Compass Points - Basic Math
Marine Corps keeps squad at 13
Compass Points - Basic Math
Marine Corps keeps squad at 13
April 15, 2025
.
Add? Subtract? Multiply? Divide?
Every school child knows that when it comes to basic math, there are four fundamental functions: add, subtract, multiply, and divide.
The Marine Corps should always know which of the basic math functions is best.
When the subject is combined arms, combat capabilities, the Marine Corps should always work to add and multiply combat capabilities, never subtract or divide.
The Marine Corps recently announced that after years of study, it will keep the number of Marines in a Marine rifle squad at 13. The squad will add a precision fires specialist but the structure, name, and number will stay the same.
.
-------------------
-------------------
.
After years of experimentation, the Marine Corps has finally settled on a 13-person rifle squad, including a grunt trained in long-range precision weapons as the service looks to increase the distance from which its most fundamental ground unit can destroy the enemy.
The Corps' top officer, Commandant Gen. Eric Smith, made the announcement Monday at the Navy League's Sea-Air-Space 2025 conference in National Harbor, Maryland, where military and defense industry leaders are gathering this week to discuss national security aims and challenges.
The service had used a 13-Marine rifle squad for decades. But in 2018, as the Corps embarked on its most ambitious organizational shift since before World War II -- known as Force Design -- and it began to tinker with the number of infantrymen in the unit, ranging from 12 people to 15 over the last several years.
Read Next: House Republicans and Democrats Say the US Must Maintain Its Troop Totals in Europe
"This includes a school-trained squad leader sergeant and three fire teams," Smith said at the conference. "While this structure sounds familiar, it now includes an organic precision fires specialist."
-- Military.com
.
-------------------
-------------------
.
Here's what the Marine Corps might have done to the squad.
.
1. Change the squad name. -- Could have called it a 'missile slice'
2. Change the squad structure. -- A missile slice would have 5 Marines with fire control laptops.
3. Change the squad number. -- 8 missile slices would make a missile pie.
4. Subtract squad capabilities. -- Combined arms capabilities subtracted.
.
Fortunately, the Marine Corps did not do any of those silly things. Although the Marine Corps took years to decide, at least it decided to keep the basic Marine Corps squad, name, structure, and number the same while adding an additional capability, "an organic precision fires specialist."
Over many, many decades, the Marine Corps has updated itself constantly by using a recurring method: keep the proven organization intact, but add new capabilities as needed. Using this method, the updated squad will serve the Marine Corps well, as it always has.
If only the Marine Corps had used this method to update itself beginning back in 2019. If only.
Instead, with destructive haste Marine Corps leadership began not by adding to or multiplying the amphibious fleet, but instead by subtracting and dividing the amphibs.
A recent force structure article by Bruce Stubbs recalls what happened.
.
-------------------
-------------------
.
Soon after becoming Marine Corps Commandant, General David H. Berger announced a headline-grabbing transformation of the Corps in his July 2019 Commandant’s Planning Guidance. In its new role, the Marines would operate inside actively contested maritime spaces to conduct sea denial and assured access missions with a particular focus on the Indo-Pacific theater. In March 2020 Berger further explained his concept in Force Design 2030. Berger’s guidance declared that the Navy’s large amphibs were too vulnerable and too expensive to risk in combat, the Marines’ requirement for 38 or 34 large amphibs was no longer valid, and the Marines had a new requirement for small, agile amphibs.
His unprecedented, if not historic, transformational initiative sparked a years-long controversy over two inter-related issues. First, Force Design 2030 punctured the Corps’ rationale for Navy’s large amphibs, which the two sea services refer to as either “big deck” or “small deck” ships. Second, the initiative handed the Navy a multi-billion dollar bill to construct and operate a new class of amphibs designated eventually as the Medium Landing Ship.
-- Bruce Stubbs for Cimsec.
.
-------------------
-------------------
.
Instead of standing up and advocating for needed additions to the amphibious fleet, Marine leadership in 2019 announced they would accept subtractions. Subtractions to an amphibious fleet that was already too small?
