13 Comments
User's avatar
Douglas C Rapé's avatar

I am not surprised that a clueless reporter might be impressed. I am stunned that a Marine Colonel would spew the ignorant trash that passes for military expertise.

I have visited many of these islands and coasts. These are not the deserted islands of 100 years ago. There is no sneaking ashore and no movement without detection. The populations have a cell phone density of any place in the United States. That alone insures that your every location and movement is reported in real time.

Expand full comment
Samuel Whittemore's avatar

HAWTHORNE, Calif. — January 3, 2024 — 3…2…1…Lift off! Today, T-Mobile announced that SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket launched the first set of Starlink satellites with Direct to Cell capabilities, following the livestreamed webcast last night. This is a significant milestone following last year’s joint announcement of the Coverage Above and Beyond initiative, which aims to bring connectivity nearly everywhere in the U.S. for Un-carrier customers — even in many of the most remote locations previously unreachable by traditional cell signals from any provider … aka dead zones. Now that the satellites are in low-Earth orbit, field testing can soon begin on the new service that will leverage SpaceX’s constellation of satellites with Direct to Cell technology and T-Mobile’s industry-leading wireless network.

Expand full comment
Samuel Whittemore's avatar

PI is covered by Starlink and it appears in some remote areas w/o regular cell coverage they may have Starlink text via cell phones. T Mobile is testing it it for remote areas of Rio Grande Valley in Texas ….which means so are the Cartels, Terrorist, CCP Agents etc etc….the folks at Never Say Anything must be very busy.

Expand full comment
Jerry McAbee's avatar

Unbeknownst to the reporter, her article pulled the scab from the Marine Corps’ self-inflicted Force Design 2030 wound. In a sign of increasing irrelevance, “America’s New Island Fighters” deployed aboard U.S. Army helicopters, not Marine Corps V-22s or CH-53s or even Navy ships. After four years, the highly touted Landing Ship Medium is still on the drawing board and, more likely, on life support as the U.S. Navy and the Congress debate its utility in a war with China. After debarking the borrowed aircraft, the Marines were left stranded on the tiny island without mobility, the full range of logistics, or missiles, which, even if deployed, would have been largely ineffective. Under the 38th and 39th Commandants, we have witnessed the Marine Corps transform itself to irrelevance. Colonel Mike Marletto predicted this sad fate almost two years ago in his article at the link: https://nationalinterest.org/feature/force-design-2030-transforming-irrelevance-205734

Expand full comment
Christopher Wright's avatar

Huge amphibious landings are a thing of the past according to the BBC. Wait until China does exactly that to Taiwan. As for the "new island fighters" they are a mosquito bite on an elephant. Small, agile, and irrelevant to the mass that the PLA represents.

Expand full comment
Randy Shetter's avatar

That's a good point Christopher. Amphibious landings are a thing of the past. Yet, that is China's whole strategy.

Expand full comment
Samuel Whittemore's avatar

Sadly the WSJ piece is written by someone who knows nothing about naval warfare or the USMC, it’s capital letter M Marines or Operational Maneuver from the Sea. Nor does she have a clue as to any of the points made by MCCP. In the case of PRC and it’s 3 naval forces i.e. the PRC Deep Sea Fishing Vessel Fleet’s 3000 ships, their inner core of military militia ships who when activated act as privateers known as the Sansha and the potent PRC Navy and PRC Coast Guard. The article is little more than a shallow propaganda piece for Force Designs impotent Marine Littoral Regiment, which in this instance borrows Chinook Helicopters from “someone” in order to be dropped off in the jungle w 3 days of rations, where they will be ignored and left to starve to death. It is as embarrassing as the Army’s Floating Dock , correction “floating away dock” off Gaza, the broken Maritime Prepositioning Ships that finally delivered it and the USN’s “not fit to sail” Amphibious Fleet as exemplified by the USS Boxer.

Expand full comment
Ray “Skip” Polak's avatar

Ignore the lessons from WWII at our peril. Units on bypassed islands are irrelevant .

