Words are cheap. Action counts. We continue to hear a lot of wishful words about Marine Corps current capabilities. One would think senior leaders were talking about 2018 or earlier.
Marine infantry needs more than rousing speeches and empty words to remain the final arbiter in the close and rear fight. If the senior leadership truly believed in the primacy of the infantry, would they have destroyed the supporting arms that makes winning and surviving possible? I think not. But they did! And for what? For 14 short range and 3 mid-range subsonic missile batteries that are highly duplicative of other services’ capabilities and well on the path to obsolescence.
But the issue is not the size or even the number infantry battalions per se. For without armor and bridging; insufficient close, continuous, accurate, and all-weather cannon artillery support and assault breaching; and the necessary aviation for close in fire suppression and close air support, no infantry battalion is a match against a force that possesses resiliency in these capabilities, which most of our potential enemies do. The troops know this and no amount of bluster will deceive them.
History is replete with bad military decisions made by senior officers. The adverse impacts of many of these decisions only became apparent during war and almost always at great cost to those doing the fighting and dying. The terribly bad decision to strip Marine infantry of its support is so apparent to almost everyone that it’s a sin to wait until the next war before fixing the problem. Those who see the problem but remain silent are part of the problem. Speak out now before the next battle is lost and too many Marines are unnecessarily killed or wounded.
MARINES have long taken pride in the statement "We can do everything, with nothing, forever". Seems like the new generation of flag officers have taken that to a new level.
I totally agree with the narrative of MGen Livingston and Col Vargas. Lessons learned at during the Battle of Dai Do should not be lost to history. The Marine Corps needs to rethink the new concept of Combined Arms with a focus on our former doctrine. I believe we need to do a closer look at all of the potential scenarios for conflict in the world today. For example, some major issues that need to be further addressed:
1. Can the Corps and its current Combined Arms configuration meet the all of the dangers on the globe as currently configured?
2. How could the Corps handle the Ukraine war with Russia should the President direct our intervention in support of Ukraine?
3. How quickly could the Corps expand its Combined Arms capability to meet the demands of a land warfare such as in Europe or Africa?
4. Will the Navy's be able to meet the Corps deployments with ships that won't break down en-route?
Having lead a Tank Company Team in combat....i would have loved a Company Team with the modern sUAS / Loitering munitions, etc. Imagine manuevering while running SEAD that included s/UAS. That's an armored drive to dream of. Oh well, I am sure a Razer and a couple of Javelins is the same as an M1A1 in close combat.
I would add: the Marines that executed Operation WATCHTOWER called it Operation SHOESTRING. They did so because they were thrown into the fray with nothing. These Marines, doing more with less, are always the hope of the Corps as history rhymes.
Regarding combined arms at Guadalcanal “To oppose the Japanese, the Marines had an overwhelming superiority of men. At the time, the tables of organization for a Marine Corps division indicated a total of 19,514 officers and enlisted men, including naval medical and engineer (Seabee) units. Infantry regiments numbered 3,168 and consisted of a headquarters company, a weapons company, and three battalions. Each infantry battalion (933 Marines) was organized into a headquarters company (89), a weapons company (273), and three rifle companies (183). The artillery regiment had 2,581 officers and men organized into three 75mm pack howitzer battalions and one 105mm howitzer battalion. A light tank battalion, a special weapons battalion of antiaircraft and antitank guns, and a parachute battalion added combat power. An engineer regiment (2,452 Marines) with battalions of engineers, pioneers, and Seabees, provided a hefty combat and service element. The total was rounded out by division headquarters battalion's headquarters, signal, and military police companies and the division's service troops—service, motor transport, amphibian tractor, and medical battalions. For Watchtower, the 1st Raider Battalion and the 3d Defense Battalion had been added to Vandegrift's command to provide more infantrymen and much needed coast defense and antiaircraft guns and crews.
Unfortunately, the division's heaviest ordnance had been left behind in New Zealand. Limited ships' space and time meant that the division's big guns, a 155mm howitzer battalion, and all the motor transport battalion's two-and-a-half-ton trucks were not loaded. Colonel Pedro A. del Valle, commanding the 11th Marines, was unhappy at the loss of his heavy howitzers and equally distressed that essential sound and flash-ranging equipment necessary for effective counterbattery fire was left behind. Also failing to make the cut in the battle for shipping space, were all spare clothing, bedding rolls, and supplies necessary to support the reinforced division beyond 60 days of combat. Ten days supply of ammunition for each of the division's weapons remained in New Zealand.”…
Well said! Any number of histories, from No Bended Knee, Neptune’s Inferno, or even The Thin Red Line can paint the picture of a force fighting from the back foot to overcome overwhelming odds during that time. Those are the hard educations that I fear will face the planners of the future. Fortunately, as LtCol Brute Krulak observed, Marines remain the same. Or so we hope.
There seems a significant misalignment between what the US civilian political world thinks and wants from its military and what that military can do, can perform, conduct or otherwise deliver in terms of capabilities. Not much has changed over the last two centuries (at least) artillery remains the king of battle, and this is proved out everyday that the Russian Federation forces fire up to 12,000 rounds of various artillery configurations every day, in the Ukrainian conflict. There is a Title X mandate, either the Marine Corps can meet this legal obligation or it can not. By all lights it as currently configured, can not meet the requirements. So either change the mandate to something that can be met, or have the force capable of meeting the obligation.
