If anyone is serious about rebuilding the Marine Corps, they need to begin by replacing the current woke leadership. The present leader talks & writes a good game but we must remember he was ‘Berger’s boy’ & shares responsibility for the current state of our Corps. We badly need another Al Gray to lead us back to reality & a world class fighting force.
Noticed an article in the Sept 17th issue of Defense News. It was about the fitting of an AGM- 158A onto to an FA-18 Super Hornet from VMFA- 262. Range of the missile is 260 miles. The extended range units AGM- 158 B and C is 620 miles. Makes me wonder about the use of FD 2030. What is the use of putting marines on an island with missiles (not invented yet) when the now non-existent MAGTF could be doing this today. The AGM-158 B and C are for the F-35, but bet a couple of smart Gunnies could fit them to the F/A-18. Even the AH-1Z sank a ship. Kinda makes you wonder what use FD 2030 is. You could sink all of the Chinese ships screwing with the Philippines with one Marine air strike. Especially if you use the extended range Missile.
Imagine a squadron or two of seaplanes armed with these missiles. They would have the whole Pacific Ocean as maneuver space plus the stand-off range of the missiles. They could strike from anywhere.
We should be smart enough to solve these problems and use our diplomatic corps to cool off the present difficulties. China should realize that the red line that they claim isn’t defensible and is causing them more problems than it is us. Like the Seaplane idea, much cheaper and a harder target than aircraft carriers.
Strength is a great deterrent. We are not projecting strength. We are projecting insecurity, unsureness, a lack of will and certainly a lack of purpose.
One would think, that if the current CMC read the Walter Russell Mead review that it would strike a cord. Further, it ought to strike a cord with the JCS as they look across a military posture that feels disheveled at best. Fair to say, civilian guidance and participation might take a bit of the blame, after all we have a nearly trillion dollar defense budget, which by any accounting is a lot of money and it is clear we are not getting enough bang per buck. It has not taken months to get here, nor years rather decades, but here we are. The 33rd CNO has released her equivalent of the CPG, and while modestly encouraging at least in terms of right words and less salad in them, it is still clear many elements of the defense posture are broken. This all said on a macro scale is not a good report on readiness. But, again with sharp focus on rebuilding the Corps and the MAGTF, the lemons could become lemonade pretty quickly. But this means abandonment of FD Happy Talk, ASAP and laser focus on the weapons and ancillary equipment to support the MAGTF going forward into 2030, 2035 and out years beyond. If the Corps can be made truly ready than on a micro level overall readiness improves. It is back to us here at CP and the Chowder Society II to keep pounding out the drum beat and hope that everyone gets so tired of listening to the beat that they sit up and listen, and support returning the Corps to a position to meet Title X mandates, and be able to answer the call when it comes.
Let’s be precise. During the ill advised draw downs to harvest the “peace dividend” we withdrew from military installations world wide. In the negotiations over Subic Bay our heart was not in it and we left Subic Bay as well as Clark AFB as we were unwilling to pay the price the Philippines was asking. It was short sighted and grossly naive. We shuttered many installations in Germany, the UK, Iceland, the Aleutians and others overseas and in the United States. The rapid draw down was the height of irresponsibility by ignorant leaders. The divesting of installations was matched by the disbanding of units and personnel that was only temporarily suspended by DS/DS after which it resumed with a ruthless vengeance.
In matters of great importance the thoughtful and slow retrenchment should be driven by security realities vice potential fiscal windfalls for tertiary priorities. The theme sounds oddly familiar today. Divest the old and excess and rebuild with the efficient and the new — and don’t be too concerned with the gap between the two. Who sells the horse before you purchase the new one? Sadly, our Corps has sold the horses and has yet to purchase the donkey to replace them.
At this point the senior leadership of the Corps remains wedded to FX 20XX despite every aspect of it being overtaken by events. Deeply flawed at conception and obsolete before delivery.
