A member of Congress, that knows something about the military, needs to call the Commandants bluff and ask to see a MLR. See the missiles, see the launchers...ask the hard questions about logistics and the support of Marines.
Problem is, it seems they are all intimidated by colored pieces of cloth stacked on the left side of a uniform or the 4 stars glittering.
I would hope and expect the senior retired Marine in Congress, Alaska’s Sen. Sullivan, to be the leader in questioning this “Ship of Fools”. Not sure where he is, but he or another Marine needs to step forward ASAP.
Don't know the current leadership of our CORPS, but it sounds like these "Leaders" are a bunch of Bks lawyers. They have all these ideas and "plans", but no way to implement them. All they did is cripple our ability to fight.....SAD
Reading the CPG, I don’t know if I should laugh or cry. All that is in place are words. There are NO weapons systems in place. There is no credible, and transparent wargaming of FD. We need some lawmakers with military background to do their job and make the MC leadership show them what they’ve done in the past 5 years. Leadership’s feet must be held to the proverbial fire!
I should’ve added. Where is the logistics plan to support the SIF? From what I’ve been reading, the MC planners are still “working” the plan. Sad state of affairs for our Corps!
Also, I don’t believe that I’ve ever seen or heard that the SIF has a T/O or T/E. I know that the Commandant says that the SIF is a CONCEPT not a physical entity, but a MAGTF is a concept that is backed by concrete units that have fixed T/Os and T/Es. As Gen McAbee stated after 5 years, “where’s the beef”?
So the marines are supposed to go the first island chain and set up defenses.
Ok
Which countries in that first island chain precisely are going to allow America to deploy the Marines to come and set up in their territory BEFORE a war kicks off and it's too late/difficult/impractical to get marines there?
None. Not one country in the first chain will allow it so therefore this whole idea is moot.
AIL’s comments are not even worthy of a response. AIL is clearly not reading Compass Points. He even introduces a new term: ex-officers. No need for further comment
Gen Smith became the acting CMC 15 months ago and a CPG should have followed literally the day he formally became the CMC in late September 2023. He had a major medical episode that made him unable to serve for many months. In the Corps I remember the second in command steps up to continue the mission. In this case the issuance of the CPG, which could have been modified later, languished for well over a year. Why? The Corps has been in a period of paralysis through analysis and divestment for five years.
As The Corps was withdrawing from The Republic of Vietnam in the early ‘70’s, we realized that we needed to rid the Corps of the human garbage that we had accumulated during the war. Camp Pendleton was the primary site for the cleansing. In mid 1971, as best as we could estimate, there were some 2,000 of these people somewhere between the Mississippi River and the Mekong Delta: in various civilian jails; military brigs; Casual Companies; and deserters. They had to be accounted for and eliminated…It took us about a year.
We also set about changing the direction of the Marine Corps’ focus from jungle operations to coordinated, combined arms operations. Again, Camp Pendleton (First Marine Division) with its proximity to our large, desert training facility at 29 Palms, took the lead
We realized the reality and need for doctrine in mechanized operations and stayed busy in the mid ‘70’s conducting such operations. They began with amphibious operations (both across the beach and helo-borne, then moving inland throughout Camp Pendleton and on to 29 Palms. Mechanized formations with artillery preceding the force became routine.
During this entire evolution, we were visited by officers from Quantico who had arrived at the same conclusion. Of course, there were infantry officers who did not want the responsibility attendant with attached armor and the fear of casualties from widely separated units with such heavy use of artillery and air strikes, but this was quickly overcome.
These early operations laid the ground work for the magnificent success of Desert Storm, some fifteen years in the future.
What these uninformed figureheads, today, have done to the Corps in just a few short years, is beyond belief. Their divestments, without meaningful discussion and testing; lack of progress; useless explanations; and wishful thinking must have the Peoples Liberation Army jumping for joy with the sure knowledge that these American Marines’ plans to isolate themselves on a scattering of islands, will be swept away in the first few minutes of conflict.
Of course, the Corps must evolve and take advantage of modern technology, but for God’s sake, do it as the result of consensus, testing and training. Force Design and the callous divestment of Armor, Artillery and Engineering assets was decided by people with limited experience who issued declarations that opposing views will not be tolerated.
It’s time to get the Congress involved in this nonsense and save the Corps from itself. Semper fi
Another, right on point, article Gary Anderson Col. (ret)
“Starting with the Navy, as this is written, we have only two aircraft carriers deployed globally, with both anchored in the Middle East for what could become a global crisis. Despite the chest pounding over the Chinese threat, the Navy’s Indo-Pacific presence is akin to the emperor without clothes.”