We are at a “who shot John” moment. Who shot John? Who cares John is dead now what to you intend to do next. Politicians and the new flag officer class of all the services like going to meetings picking a target and having the target engaged and destroyed. “See America! We got the bad guys!” We did it with technology and distance and the joy stick on our game boys which work magic. In the meantime the reality is as example, our Marines have been left in squalor, filthy mold ridden barracks. Doing more with less, and as it was, put into harms way at the end of the Afghanistan experiment of bringing democracy to a region that did not want it, and damn near got everyone killed, only by the brilliant
efforts by all the Marines involved in the HKIA NEO was complete disaster averted. Not allowing a crisis to go to waste the “Brass” bragged about the largest humanitarian airlift in the history of modern man. Who is the peer foe we hear about? Please step up and identify yourselves. In the meantime it is brush fire after brush fire after brush fire and the Marine Corps used to be very good at putting the fires out. They did this with combined arms reality, not combined arms flowery rhetoric. As to FD bad…yes, it a complete canard dreamed up by over educated leadership that has proved a failure. They are walking, not running from it, as fast they can, because they don’t want anyone to see them running from it.
As to 0302 good. Yes, again. One can leave it at that.
Taking the liberty to return to why recruiting is tough! Saturday STARRS puts out its weekly newsletter. “Air Force Celebrates ‘Pride Month’ Amidst ‘Worst’ Recruiting Crisis In Modern History
17 May 2024
By Shawn Fleetwood | The Federalist
As Joe Biden’s reckless foreign policy puts the world on the edge of catastrophe with conflicts already raging in Ukraine and the Middle East, the Air Force is directing its focus toward the biggest issue implicating U.S. national security: LGBT “pride.”
In an under-the-radar maneuver, Marianne Malizia, the Air Force’s chief diversity officer, issued a memo Monday informing service members that the Department of the Air Force recognizes June as “LGBTQ+ Pride Month 2024.” In doing so, she claimed the month represents “a time to celebrate the diversity and inclusivity of our force, and to honor the contributions of our LGBTQ+ Airmen, Guardians, and dependents.”
“Our Air and Space Forces are stronger because of the unique backgrounds and experiences of our Total Force that engender a more inclusive, and ultimately more effective, team,” Malizia wrote.
An Air Force representative confirmed the authenticity of the memo to The Federalist. A copy of the document was initially posted on X by former Space Force Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier, who was relieved of command in 2021 after publicly discussing the increasing pervasiveness of leftism in the military.
The Air Force memo’s contents are hardly just celebratory, however. In fact, the communique advances core tenets of neo-Marxist ideology, such as so-called “diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).” Employing an “oppressed versus oppressor” dynamic, Malizia contended: “While we acknowledge the progress we have made, we are also mindful that real challenges persist for members of the LGBTQ+ community.”
“Pride month is an opportunity to acknowledge the pioneers and activists who fought tirelessly for equality and justice, paving the way for a more equitable military and American society,” the chief diversity officer wrote. “During Pride Month, let us elevate the authentic voices and inspirational stories of the DAF’s LGBTQ+ community, while recognizing those who continue to face discrimination and marginalization for simply being who they are.”
Malizia concluded her diatribe by notifying military base commanders they are authorized to “organize and execute appropriate activities to commemorate Pride Month.”
The Air Force received much-deserved scrutiny from GOP lawmakers last year for hosting LGBT-related events on its bases in commemoration of “pride” month. In one instance, Republican pressure prompted Pentagon leadership to cancel an all-ages drag show at Nevada’s Nellis Air Force Base. The incident came months after Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin claimed under oath that “drag shows … are not something that the Department of Defense supports or funds.”
In addition to allowing “pride” events on its installations, the Air Force has also previously authorized the use of U.S. taxpayer dollars to transport airmen to such “festivities.” Last June, Malizia issued a memo permitting branch commanders to utilize “unit funds” to pay for service members under their command to “travel to, and participate in … DAF Pride events if approved by their individual supervisory authority.”
Malizia’s latest guidance comes amid the military’s ongoing recruiting crisis. In September, the Air Force announced it missed its FY2023 recruiting targets by roughly 2,700 airmen, while the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard each experienced a 30 percent shortfall in new recruits, according to the Military Times. The Navy and Army also missed their respective FY2023 recruiting goals.
Thomas Spoehr, a senior adviser for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, previously described the recruiting crisis as “the worst since the institution of the all-volunteer force in 1973.”
So-called “journalists” and industry “experts” have regularly dismissed the notion that the military’s embrace of DEI racism and radical gender ideology is contributing to its recruiting crisis. Instead, these individuals have downplayed Republican concerns about the pervasiveness of neo-Marxist thought throughout the service and blamed the crisis on factors that predated the embrace of DEI policies, such as obesity rates and fluctuating labor markets.
Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood
Unfortunately, the Air Force is always the most Woke (click to enlarge):
Share this post:
________
STARRS: We are US military veterans and citizens concerned about the divisive racist and radical CRT/DEI ideology infiltrating the military and services academies. Join us in this fight!
