After five years of bragging about the game-changing potential of the Marine Littoral Regiments (MLRs) and Stand-in Forces (SIFs), the Marines still do not have an inkling of how they will position, reposition, evacuate, or logistically support these small, isolated, and vulnerable forces in a shooting war with China. The only hope (and as we all know, hope is not a course of action) HQMC and MCCDC have yet articulated is the Landing Ship Medium, a slow, relatively unarmed vessel that is touted to sail inside contested areas where Navy surface combatants (carriers, cruisers, destroyers) dare not tread. When pressed about how the LSM can survive inside these areas during hostilities, the senior leadership can only resort to flights of fantasy, stating the ships will blend in with commercial vessels or will go to ground and hide when the shooting starts. The truth is the Marines have no concept for logistically supporting the MLRs/SIFs today or in the future. Without a proven concept, it’s impossible to develop the capabilities and requirements needed. The current Commandant would do well to heed the words of a previous Commandant, General Robert Barrow who knew: “amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics.” All those who continue to advocate the full and quick implementation of Force Design need to tell us exactly how the Marines are going to logistically (which includes lifesaving emergency medical care and evacuation) support Marines who are isolated, vulnerable, and inside China’s kill zone. But they won’t because they can’t.
They never gave a thought to logistics or the concept of logistical reach for a second. They didn’t care to, whatever blinded them to absolute facts then (2019 forward) apparently still blind the CMC today. We have all been out in the field when our young Marines are hungry and they had 1000 calories in the CRat box. The MRE was just barely enough 2-3 times a day. That is just one tiny element of the logistical tail that at needs to wag the snarling dog that bites at the tactical end of the operation.
Tankers and artillerists always ask for the refueling point, even when roadmarching between CLNC and Bragg or from CamPen to 29 Stumps. And we have our own refuelers!
Japanese forces in the Aleutians lost resupply and withered.
A Russian attempt to kill the CEO of a German company making 155 shells was foiled recently—-they think resupply is important!
With regards to logistics, there is an enlightening rebuttal in the June Naval Institute Proceedings article "Force Design is Still to Heavy" by Gunnery Sergeant Davis. The rebuttal by Colonel McFetridge, US Army, points out that FD and its "austere logistical support" would force Marines to live at subsistence levels. The Colonel argues that light forces such as Wingate's Chindit's and Merrill's Marauders, while operating deep behind Japanese lines and "creating some difficulties for Japanese troops, achieved no strategic operational effect...." At the same time, these operations left these units combat ineffective for the remainder of the war. He also maintains that Marine Raiders were mostly used as line infantry at Guadalcanal. And from our own history, we must recall that Guadalcanal was called "Starvation Island" due to a lack of logistical support from the fleet. I want to suggest that the logistical effort to supply widely spread-out SIF's would be immense, considering that the Commandant still wants to maintain an expeditionary capability. Colonel McFetridge sums up his rebuttal by stating that FD "looks too light to engage in sustained combat against a well-equipped competent opponent." Even our sister service members want a strong and robust Marine Corps.
I said it before and I will say it again. These "war games" that "proved" the concepts of FD2030 put a serious strain on the Pentagons supply of "fairy dust". And from the sounds of it, it was used exclusively on the logistics piece of this. 863 tons of supplies daily. And the Corps is experimenting with a drone that can carry a case of MRE's?
You will not find it difficult to prove that battles, campaigns, and even wars have been won or lost primarily because of logistics.
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Logistics comprises the means and arrangements which work out the plans of strategy and tactics. Strategy decides where to act; logistics brings the troops to this point.
Antoine-Henri Jomini
Leaders win through logistics. Vision, sure. Strategy, yes. But when you go to war, you need to have both toilet paper and bullets at the right place at the right time. In other words, you must win through superior logistics.
Tom Peters
Factors in the art of warfare are: First, calculations; second, quantities; third, logistics; fourth, the balance of power; and fifth, the possibility of victory is based on the balance of power.
Resupply not important? A Russian plot to kill the CEO of the German company making 155 artillery shells was thwarted>. The intent was to send a message…
The Japanese force in the Aleutians was left without supply.
Tankers and artillerists always ask, “where is my refueling point?” Without fuel we are just heavy junk.
The current leadership apparently fought wars with a firehose logistics effort, while in a peer battle the logistics may be but a trickle at times.
I can’t really believe that a 4-star Marine General that is now our Commandant really said that. I can only hope he is trying to laugh our enemies into submission…but I kind of doubt it.
I doubt it too Greg. I find it hard to believe that anyone who has learned even a little about our history could seriously make such a statement, much less a graduate of every level of our educational system and General Officer on top of that.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_227649.htm NATO missile Defense base in Poland now mission ready.... WTF? Why is the US Navy building missiles defense in Poland instead of the Pacific? and why is the USMC developing land based anti-ship missiles instead of concentrating on anti-missile defense? Seems to me the US Navy is making the Commandant look really bad.
English does not have a gender-inclusive third personal pronoun in the singular. Accordingly, the masculine resumptive pronoun is used when the gender is unknown or not relevant. This is basic elementary school grammar. The new fad of using plural pronouns to refer to singular subjects is distracting and confusing.
The new DOD requirement to use plural pronouns for singular subjects in award citations is a matter of concern. Should DOD mandate bad grammar?
Does “When a person leaves their house…” indicate that the Compass Marines are buying into this gender-neutral BS? I hope not!