AI L., As I read your words I thought this does not sound like any Marine I ever served with. Your words are defeatist and don't represent the Corps I served in for many years. In that Corps (pre-Berger/Smith) Marines tackled problems that prevented it from fulfilling its Title 10, USC mission; they did not go looking for a mission that the other Services were handling well. And they certainly were not interested in being part of an organization that favored the defense. No they were real Marines, fix bayonets and take the hill was their mindset. You may have earned the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor but I wouldn't want you in a fighting position next to me! I wear my Purple Heart Medal proudly and hold those with a defeatist outlook in great disdain.
Sir, you state very many correct facts regarding the lack of Navy/MSC amphibious lift, but you’re working the wrong end of the problem. You don’t ever modify the organization that’s been given a mission (Title 10) because another component organization can’t meet their Title 10 mission. You fix the root cause.
Also I should note that what Corps leadership is doing, IMO, a violation of 10 U.S. Code § 8063 - United States Marine Corps: composition; functions.
Section 8063 states “…shall be so organized as to include not less than three combat divisions and three air wings, and such other land combat, aviation, and other services as may be organic therein.” As the Commandant foresees the future force structure there will not be 3 combat divisions. Are you aware that III MEF has a HQ element but NO maneuver or support regiments? No ability to project combat power, even if the Navy had the shipping. That it is short a division.
I should also note that Section 8063 clearly states, “…and shall perform such other duties as the President may direct. However, these additional duties may not detract from or interfere with the operations for which the Marine Corps is primarily organized.” There are numerous other missions that the President has ordered the Corps to conduct, NEO, peacekeeping, “soft” power projection, etc.
In one of your posts you stated that the Corps had obsolete, too large or difficult to maintain equipment. Some of your examples may be partially true such as the M-1 tank, but one example doesn’t prove the statement. Yes, the F-35 may prove a challenge to maintain at FARPs but initially, so was the AV-8. The one thing you’ve glossed over, whether by omission or commission, is why the castration of the MAGTF of tubed artillery, engineering units, the removal of Scout/Snipers, the reduction in the size of infantry battalions, etc.?
These “old farts” you so summarily dismiss are the rails that keep the Corps moving forward in the right direction.
Ah yes, the bad ole days when the Navy and the Marine Corps were falling apart - - when the first two questions asked by the NSC during a crisis were: where are the carriers and where are the Marines.
A member of Congress, that knows something about the military, needs to call the Commandants bluff and ask to see a MLR. See the missiles, see the launchers...ask the hard questions about logistics and the support of Marines.
Problem is, it seems they are all intimidated by colored pieces of cloth stacked on the left side of a uniform or the 4 stars glittering.
I would hope and expect the senior retired Marine in Congress, Alaska’s Sen. Sullivan, to be the leader in questioning this “Ship of Fools”. Not sure where he is, but he or another Marine needs to step forward ASAP.
Don't know the current leadership of our CORPS, but it sounds like these "Leaders" are a bunch of Bks lawyers. They have all these ideas and "plans", but no way to implement them. All they did is cripple our ability to fight.....SAD
Reading the CPG, I don’t know if I should laugh or cry. All that is in place are words. There are NO weapons systems in place. There is no credible, and transparent wargaming of FD. We need some lawmakers with military background to do their job and make the MC leadership show them what they’ve done in the past 5 years. Leadership’s feet must be held to the proverbial fire!
I should’ve added. Where is the logistics plan to support the SIF? From what I’ve been reading, the MC planners are still “working” the plan. Sad state of affairs for our Corps!
Sadly, there is more work being done to "spin" a solution to the logistics problem than to find a solution to the problem.
Also, I don’t believe that I’ve ever seen or heard that the SIF has a T/O or T/E. I know that the Commandant says that the SIF is a CONCEPT not a physical entity, but a MAGTF is a concept that is backed by concrete units that have fixed T/Os and T/Es. As Gen McAbee stated after 5 years, “where’s the beef”?
All CMC said is political speak, say a lot without saying anything.
So the marines are supposed to go the first island chain and set up defenses.
Ok
Which countries in that first island chain precisely are going to allow America to deploy the Marines to come and set up in their territory BEFORE a war kicks off and it's too late/difficult/impractical to get marines there?
None. Not one country in the first chain will allow it so therefore this whole idea is moot.
AIL’s comments are not even worthy of a response. AIL is clearly not reading Compass Points. He even introduces a new term: ex-officers. No need for further comment
Gen Smith became the acting CMC 15 months ago and a CPG should have followed literally the day he formally became the CMC in late September 2023. He had a major medical episode that made him unable to serve for many months. In the Corps I remember the second in command steps up to continue the mission. In this case the issuance of the CPG, which could have been modified later, languished for well over a year. Why? The Corps has been in a period of paralysis through analysis and divestment for five years.