Join Mailing List | Volunteer | Make a Donation | Provide Suggestions
Leave a comment about this post in the form below
You may also like
How ‘Social Justice’ is Killing the Military
By Capt. Brent Ramsey, USN (Ret), STARRS Director at Large Col. Michael D. Pefley, USAF (Ret), VP of Communications for...
Pentagon mulls back pay for troops kicked out over Covid vaccine mandate
The Pentagon is considering providing back pay to former service members who were discharged for refusing to get the Covid...
BOOK REVIEW: Black Rednecks & White Liberals
Book Review by Brent Ramsey, STARRS Director at Large Black Rednecks and White Liberals by national treasure Dr. Thomas...
Supreme Court Lets West Point Keep Using Race in Admissions
Once again, West Point is allowed to be racists The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday declined a request to block the U.S...
A Government Woke and Broken
“Today, the Soldier approached his commanding officer to discuss his newly confirmed pregnancy.” The above sentence might...
Open Letter on the Air Force Academy’s Cultural Change
A letter to the Superintendent of the Air Force Academy by 1973 graduate Col. Ron Scott, PhD (ret). His class was...
Leave a Comment
Comment
Name *Email *Website
Search
Search
STARRS EVENT MAY 21 IN CONNECTICUT:
ABOUT STARRS
STAND TOGETHER Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services (STARRS) is an organization of retired military members and patriots who educate our fellow Americans on the dangers of the racist, radical and divisive CRT/DEI Marxist ideology infiltrating our military.
We work toward eliminating these divisive influences to maintain a unified and cohesive fighting force, one based on MERIT and ability, not appearances or labels. Learn More About Us
FOLLOW STARRS
X (Twitter) | Facebook | Rumble
Gettr | TruthSocial | Gab
TOPICS
Air Force145
Air Force Academy181
Army137
Books55
Coast Guard8
Coast Guard Academy29
DACODAI59
Defense Contractors2
DOD751
Marines38
Marxism292
Media84
Merchant Marine Academy21
National Guard13
Naval Academy85
Navy108
Open Letter38
Podcast16
Press Release37
Space Force43
STARRS48
STARRS Authors197
Vax241
Veterans Affairs21
VMI23
West Point174
Woke Agenda1,157
WATCH STARRS VIDEO:
WATCH STARRS VIDEO
MORE TO READ
Air National Guard Board Finds Military’s...
Open letter exposes corruption, cheating and failing...
Former SECDEF: DEI Divides Us
Military academies use affirmative action. Will the...
The GOP’s ‘war on woke’ forced the...
Republicans Gut Biden’s Trans Extremism in Woke...
Is Woke Culture Ruining The Military?
BOOK: Stories of Faith and Courage from the...
STARRS President Ron Scott interviewed on Voice of...
Statement to DACODAI – Colonel Tim Hughes
MARXIST CRT IN THE ACADEMIES
Air Force Academy
Coast Guard Academy
Merchant Marine Academy
Naval Academy
West Point
MACARTHUR SOCIETY OF WEST POINT GRADUATES
MARXISM’S GOAL OF CONQUEST & THE UNMAKING OF THE AMERICAN MILITARY
HELP SUPPORT OUR MISSION!
With your help, we can drive radical politics out of the military and restore our citizen soldiers to their primary purpose: to defend our Constitution and protect the American people.
DONATE
STARRS is a 501(c)3 organization. Making a donation in another way? Send a check to STARRS, P.O. Box 468, Monument, CO 80132.
STARRS EIN: 86-3589850
“I am retired after 22 years in the Air Force. My son retired after 26 years in the Navy. We are both disgusted at the turn the US military has taken. Thank you STARRS for standing up.”
“We are all blessed to have STARRS members fighting this battle exposing all of this tyranny. You are all true hero’s and we are all so thankful for your hard work and dedication to saving our military and country!”
Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services
E Pluribus Unum – Unity is America’s Strength
Wake Up, Stand Up, Speak Up and Never Give Up!
P.O. Box 468, Monument, CO 80132
Contact Us
JOIN MAILING LIST
MISSION
STARRS educates our fellow Americans on the dangers of racist and radical ideologies infiltrating our military in order to eliminate these divisive influences and maintain a unified and cohesive fighting force.
Join Mailing List
VOLUNTEER
A Call to Action
____
Articles on this website do not necessarily reflect the views of STARRS.
MAKE A DONATION
STARRS is a 501(c)3 organization. Please support STARRS’ mission to unify, not divide, ensure that the U.S. military remains free of politics, and to educate Americans of the danger of neo-Marxism and Critical Race Theory ideology:
Support the Mission
Making a donation in another way? Send a check to STARRS, P.O. Box 468, Monument, CO 80132. Here is STARRS EIN: 86-3589850
In order for infantry to be successful in closing with the enemy it needs support. An infantry
force by itself is only half the force. A maneuver force needs fire support. At the company and lower levels, this is accomplished with heavy machine guns for direct fire support and by mortars for indirect fire support. But what do we do now in FD, above battalion level? Commandant Smith pointed out that the Marine Corps will still maintain it expeditionary capability. But how can this be accomplished without proper firepower support? If the infantry is to advance, the enemy force needs to be suppressed with artillery support. Infantry also needs direct firepower in the form of tanks/mobile firepower. The synergy of all three combat arms is needed to close with and defeat the enemy by fire and maneuver. When I was at TBS, we were told that the mortar was the company commander's hip pocket artillery. Well, now at the battalion level and above we have no tanks and very little artillery. I hope the Army's lesson at Mogadishu in 1993 during Black Hawk Down is not lost on the Marine Corps with no armor. While it was a air mobile counter insurgency operation, they had to rely on foreign armor assets to be rescued.