Expand full comment
Polarbear's avatar

An item not discussed concerning the tactic of the “MLR hiding on small islands” is the CCP’s People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM). The PAFMM is a government-supported armed fishing force and operates under the direct command and control of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). PAFMM’s exact number of ship hulls is mostly unknown because they are built on the same design as the massive CCP fishing fleet hulls. In other words, they are design to hide in the fishing fleet also controlled by the CCP. As early as 1967, CCP’s militia confronted the USS Banner, a sister ship of the USS Pueblo, in order to protect Beijing’s “maritime rights”. In April 1978, approximately one hundred Chinese fishing vessels, some armed, sailed to the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, where they unfurled banners declaring Chinese sovereignty.” Hmmm…interesting (except to the 2030 Design crew).

What is the Combatant Commander going to do, in an environment of rising tensions, when he orders the deployment of the MLA but finds the area is saturated with large numbers of PAFMM and CCP fishing boats? BTW one of the missions of the PAFMM is recon. An interesting reference is: China’s Maritime Gray Zone Operations, I am hoping that INDOPACOM have read this book, and have not missed it like the 2030 Design Staff.

Semper Fi

Expand full comment
Samuel Whittemore's avatar

Polarbear…. you spot on….hiding the MLR…in the PI..LOL. Google Earth, Commercial Satellites, thousands of drones…..and then the CCP has plenty of surveillance capabilities. The PRC will laugh at their ineffective weapons and let them hide.

Expand full comment
Polarbear's avatar

Yep, this is comedy and what happens when a Service Chief tries to tell the Combatant Commander how to fight his war....sigh!

Expand full comment
Raymond Lee Maloy's avatar

We need a reporter like retired Colonel David Hackworth to delve into the idiocy that has infected the U. S . Military today. Civilians are too easily manipulated and wowed by tough sounding lingo with little substance. Semper Fi

Expand full comment
Samuel Whittemore's avatar

Ukraine War rips veil off of US weapons superiority

Many of the failures, including the HIMARS, have been due to their reliance on GPS

ANALYSIS | LATEST

Ukraine War

ANDREW COCKBURN

MAY 29, 2024

As Russian forces steadily advance in the Kharkiv region, it is becoming ever more clear that the Ukraine war has been a disaster for the U.S. defense machine, and not just because our aid has failed to save Ukraine from retreat and possible defeat. More importantly, the war has pitilessly exposed our defense system’s deep, underlying, faults.

Critics have long maintained that our obsession with technologically complex weapons inevitably yields unreliable systems produced in limited numbers because of their predictably high cost. They are furthermore likely to fail in combat because of the military’s lack of interest in adequate testing (lest realistic tests reveal serious shortcomings and thereby threaten the budget.) The unforgiving operational test provided by the Ukraine war has shown that the critics were absolutely right. Successive “game changing” systems - such as the Switchblade drone, the M-1 Abrams tank, Patriot air defense missiles, the M777 howitzer, the Excalibur guided 155 mm artillery round, the HIMARS precision missile, GPS-guided bombs, and Skydio drones endowed with artificial intelligence, were all dispatched to “the fight,” as the military like to call it, with fanfare and high expectations. All were destined to fail for reasons rooted in the fundamental problems cited above. The $60,000 Switchblade drone, produced in limited numbers due to cost, proved useless against armored targets and was quickly discarded by Ukrainian troops in favor of $700 Chinese commercial models ordered online. The $10 million Abrams tank not only proved distressingly vulnerable to Russian attack drones but in any case broke down repeatedly and was soon withdrawn from combat, though not before the Russians put several out of action and captured at least one, which they took to Moscow and added to a display of Nato weaponry in a Moscow park that included an M777 howitzer and other items of NATO hardware, . The M777 cannon, though touted for its accuracy, has proved too delicate for the rough conditions of sustained combat, with barrels regularly wearing out and requiring replacement in Poland far from …..cont..

Expand full comment