As The Corps was withdrawing from The Republic of Vietnam in the early ‘70’s, we realized that we needed to rid the Corps of the human garbage that we had accumulated during the war. Camp Pendleton was the primary site for the cleansing. In mid 1971, as best as we could estimate, there were some 2,000 of these people somewhere between the Mississippi River and the Mekong Delta: in various civilian jails; military brigs; Casual Companies; and deserters. They had to be accounted for and eliminated…It took us about a year.
We also set about changing the direction of the Marine Corps’ focus from jungle operations to coordinated, combined arms operations. Again, Camp Pendleton (First Marine Division) with its proximity to our large, desert training facility at 29 Palms, took the lead
We realized the reality and need for doctrine in mechanized operations and stayed busy in the mid ‘70’s conducting such operations. They began with amphibious operations (both across the beach and helo-borne, then moving inland throughout Camp Pendleton and on to 29 Palms. Mechanized formations with artillery preceding the force became routine.
During this entire evolution, we were visited by officers from Quantico who had arrived at the same conclusion. Of course, there were infantry officers who did not want the responsibility attendant with attached armor and the fear of casualties from widely separated units with such heavy use of artillery and air strikes, but this was quickly overcome.
These early operations laid the ground work for the magnificent success of Desert Storm, some fifteen years in the future.
What these uninformed figureheads, today, have done to the Corps in just a few short years, is beyond belief. Their divestments, without meaningful discussion and testing; lack of progress; useless explanations; and wishful thinking must have the Peoples Liberation Army jumping for joy with the sure knowledge that these American Marines’ plans to isolate themselves on a scattering of islands, will be swept away in the first few minutes of conflict.
Of course, the Corps must evolve and take advantage of modern technology, but for God’s sake, do it as the result of consensus, testing and training. Force Design and the callous divestment of Armor, Artillery and Engineering assets was decided by people with limited experience who issued declarations that opposing views will not be tolerated.
It’s time to get the Congress involved in this nonsense and save the Corps from itself. Semper fi
Another, right on point, article Gary Anderson Col. (ret)
“Starting with the Navy, as this is written, we have only two aircraft carriers deployed globally, with both anchored in the Middle East for what could become a global crisis. Despite the chest pounding over the Chinese threat, the Navy’s Indo-Pacific presence is akin to the emperor without clothes.”
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2024/09/05/military_reform_reversing_the_decline_1056296.html
AI L., As I read your words I thought this does not sound like any Marine I ever served with. Your words are defeatist and don't represent the Corps I served in for many years. In that Corps (pre-Berger/Smith) Marines tackled problems that prevented it from fulfilling its Title 10, USC mission; they did not go looking for a mission that the other Services were handling well. And they certainly were not interested in being part of an organization that favored the defense. No they were real Marines, fix bayonets and take the hill was their mindset. You may have earned the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor but I wouldn't want you in a fighting position next to me! I wear my Purple Heart Medal proudly and hold those with a defeatist outlook in great disdain.
Sir, you state very many correct facts regarding the lack of Navy/MSC amphibious lift, but you’re working the wrong end of the problem. You don’t ever modify the organization that’s been given a mission (Title 10) because another component organization can’t meet their Title 10 mission. You fix the root cause.
Also I should note that what Corps leadership is doing, IMO, a violation of 10 U.S. Code § 8063 - United States Marine Corps: composition; functions.
Section 8063 states “…shall be so organized as to include not less than three combat divisions and three air wings, and such other land combat, aviation, and other services as may be organic therein.” As the Commandant foresees the future force structure there will not be 3 combat divisions. Are you aware that III MEF has a HQ element but NO maneuver or support regiments? No ability to project combat power, even if the Navy had the shipping. That it is short a division.
I should also note that Section 8063 clearly states, “…and shall perform such other duties as the President may direct. However, these additional duties may not detract from or interfere with the operations for which the Marine Corps is primarily organized.” There are numerous other missions that the President has ordered the Corps to conduct, NEO, peacekeeping, “soft” power projection, etc.
In one of your posts you stated that the Corps had obsolete, too large or difficult to maintain equipment. Some of your examples may be partially true such as the M-1 tank, but one example doesn’t prove the statement. Yes, the F-35 may prove a challenge to maintain at FARPs but initially, so was the AV-8. The one thing you’ve glossed over, whether by omission or commission, is why the castration of the MAGTF of tubed artillery, engineering units, the removal of Scout/Snipers, the reduction in the size of infantry battalions, etc.?
These “old farts” you so summarily dismiss are the rails that keep the Corps moving forward in the right direction.
Semper Fi!
Ah yes, the bad ole days when the Navy and the Marine Corps were falling apart - - when the first two questions asked by the NSC during a crisis were: where are the carriers and where are the Marines.