If anyone is serious about rebuilding the Marine Corps, they need to begin by replacing the current woke leadership. The present leader talks & writes a good game but we must remember he was ‘Berger’s boy’ & shares responsibility for the current state of our Corps. We badly need another Al Gray to lead us back to reality & a world class fighting force.
Noticed an article in the Sept 17th issue of Defense News. It was about the fitting of an AGM- 158A onto to an FA-18 Super Hornet from VMFA- 262. Range of the missile is 260 miles. The extended range units AGM- 158 B and C is 620 miles. Makes me wonder about the use of FD 2030. What is the use of putting marines on an island with missiles (not invented yet) when the now non-existent MAGTF could be doing this today. The AGM-158 B and C are for the F-35, but bet a couple of smart Gunnies could fit them to the F/A-18. Even the AH-1Z sank a ship. Kinda makes you wonder what use FD 2030 is. You could sink all of the Chinese ships screwing with the Philippines with one Marine air strike. Especially if you use the extended range Missile.
Imagine a squadron or two of seaplanes armed with these missiles. They would have the whole Pacific Ocean as maneuver space plus the stand-off range of the missiles. They could strike from anywhere.
We should be smart enough to solve these problems and use our diplomatic corps to cool off the present difficulties. China should realize that the red line that they claim isn’t defensible and is causing them more problems than it is us. Like the Seaplane idea, much cheaper and a harder target than aircraft carriers.
Strength is a great deterrent. We are not projecting strength. We are projecting insecurity, unsureness, a lack of will and certainly a lack of purpose.
Great point. By projecting insecurity, our allies will look elsewhere for support.
- Or, surrender to aggression.
One would think, that if the current CMC read the Walter Russell Mead review that it would strike a cord. Further, it ought to strike a cord with the JCS as they look across a military posture that feels disheveled at best. Fair to say, civilian guidance and participation might take a bit of the blame, after all we have a nearly trillion dollar defense budget, which by any accounting is a lot of money and it is clear we are not getting enough bang per buck. It has not taken months to get here, nor years rather decades, but here we are. The 33rd CNO has released her equivalent of the CPG, and while modestly encouraging at least in terms of right words and less salad in them, it is still clear many elements of the defense posture are broken. This all said on a macro scale is not a good report on readiness. But, again with sharp focus on rebuilding the Corps and the MAGTF, the lemons could become lemonade pretty quickly. But this means abandonment of FD Happy Talk, ASAP and laser focus on the weapons and ancillary equipment to support the MAGTF going forward into 2030, 2035 and out years beyond. If the Corps can be made truly ready than on a micro level overall readiness improves. It is back to us here at CP and the Chowder Society II to keep pounding out the drum beat and hope that everyone gets so tired of listening to the beat that they sit up and listen, and support returning the Corps to a position to meet Title X mandates, and be able to answer the call when it comes.
Let’s be precise. During the ill advised draw downs to harvest the “peace dividend” we withdrew from military installations world wide. In the negotiations over Subic Bay our heart was not in it and we left Subic Bay as well as Clark AFB as we were unwilling to pay the price the Philippines was asking. It was short sighted and grossly naive. We shuttered many installations in Germany, the UK, Iceland, the Aleutians and others overseas and in the United States. The rapid draw down was the height of irresponsibility by ignorant leaders. The divesting of installations was matched by the disbanding of units and personnel that was only temporarily suspended by DS/DS after which it resumed with a ruthless vengeance.
In matters of great importance the thoughtful and slow retrenchment should be driven by security realities vice potential fiscal windfalls for tertiary priorities. The theme sounds oddly familiar today. Divest the old and excess and rebuild with the efficient and the new — and don’t be too concerned with the gap between the two. Who sells the horse before you purchase the new one? Sadly, our Corps has sold the horses and has yet to purchase the donkey to replace them.
At this point the senior leadership of the Corps remains wedded to FX 20XX despite every aspect of it being overtaken by events. Deeply flawed at conception and obsolete before delivery.