After five years of bragging about the game-changing potential of the Marine Littoral Regiments (MLRs) and Stand-in Forces (SIFs), the Marines still do not have an inkling of how they will position, reposition, evacuate, or logistically support these small, isolated, and vulnerable forces in a shooting war with China. The only hope (and as we all know, hope is not a course of action) HQMC and MCCDC have yet articulated is the Landing Ship Medium, a slow, relatively unarmed vessel that is touted to sail inside contested areas where Navy surface combatants (carriers, cruisers, destroyers) dare not tread. When pressed about how the LSM can survive inside these areas during hostilities, the senior leadership can only resort to flights of fantasy, stating the ships will blend in with commercial vessels or will go to ground and hide when the shooting starts. The truth is the Marines have no concept for logistically supporting the MLRs/SIFs today or in the future. Without a proven concept, it’s impossible to develop the capabilities and requirements needed. The current Commandant would do well to heed the words of a previous Commandant, General Robert Barrow who knew: “amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics.” All those who continue to advocate the full and quick implementation of Force Design need to tell us exactly how the Marines are going to logistically (which includes lifesaving emergency medical care and evacuation) support Marines who are isolated, vulnerable, and inside China’s kill zone. But they won’t because they can’t.
General, maybe they’ll “blend” by impersonating a “tramp steamer”, but I’m not hopeful that the FD folks have even thought that far.
They never gave a thought to logistics or the concept of logistical reach for a second. They didn’t care to, whatever blinded them to absolute facts then (2019 forward) apparently still blind the CMC today. We have all been out in the field when our young Marines are hungry and they had 1000 calories in the CRat box. The MRE was just barely enough 2-3 times a day. That is just one tiny element of the logistical tail that at needs to wag the snarling dog that bites at the tactical end of the operation.
Tankers and artillerists always ask for the refueling point, even when roadmarching between CLNC and Bragg or from CamPen to 29 Stumps. And we have our own refuelers!
Japanese forces in the Aleutians lost resupply and withered.
A Russian attempt to kill the CEO of a German company making 155 shells was foiled recently—-they think resupply is important!
So should we!
With regards to logistics, there is an enlightening rebuttal in the June Naval Institute Proceedings article "Force Design is Still to Heavy" by Gunnery Sergeant Davis. The rebuttal by Colonel McFetridge, US Army, points out that FD and its "austere logistical support" would force Marines to live at subsistence levels. The Colonel argues that light forces such as Wingate's Chindit's and Merrill's Marauders, while operating deep behind Japanese lines and "creating some difficulties for Japanese troops, achieved no strategic operational effect...." At the same time, these operations left these units combat ineffective for the remainder of the war. He also maintains that Marine Raiders were mostly used as line infantry at Guadalcanal. And from our own history, we must recall that Guadalcanal was called "Starvation Island" due to a lack of logistical support from the fleet. I want to suggest that the logistical effort to supply widely spread-out SIF's would be immense, considering that the Commandant still wants to maintain an expeditionary capability. Colonel McFetridge sums up his rebuttal by stating that FD "looks too light to engage in sustained combat against a well-equipped competent opponent." Even our sister service members want a strong and robust Marine Corps.
I said it before and I will say it again. These "war games" that "proved" the concepts of FD2030 put a serious strain on the Pentagons supply of "fairy dust". And from the sounds of it, it was used exclusively on the logistics piece of this. 863 tons of supplies daily. And the Corps is experimenting with a drone that can carry a case of MRE's?
You will not find it difficult to prove that battles, campaigns, and even wars have been won or lost primarily because of logistics.
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Logistics comprises the means and arrangements which work out the plans of strategy and tactics. Strategy decides where to act; logistics brings the troops to this point.
Antoine-Henri Jomini
Leaders win through logistics. Vision, sure. Strategy, yes. But when you go to war, you need to have both toilet paper and bullets at the right place at the right time. In other words, you must win through superior logistics.
Tom Peters
Factors in the art of warfare are: First, calculations; second, quantities; third, logistics; fourth, the balance of power; and fifth, the possibility of victory is based on the balance of power.
Sun Tzu
Resupply not important? A Russian plot to kill the CEO of the German company making 155 artillery shells was thwarted>. The intent was to send a message…
The Japanese force in the Aleutians was left without supply.
Tankers and artillerists always ask, “where is my refueling point?” Without fuel we are just heavy junk.
The current leadership apparently fought wars with a firehose logistics effort, while in a peer battle the logistics may be but a trickle at times.
The issue of logistics support for the MLRs/SIFs has been getting lip service from the top for years. Heres a little snippet on "expeditionary foraging": https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2021/08/06/is-expeditionary-foraging-in-the-corps-future/
It was laughable then; the lack of progress since then is deplorable.
SF
John:
I can’t really believe that a 4-star Marine General that is now our Commandant really said that. I can only hope he is trying to laugh our enemies into submission…but I kind of doubt it.
We should learn the lessons of what happens with degraded logistics, like at Guadalcanal.
I can’t believe I wasted my time on a simplistic and unprofessional article on “foraging” as a method of “resupply”.
I doubt it too Greg. I find it hard to believe that anyone who has learned even a little about our history could seriously make such a statement, much less a graduate of every level of our educational system and General Officer on top of that.
SF
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_227649.htm NATO missile Defense base in Poland now mission ready.... WTF? Why is the US Navy building missiles defense in Poland instead of the Pacific? and why is the USMC developing land based anti-ship missiles instead of concentrating on anti-missile defense? Seems to me the US Navy is making the Commandant look really bad.
NewSpeak?
English does not have a gender-inclusive third personal pronoun in the singular. Accordingly, the masculine resumptive pronoun is used when the gender is unknown or not relevant. This is basic elementary school grammar. The new fad of using plural pronouns to refer to singular subjects is distracting and confusing.
The new DOD requirement to use plural pronouns for singular subjects in award citations is a matter of concern. Should DOD mandate bad grammar?
Does “When a person leaves their house…” indicate that the Compass Marines are buying into this gender-neutral BS? I hope not!