy, "the source said.Expert commentary added: "If the Hanoi fight a specific army, the naval task force will be presented before they defeated high risk.PT-76B tanks are not strong enough to destroy infantry fighting vehicle middle class, the main tank and other technical equipment of the enemy. I suppose they will not have much chance to recapture an island in real combat environment. "However, Hanoi has considered the possibility of buying a plot of amphibious armored vehicle modernization. We have proposed two options for Vietnam as infantry fighting vehicle BMP-3F (naval version) and self-propelled antitank gun 2S25. Navy reviews of Vietnam have expressed their interest to both vehicles on.

Two things.  First. It irks me to no end that our diplomats and military planners seem convinced that the alliances that they're working so hard to build will always remain.  Alliances shift...so do interests.  Just because its in a certain country's interest to be seen as moving closer to the US today DOES NOT mean that it will always.  This is especially true in Asia.  You're dealing with the land of practicality...if the US is seen as the weak horse then they'll drop us like a bad habit.

Second.  Moves like this one has me shouting at the rooftops about how wedded the USMC is to the Company Landing Team concept.  We are disbanding our premier combined arms team concept to chase waterfalls while the rest of the world is trying to duplicate what we're throwing away.

The futurists in the Strategic Initiatives Group are getting it wrong.