Compass Points - Rocky Article
A reply to war on the rocks.
Compass Points - Rocky Article
A reply to war on the rocks.
August 9, 2025
.
Compass Points has been contacted by a reader with a reply to a recent article in, War on the Rocks. Compass Points thanks the reader and all our readers who continue, despite all hecklers, to speak out and advocate for a global Marine Corps that is strong today and even stronger tomorrow. Many thanks!
.
------------------
------------------
.
Nearly 50 years ago I learned a valuable lesson that began when I opened Chapter 1 of John Keegan’s The Face of Battle and read: “I have not been in a battle; not near one, nor heard one from afar,” yet he was going to inform the reader about battles. At that point I nearly closed the book and moved on, believing no one could tell me about battles who had not been in one, as I had been numerous times. However, I continued reading only to again come close to the decision to walk away from the book when Keegan revealed he had never worn the uniform of a soldier. Fortunately, I pressed on and found my knowledge of battles enhanced by Keegan’s research and the insights he offered. Obviously, this changed my mind about learning from those who have not had military experience. And in the years since I have been well-schooled by those who have not seen war nor wore a military uniform.
Yes, over the years I have learned much from others, especially historians, about engagements, battles, campaigns, and national defense generally, and it has complemented my own years of experience. However, I have also learned when an author is misinformed about things military and offers only thin, bitter gruel. Such was the case when I read a recent article in War on the Rocks by Ryan Evans titled, “The Marine Corps Americans Want Can’t Be Derailed by a Fake Crisis.” There are too many mischaracterizations, errors, and outright falsehoods to address all in a Compass Points comment, so let me describe a few.
Evans writes, “The crisis exists in the minds of a largely retired coterie of Marine leaders. . . .” implying there are only a handful of critics. There are 112 retired Marine Corps Generals who have identified with Chowder Society II; I have the list. Many others have called or emailed me to express their support. The site that carries many of the articles questioning Force Design 2030 has well over 100,000 views per month and most readers, based on comments, are critics of that fatally flawed plan. I monitor email chains that have as many as 1,300 members and again nearly all the messages are in opposition to the plan. So, Evans' allegation that ours is a small “coterie” of retired leaders is patently false, and he has offered no evidence otherwise.
Evans quotes my words from a Marine Corps Times article asserting that I inaccurately dismissed the stand-in force as sitting “on the defense on isolated islands waiting for a ship to pass by” and claiming this will change “the very ethos of the Corps and not for the good.” There is nothing inaccurate about those words, we are already hearing Marines say, “I didn’t join the Marine Corps to sit on an island waiting to fire a missile,” and “I joined the Corps to be a warfighter not a missileer.”
Evans goes so far as to put forth the falsehood that this is “what the American people are asking the Marine Corps to do through their elected leaders.” The 38th Commandant asserted that he made the radical changes to the Corps’ structure based on Secretary of Defense Mattis’ 2018 National Defense Strategy, not elected leaders. The former secretary told me personally that he never envisioned the 38th Commandant restructuring the Corps in the manner he did.
Moreover, the American people express their will of what they want the Corps to do through Congressional legislation and that mission is very clear in Title 10 of the US Code: “The Marine Corps, within the Department of the Navy, 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. The Marine Corps shall be organized, trained, and equipped to provide fleet marine forces of combined arms, together with supporting air components. . . .” The 38th Commandant wasn’t adhering to the law when he destroyed the Corps’ combined arms capabilities.
Evans falsely claims that I and others are dishonest when we count other commandants beside General Krulak as opponents of Force Design 2030. Mr. Evans, I have personally heard 4 of these retired officers express their deep concerns about the plan, some in angry voices. And I have heard 3 others of the 8 living former commandants share reservations about the plan. Bottom line, 7 of 8 are not for Force Design 2030! Sir, it is you who is being dishonest with your written words.
I take particular umbrage in Evans’ contention that I have forgotten what MCDP Warfighting tells us about the offense and defense. I mentored the officer, John Schmitt, who authored both editions of that manual and I taught its foundational thoughts to Marine officers for 11 years. I know that manual inside and out, Evans appears to have been a casual reader. Furthermore, I taught Clausewitzian theory for the same period and what Evans knows about that master theoretician pales in comparison to what even one of my slowest students knows.
Finally, Evans states that those of us who identify as members of Chowder Society II have employed lobbyists; that is a bold faced lie! We have never consulted with or employed any lobbyist. These are the sorts of words that frequently engender libel suits.
In the future, when I want to learn more about military related topics, Mr. Evans will not be a person I turn to; he appears to me to be one of the all too prevalent defense dilettantes who inhabit our National Capital -- lots of words, and lots of inaccuracies, but no substance.
-- Paul Van Riper, US Marine
.
------------------
------------------
.
.
- - - - -
.
War on the Rocks - 08/07/2025
The Marine Corps Americans Want Can’t Be Derailed by a Fake Crisis
By Ryan Evans
https://warontherocks.com/2025/08/the-marine-corps-americans-want-cant-be-derailed-by-a-fake-crisis/
I had provided my comments to the article in a couple different forums a few days ago. I neither process the experience, background, combat experience or eloquence of Gen Van Riper. I am in full agreement with his comments and join him in the conclusion that much can be learned from decades of reading and deep immersion in history. That, of course, assumes that you actually read and not draw conclusions from the executive summary or dust cover. “Fact check” is a time honored minimum requirement and should be deep in the DNA of any editor. It is more than a few phone calls around the Washington DC area.
In the end, FD-2030 remains a concept that six years later has yet to demonstrate results. The Corps traded in a Rolls Royce for a Vespa scooter that has yet to leave the garage. ( apologies to Vespa).
So War On The Rocks has decided that its no longer a place for debate. Its founder has decided (or paid to decide) that the righteous mission of Force Design 2030 is best for the Marine Corps? He insists that critics be ignored? Amazing! The concept is so weak, so poorly implemented and so tactically unsound that any criticism is to be ignored rather than debated? The holes are so glaring that they can't withstand examination? The battle is won. Everyone knows Force Design 2030 is a failed idea, but I would guess that sunken cost fallacy has kicked in full force.
I dare say even Smith realizes this which is why he's suddenly on the MEU bandwagon. It was a terrible article with terrible ideas but at the sametime its encouraging. In attempting to defend such a flawed idea he exposed the failures in it. Chowder Society II has done it.
I guess the next mission is to chart a course for how you transition back to the Marine Corps as it should be.