Something that gives those with operational experience pause, and lends credibility to the questions that members of Chowder II pose:
The Marines that are proposing these bold, sweeping changes...
Have they ever participated in a combined arms breach at Morgan's Well?
Have they every endeavored to synchronize a TOT on FiST Hill?
Have they ever successfully employed a Marine Rifle Company with combined arms on Range 400?
Have they ever led a platoon, company or battalion in combat against a thinking enemy?
I cite the above examples because they are really difficult skillsets, but are relics of a time gone by. We are now told that the character of war is changing, and these skillsets are passe'. They are no longer routinely practiced, and are indeed dismissed by many great thinkers and futurists.
Training is, to a great extent, a zero sum game. If you man, train and equip against one thing, the other thing suffers. It might be time to admit; indeed, to proclaim, that the Corps is no longer the combined arms force, but a sea denial force with precision weapons. It is palpable that we're not doing our former thing well anymore, and not doing our future thing well yet.
Honest question for the crowd: where is the line between combined arms / supporting fires vs. increasing / upgrading the infantry battalions?
I’m happy to have funding and structure for a Marine Corps of 400,000+. But that’s not reality. So what are the supporting fires and functions that you think the Marine Corps should NOT be doing? Clearly the group is in favor of short-range, massed cannon artillery over long-range precision rocket artillery. Clearly the group wants to keep engineering functions like bridging organic. What about multi-domain reconnaissance? Should that be organic, or relied upon the joint force? And what about air defense? I think the greatest disservice the Marine Corps ever did to the GCE was divest away from ground-based air defense in the late 1990’s. I believe the Marine Corps (and entire joint force) has been lazy and spoiled, because the last time any American servicemember felt the effect of enemy aircraft was in Korea.
So is this group expecting the Marine Corps to have all the cake and eat it, too?
Jeff, you bring up a good point here about cost. I think the issue, as mentioned elsewhere, is over focus on fires. Joint Engineering is fan fiction in application.
This article puts all the emphasis on infantry battalions. True, every Marine is a rifleman. But a hallmark of Marine Corps operations is combined arms. I don’t hear any acknowledgement from Compass Points of the value of medium- and long-range fires, air defense, etc.
It’s as if the author(s) believe that if the threat isn’t within the effective range of a 5.56 round, then the threat must not exist.
I’m sorry to say, Compass Points is stale and predictable.
All the retied Marine Corps officers I know who have spoken out against Force Design 2030 have also advocated that the Corps rebuild it combined arms capabilities; that means more infantry, armor, cannon artillery, combat engineers, and close air-support. Infantry without the latter, especially cannon artillery, will die!
Jeff, as a fellow 'Marine. Warfighter.", I'm not sure where you are getting that CP and critics of FD are poo-poo'ing the value of medium and long range effects. I think you are flat wrong on that account. CP and most of the critics think medium and long range effects are important...though we should not eliminate close effects for the sake of medium and long term. Do you have any actual substantive critique, or is this more of the stale and predictable reactionary/ad hominem nonsense from advocates of FD 2030. For a start, where are the critics wrong on infantry?
Apparently you missed the numerous comments regarding supporting fires. Perhaps a quick refresh of the multiple comments re the need for a functioning MAGTF is in order.
Perhaps more of an open-minded approach and less condescension is in order.
Or we can do a chest-beating contest about who in the group knows more about MAGTF.
My point was that I’ve been reading Compass Points for awhile now. I think the arguments are stale and predictable. They “chicken little” too much. Take the criticism, or don’t.
Jeff, I know the Editor and Publisher of Compass Points and he takes all comments, critical or otherwise, seriously. The arguments may appear stale because the problem remains the same; the former Commandant gutted the combat capabilities of the Corps' operational forces and we have yet to see the current Commandant make any attempt to reacquire them in a modern or updated form.
I believe if you look back you will see articles on the supporting arms for infantry. I know myself, I have always, when appropriate emphasized the need for armor and the full complement of combined arms. Personally I believe the Division should have its own air defense.
Aside from the title, I don’t see a strong argument in this article for “combined arms”; I only see a predictable argument against reducing infantry battalions.
Jeff, Please review Compass Points index of published articles and you will find it is filled with recommendations for the Corps to acquire the supporting arms that make for a combined arms team.
Words are cheap. Action counts. We continue to hear a lot of wishful words about Marine Corps current capabilities. One would think senior leaders were talking about 2018 or earlier.
Marine infantry needs more than rousing speeches and empty words to remain the final arbiter in the close and rear fight. If the senior leadership truly believed in the primacy of the infantry, would they have destroyed the supporting arms that makes winning and surviving possible? I think not. But they did! And for what? For 14 short range and 3 mid-range subsonic missile batteries that are highly duplicative of other services’ capabilities and well on the path to obsolescence.