Sadly, that was only the beginning of the misguided destruction. Marine regiments and supporting units were next for subtraction. Some or all of air, armor, infantry, artillery, engineers, snipers and more were stripped away. Instead of adding and multiplying combat capabilities, too many combat capabilities were subtracted.
While the Marine squad has survived the turmoil, the Marine regiment has not.
Here's what the Marine Corps has done to the world famous Marine regiment.
.
1. Changed the name of regiments
2. Changed the structure of regiments.
3. Changed the number of Marines in regiments.
4. Subtracted combat capabilities from regiments.
.
Add? Subtract? Multiply? Divide?
Back in the summer of 2019 the Marine Corps sought to trade proven amphibious ships for a fleet of small connector ships, now called the LSM. Five years the later, the Marine Corps has fewer amphibs available and no new LSMs. Too much subtraction.
Also back in the summer of 2019, the Marine Corps had a full roster of infantry regiments. Five years later too many regiments have been renamed, restructured, and repurposed. Too many regiments have lost too much combined arms units, equipment, and capabilities. All this combined arms subtraction has caused deep divisions across the entire Marine community. Too much subtraction.
When the subject is combined arms, combat capabilities, the Marine Corps must always focus on adding and multiplying combined arms, combat capabilities. If there is a need to add new capabilities, add them, but never make the Marine Corps weaker.
With new leadership in place in Congress, in the Department of Defense, and at the Department of the Navy, it is time for the Marine Corps to stop all the subtraction and division, and get back to adding and multiplying the global, combined arms, 9-1-1 MAGTF.
.
- - - - -
.
Military.com - 04/08/2025
Top Marine Says Service Has Finally Settled on 13-Grunt Rifle Squads
By Drew F. Lawrence
.
- - - - -
.
Cimsec - 03/17/2025
Navy Force Planning with a Pertinacious Marine Corps
By Bruce Stubbs
https://cimsec.org/navy-force-planning-with-a-pertinacious-marine-corps/
"Taylor designed the Pentomic concept with the basic concept being to reduce the time needed to organize an attack, thereby reducing the time available for the enemy to respond with a nuclear strike. To do this, the Pentomic concept organized what would normally be parts of several different units into a more balanced division, reducing the need for communications between different command structures that would introduce delays.
American army officers felt the plan was "ill started, ill fated and hopefully short lived" with some thinking it was a scheme of Taylor's to increase the number of active divisions in the Army when he had actually cut their combat manpower.
Westmoreland recalled that the pentomic structure, with all its flaws, was a creature of the Chief of Staff, and any officer who valued his career was loath to criticise it. Westmoreland also briefed all officers in the division that "Our job is not to determine whether it will work—our job is to make it work". Following the end of Westmoreland's command of the 101st in 1960 he recommended that the pentomic structure be abolished."
FD2030 stinks like the Armys ill fated "Pentomic" structure.
Somewhere along the line, like in the second summer of a PLC OCS increment of happiness, Squad Tactics were introduced. Not sure if an officer or Staff NCO gave the course introduction, conducted in the hour after noon chow so we could fight off the sleepezes in a hot classroom, but sooner or later we went out into the wilds of Mainside and began to practice the craft of “squad leading.” A some stage a fairly grizzled. Staff Sargent who had served in Vietnam broke it down for we few, we happy few. “You need to position yourself where you can best lead your fire teams, and you “Fing” fireteam leaders need to control your fireteams. It’s the rule of threes Candidates, the rule of three.” This was reinforced for a as long as this writer can recall. It also has practical application the management of a company public or private;y held.
No doubt the introduction of new equipment and so forth has an impact on T/O’s, but not sure anything was accomplished in trying to come up with a better “Squad sized mousetrap.” One can imagine the consultants were very happy, hours of billable time spent “analyzing” the needs and uses of the rifle squad in the USMC. One for me, and one for the bridge, one for me, and one for the bridge, two for me and none for the bridge….” wasted time, wasted dollars. People need to lose their jobs over this BS. Let’s start with the current occupant of the oldest standing structure in Washington DC.