But the issue is not the size or even the number infantry battalions per se. For without armor and bridging; insufficient close, continuous, accurate, and all-weather cannon artillery support and assault breaching; and the necessary aviation for close in fire suppression and close air support, no infantry battalion is a match against a force that possesses resiliency in these capabilities, which most of our potential enemies do. The troops know this and no amount of bluster will deceive them.
History is replete with bad military decisions made by senior officers. The adverse impacts of many of these decisions only became apparent during war and almost always at great cost to those doing the fighting and dying. The terribly bad decision to strip Marine infantry of its support is so apparent to almost everyone that it’s a sin to wait until the next war before fixing the problem. Those who see the problem but remain silent are part of the problem. Speak out now before the next battle is lost and too many Marines are unnecessarily killed or wounded.
MARINES have long taken pride in the statement "We can do everything, with nothing, forever". Seems like the new generation of flag officers have taken that to a new level.
I totally agree with the narrative of MGen Livingston and Col Vargas. Lessons learned at during the Battle of Dai Do should not be lost to history. The Marine Corps needs to rethink the new concept of Combined Arms with a focus on our former doctrine. I believe we need to do a closer look at all of the potential scenarios for conflict in the world today. For example, some major issues that need to be further addressed:
1. Can the Corps and its current Combined Arms configuration meet the all of the dangers on the globe as currently configured?
2. How could the Corps handle the Ukraine war with Russia should the President direct our intervention in support of Ukraine?
3. How quickly could the Corps expand its Combined Arms capability to meet the demands of a land warfare such as in Europe or Africa?
4. Will the Navy's be able to meet the Corps deployments with ships that won't break down en-route?
Having lead a Tank Company Team in combat....i would have loved a Company Team with the modern sUAS / Loitering munitions, etc. Imagine manuevering while running SEAD that included s/UAS. That's an armored drive to dream of. Oh well, I am sure a Razer and a couple of Javelins is the same as an M1A1 in close combat.
Oh, I would have loved to have gone armor!
I would add: the Marines that executed Operation WATCHTOWER called it Operation SHOESTRING. They did so because they were thrown into the fray with nothing. These Marines, doing more with less, are always the hope of the Corps as history rhymes.
Regarding combined arms at Guadalcanal “To oppose the Japanese, the Marines had an overwhelming superiority of men. At the time, the tables of organization for a Marine Corps division indicated a total of 19,514 officers and enlisted men, including naval medical and engineer (Seabee) units. Infantry regiments numbered 3,168 and consisted of a headquarters company, a weapons company, and three battalions. Each infantry battalion (933 Marines) was organized into a headquarters company (89), a weapons company (273), and three rifle companies (183). The artillery regiment had 2,581 officers and men organized into three 75mm pack howitzer battalions and one 105mm howitzer battalion. A light tank battalion, a special weapons battalion of antiaircraft and antitank guns, and a parachute battalion added combat power. An engineer regiment (2,452 Marines) with battalions of engineers, pioneers, and Seabees, provided a hefty combat and service element. The total was rounded out by division headquarters battalion's headquarters, signal, and military police companies and the division's service troops—service, motor transport, amphibian tractor, and medical battalions. For Watchtower, the 1st Raider Battalion and the 3d Defense Battalion had been added to Vandegrift's command to provide more infantrymen and much needed coast defense and antiaircraft guns and crews.
Unfortunately, the division's heaviest ordnance had been left behind in New Zealand. Limited ships' space and time meant that the division's big guns, a 155mm howitzer battalion, and all the motor transport battalion's two-and-a-half-ton trucks were not loaded. Colonel Pedro A. del Valle, commanding the 11th Marines, was unhappy at the loss of his heavy howitzers and equally distressed that essential sound and flash-ranging equipment necessary for effective counterbattery fire was left behind. Also failing to make the cut in the battle for shipping space, were all spare clothing, bedding rolls, and supplies necessary to support the reinforced division beyond 60 days of combat. Ten days supply of ammunition for each of the division's weapons remained in New Zealand.”…
Well said! Any number of histories, from No Bended Knee, Neptune’s Inferno, or even The Thin Red Line can paint the picture of a force fighting from the back foot to overcome overwhelming odds during that time. Those are the hard educations that I fear will face the planners of the future. Fortunately, as LtCol Brute Krulak observed, Marines remain the same. Or so we hope.
There seems a significant misalignment between what the US civilian political world thinks and wants from its military and what that military can do, can perform, conduct or otherwise deliver in terms of capabilities. Not much has changed over the last two centuries (at least) artillery remains the king of battle, and this is proved out everyday that the Russian Federation forces fire up to 12,000 rounds of various artillery configurations every day, in the Ukrainian conflict. There is a Title X mandate, either the Marine Corps can meet this legal obligation or it can not. By all lights it as currently configured, can not meet the requirements. So either change the mandate to something that can be met, or have the force capable of meeting the obligation.
We are at a “who shot John” moment. Who shot John? Who cares John is dead now what to you intend to do next. Politicians and the new flag officer class of all the services like going to meetings picking a target and having the target engaged and destroyed. “See America! We got the bad guys!” We did it with technology and distance and the joy stick on our game boys which work magic. In the meantime the reality is as example, our Marines have been left in squalor, filthy mold ridden barracks. Doing more with less, and as it was, put into harms way at the end of the Afghanistan experiment of bringing democracy to a region that did not want it, and damn near got everyone killed, only by the brilliant
efforts by all the Marines involved in the HKIA NEO was complete disaster averted. Not allowing a crisis to go to waste the “Brass” bragged about the largest humanitarian airlift in the history of modern man. Who is the peer foe we hear about? Please step up and identify yourselves. In the meantime it is brush fire after brush fire after brush fire and the Marine Corps used to be very good at putting the fires out. They did this with combined arms reality, not combined arms flowery rhetoric. As to FD bad…yes, it a complete canard dreamed up by over educated leadership that has proved a failure. They are walking, not running from it, as fast they can, because they don’t want anyone to see them running from it.
As to 0302 good. Yes, again. One can leave it at that.
Taking the liberty to return to why recruiting is tough! Saturday STARRS puts out its weekly newsletter. “Air Force Celebrates ‘Pride Month’ Amidst ‘Worst’ Recruiting Crisis In Modern History
17 May 2024
By Shawn Fleetwood | The Federalist
As Joe Biden’s reckless foreign policy puts the world on the edge of catastrophe with conflicts already raging in Ukraine and the Middle East, the Air Force is directing its focus toward the biggest issue implicating U.S. national security: LGBT “pride.”
In an under-the-radar maneuver, Marianne Malizia, the Air Force’s chief diversity officer, issued a memo Monday informing service members that the Department of the Air Force recognizes June as “LGBTQ+ Pride Month 2024.” In doing so, she claimed the month represents “a time to celebrate the diversity and inclusivity of our force, and to honor the contributions of our LGBTQ+ Airmen, Guardians, and dependents.”
“Our Air and Space Forces are stronger because of the unique backgrounds and experiences of our Total Force that engender a more inclusive, and ultimately more effective, team,” Malizia wrote.
An Air Force representative confirmed the authenticity of the memo to The Federalist. A copy of the document was initially posted on X by former Space Force Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier, who was relieved of command in 2021 after publicly discussing the increasing pervasiveness of leftism in the military.
The Air Force memo’s contents are hardly just celebratory, however. In fact, the communique advances core tenets of neo-Marxist ideology, such as so-called “diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).” Employing an “oppressed versus oppressor” dynamic, Malizia contended: “While we acknowledge the progress we have made, we are also mindful that real challenges persist for members of the LGBTQ+ community.”
“Pride month is an opportunity to acknowledge the pioneers and activists who fought tirelessly for equality and justice, paving the way for a more equitable military and American society,” the chief diversity officer wrote. “During Pride Month, let us elevate the authentic voices and inspirational stories of the DAF’s LGBTQ+ community, while recognizing those who continue to face discrimination and marginalization for simply being who they are.”
Malizia concluded her diatribe by notifying military base commanders they are authorized to “organize and execute appropriate activities to commemorate Pride Month.”
The Air Force received much-deserved scrutiny from GOP lawmakers last year for hosting LGBT-related events on its bases in commemoration of “pride” month. In one instance, Republican pressure prompted Pentagon leadership to cancel an all-ages drag show at Nevada’s Nellis Air Force Base. The incident came months after Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin claimed under oath that “drag shows … are not something that the Department of Defense supports or funds.”
In addition to allowing “pride” events on its installations, the Air Force has also previously authorized the use of U.S. taxpayer dollars to transport airmen to such “festivities.” Last June, Malizia issued a memo permitting branch commanders to utilize “unit funds” to pay for service members under their command to “travel to, and participate in … DAF Pride events if approved by their individual supervisory authority.”
Malizia’s latest guidance comes amid the military’s ongoing recruiting crisis. In September, the Air Force announced it missed its FY2023 recruiting targets by roughly 2,700 airmen, while the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard each experienced a 30 percent shortfall in new recruits, according to the Military Times. The Navy and Army also missed their respective FY2023 recruiting goals.
Thomas Spoehr, a senior adviser for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, previously described the recruiting crisis as “the worst since the institution of the all-volunteer force in 1973.”
So-called “journalists” and industry “experts” have regularly dismissed the notion that the military’s embrace of DEI racism and radical gender ideology is contributing to its recruiting crisis. Instead, these individuals have downplayed Republican concerns about the pervasiveness of neo-Marxist thought throughout the service and blamed the crisis on factors that predated the embrace of DEI policies, such as obesity rates and fluctuating labor markets.
Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood
Unfortunately, the Air Force is always the most Woke (click to enlarge):
Share this post:
________
STARRS: We are US military veterans and citizens concerned about the divisive racist and radical CRT/DEI ideology infiltrating the military and services academies. Join us in this fight!
Join Mailing List | Volunteer | Make a Donation | Provide Suggestions
Leave a comment about this post in the form below
You may also like
How ‘Social Justice’ is Killing the Military
By Capt. Brent Ramsey, USN (Ret), STARRS Director at Large Col. Michael D. Pefley, USAF (Ret), VP of Communications for...
Pentagon mulls back pay for troops kicked out over Covid vaccine mandate
The Pentagon is considering providing back pay to former service members who were discharged for refusing to get the Covid...
BOOK REVIEW: Black Rednecks & White Liberals
Book Review by Brent Ramsey, STARRS Director at Large Black Rednecks and White Liberals by national treasure Dr. Thomas...
Supreme Court Lets West Point Keep Using Race in Admissions
Once again, West Point is allowed to be racists The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday declined a request to block the U.S...
A Government Woke and Broken
“Today, the Soldier approached his commanding officer to discuss his newly confirmed pregnancy.” The above sentence might...
Open Letter on the Air Force Academy’s Cultural Change
A letter to the Superintendent of the Air Force Academy by 1973 graduate Col. Ron Scott, PhD (ret). His class was...
Leave a Comment
Comment
Name *Email *Website
Search
Search
STARRS EVENT MAY 21 IN CONNECTICUT:
ABOUT STARRS
STAND TOGETHER Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services (STARRS) is an organization of retired military members and patriots who educate our fellow Americans on the dangers of the racist, radical and divisive CRT/DEI Marxist ideology infiltrating our military.
We work toward eliminating these divisive influences to maintain a unified and cohesive fighting force, one based on MERIT and ability, not appearances or labels. Learn More About Us
FOLLOW STARRS
X (Twitter) | Facebook | Rumble
Gettr | TruthSocial | Gab
TOPICS
Air Force145
Air Force Academy181
Army137
Books55
Coast Guard8
Coast Guard Academy29
DACODAI59
Defense Contractors2
DOD751
Marines38
Marxism292
Media84
Merchant Marine Academy21
National Guard13
Naval Academy85
Navy108
Open Letter38
Podcast16
Press Release37
Space Force43
STARRS48
STARRS Authors197
Vax241
Veterans Affairs21
VMI23
West Point174
Woke Agenda1,157
WATCH STARRS VIDEO:
WATCH STARRS VIDEO
MORE TO READ
Air National Guard Board Finds Military’s...
Open letter exposes corruption, cheating and failing...
Former SECDEF: DEI Divides Us
Military academies use affirmative action. Will the...
The GOP’s ‘war on woke’ forced the...
Republicans Gut Biden’s Trans Extremism in Woke...
Is Woke Culture Ruining The Military?
BOOK: Stories of Faith and Courage from the...
STARRS President Ron Scott interviewed on Voice of...
Statement to DACODAI – Colonel Tim Hughes
MARXIST CRT IN THE ACADEMIES
Air Force Academy
Coast Guard Academy
Merchant Marine Academy
Naval Academy
West Point
MACARTHUR SOCIETY OF WEST POINT GRADUATES
MARXISM’S GOAL OF CONQUEST & THE UNMAKING OF THE AMERICAN MILITARY
HELP SUPPORT OUR MISSION!
With your help, we can drive radical politics out of the military and restore our citizen soldiers to their primary purpose: to defend our Constitution and protect the American people.
DONATE
STARRS is a 501(c)3 organization. Making a donation in another way? Send a check to STARRS, P.O. Box 468, Monument, CO 80132.
STARRS EIN: 86-3589850
“I am retired after 22 years in the Air Force. My son retired after 26 years in the Navy. We are both disgusted at the turn the US military has taken. Thank you STARRS for standing up.”
“We are all blessed to have STARRS members fighting this battle exposing all of this tyranny. You are all true hero’s and we are all so thankful for your hard work and dedication to saving our military and country!”
Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services
E Pluribus Unum – Unity is America’s Strength
Wake Up, Stand Up, Speak Up and Never Give Up!
P.O. Box 468, Monument, CO 80132
Contact Us
JOIN MAILING LIST
MISSION
STARRS educates our fellow Americans on the dangers of racist and radical ideologies infiltrating our military in order to eliminate these divisive influences and maintain a unified and cohesive fighting force.
Join Mailing List
VOLUNTEER
A Call to Action
____
Articles on this website do not necessarily reflect the views of STARRS.
MAKE A DONATION
STARRS is a 501(c)3 organization. Please support STARRS’ mission to unify, not divide, ensure that the U.S. military remains free of politics, and to educate Americans of the danger of neo-Marxism and Critical Race Theory ideology:
Support the Mission
Making a donation in another way? Send a check to STARRS, P.O. Box 468, Monument, CO 80132. Here is STARRS EIN: 86-3589850
Copyright © 2024 STARRS, Inc. | Website created by CJK Creative.
In order for infantry to be successful in closing with the enemy it needs support. An infantry
force by itself is only half the force. A maneuver force needs fire support. At the company and lower levels, this is accomplished with heavy machine guns for direct fire support and by mortars for indirect fire support. But what do we do now in FD, above battalion level? Commandant Smith pointed out that the Marine Corps will still maintain it expeditionary capability. But how can this be accomplished without proper firepower support? If the infantry is to advance, the enemy force needs to be suppressed with artillery support. Infantry also needs direct firepower in the form of tanks/mobile firepower. The synergy of all three combat arms is needed to close with and defeat the enemy by fire and maneuver. When I was at TBS, we were told that the mortar was the company commander's hip pocket artillery. Well, now at the battalion level and above we have no tanks and very little artillery. I hope the Army's lesson at Mogadishu in 1993 during Black Hawk Down is not lost on the Marine Corps with no armor. While it was a air mobile counter insurgency operation, they had to rely on foreign armor assets to be rescued.
No need for recriminations or divisiveness.
The St. Crispin’s Day speech from Henry V
by Private: William Shakespeare
King Henry V: What’s he that wishes so?
My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin:
If we are mark’d to die, we are enow
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God’s will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires:
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.
No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England:
God’s peace! I would not lose so great an honour
As one man more, methinks, would share from me
For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made
And crowns for convoy put into his purse:
We would not die in that man’s company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
This day is called the feast of Crispian:
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say ‘To-morrow is Saint Crispian:’
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
And say ‘These wounds I had on Crispin’s day.’
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,
But he’ll remember with advantages
What feats he did that day: then shall our names.
Familiar in his mouth as household words
Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,
Be in their flowing cups freshly remember’d.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remember’d;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.
From Henry V, Act IV, Scene III
Reference FIRST OFFENSIVE: The Marine Campaign for Guadalcanal
by Henry I. Shaw, Jr.
The Landing and August Battles….for above…one can easily find this using their favorite search engine.
Something that gives those with operational experience pause, and lends credibility to the questions that members of Chowder II pose:
The Marines that are proposing these bold, sweeping changes...
Have they ever participated in a combined arms breach at Morgan's Well?
Have they every endeavored to synchronize a TOT on FiST Hill?
Have they ever successfully employed a Marine Rifle Company with combined arms on Range 400?
Have they ever led a platoon, company or battalion in combat against a thinking enemy?
I cite the above examples because they are really difficult skillsets, but are relics of a time gone by. We are now told that the character of war is changing, and these skillsets are passe'. They are no longer routinely practiced, and are indeed dismissed by many great thinkers and futurists.
Training is, to a great extent, a zero sum game. If you man, train and equip against one thing, the other thing suffers. It might be time to admit; indeed, to proclaim, that the Corps is no longer the combined arms force, but a sea denial force with precision weapons. It is palpable that we're not doing our former thing well anymore, and not doing our future thing well yet.
Honest question for the crowd: where is the line between combined arms / supporting fires vs. increasing / upgrading the infantry battalions?
I’m happy to have funding and structure for a Marine Corps of 400,000+. But that’s not reality. So what are the supporting fires and functions that you think the Marine Corps should NOT be doing? Clearly the group is in favor of short-range, massed cannon artillery over long-range precision rocket artillery. Clearly the group wants to keep engineering functions like bridging organic. What about multi-domain reconnaissance? Should that be organic, or relied upon the joint force? And what about air defense? I think the greatest disservice the Marine Corps ever did to the GCE was divest away from ground-based air defense in the late 1990’s. I believe the Marine Corps (and entire joint force) has been lazy and spoiled, because the last time any American servicemember felt the effect of enemy aircraft was in Korea.
So is this group expecting the Marine Corps to have all the cake and eat it, too?
Jeff, you bring up a good point here about cost. I think the issue, as mentioned elsewhere, is over focus on fires. Joint Engineering is fan fiction in application.
This article puts all the emphasis on infantry battalions. True, every Marine is a rifleman. But a hallmark of Marine Corps operations is combined arms. I don’t hear any acknowledgement from Compass Points of the value of medium- and long-range fires, air defense, etc.
It’s as if the author(s) believe that if the threat isn’t within the effective range of a 5.56 round, then the threat must not exist.
I’m sorry to say, Compass Points is stale and predictable.
FD = bad.
0302 = good.
Repeat that message ad infinitum, ad nauseam.
All the retied Marine Corps officers I know who have spoken out against Force Design 2030 have also advocated that the Corps rebuild it combined arms capabilities; that means more infantry, armor, cannon artillery, combat engineers, and close air-support. Infantry without the latter, especially cannon artillery, will die!
Spot on.
Jeff, as a fellow 'Marine. Warfighter.", I'm not sure where you are getting that CP and critics of FD are poo-poo'ing the value of medium and long range effects. I think you are flat wrong on that account. CP and most of the critics think medium and long range effects are important...though we should not eliminate close effects for the sake of medium and long term. Do you have any actual substantive critique, or is this more of the stale and predictable reactionary/ad hominem nonsense from advocates of FD 2030. For a start, where are the critics wrong on infantry?
Well said.
Apparently you missed the numerous comments regarding supporting fires. Perhaps a quick refresh of the multiple comments re the need for a functioning MAGTF is in order.
Perhaps more of an open-minded approach and less condescension is in order.
Or we can do a chest-beating contest about who in the group knows more about MAGTF.
My point was that I’ve been reading Compass Points for awhile now. I think the arguments are stale and predictable. They “chicken little” too much. Take the criticism, or don’t.
Jeff, I know the Editor and Publisher of Compass Points and he takes all comments, critical or otherwise, seriously. The arguments may appear stale because the problem remains the same; the former Commandant gutted the combat capabilities of the Corps' operational forces and we have yet to see the current Commandant make any attempt to reacquire them in a modern or updated form.
I believe if you look back you will see articles on the supporting arms for infantry. I know myself, I have always, when appropriate emphasized the need for armor and the full complement of combined arms. Personally I believe the Division should have its own air defense.
Aside from the title, I don’t see a strong argument in this article for “combined arms”; I only see a predictable argument against reducing infantry battalions.
Jeff, Please review Compass Points index of published articles and you will find it is filled with recommendations for the Corps to acquire the supporting arms that make for a combined arms team.