Discussion about this post

User's avatar
The Wolf's avatar

Facts are facts! Fact one: The Marine Corps divested the capabilities it will need in a future conventional operation—cannon artillery; a direct-fire, mobile, protected gun system, equipment it will need to breach, clear, and proof lanes through minefields and obstacles, and bridging to cross gaps and bodies of water. Fact two: The Navy has allowed its amphibious fleet to deteriorate to the point it sometimes has no more than 12 or 13 amphibious ships available. Moreover, it has been unable to fund the 40-plus amphibious ships needed to keep sufficient Amphibious Ready Groups available to embark Marine Expeditionary Units forward deployed full-time in the Mediterranean and the Indo-Pacific Command’s region along with another ARG/MEU available six-months a year from Okinawa.

This is what the Navy and Marine Corps do not have. Fact three: What the Corps does have is emerging doctrine to enable amphibious operations (attacks, demonstrations, withdrawals, and raids) in an era where shore defenses preclude a repeat of anything like the attack on Tarawa or the other major amphibious operations of World War II. Drawn from early efforts to conduct operations from over the horizon, this emerging doctrine enables Marines to maneuver directly to operational objectives avoiding prepared defenses. The Operational Maneuver From the Sea (OMFTS) concept and its supporting Ship-to-Objective Maneuver concept were well thought out ideas that underpinned the requirements for tilt-rotor aircraft, air-cushioned landing craft, and an amphibious fighting vehicle able to move at speeds as high as 30 mph. The first two systems are in the Corps' current inventory and there are means to compensate for the lack of the latter.

Bottom line, the Corps has no intention of again conducting amphibious attacks directly against prepared defenses as circumstances required it to do in the past. However, it will not be able to conduct OMFTS until it abandons the notion of defending against enemy ships from shore-based positions with missiles as its primary mission. It “divested” the needed capabilities for OMFTS to “invest” in capabilities that other services already possess and few of the capabilities it invested in will be available for another 10-years. And the Wolf predicts some will never be available!

Let’s hope the Corps’ new leaders begin what will be a very long journey to create a modern amphibious combined arms air-ground-logistics task force able to maneuver and fire in an age of precision munitions. A force prepared. equipped, and ready to respond globally on short notice.

Expand full comment
Polarbear's avatar

To the Wolf: Well Done! "Want a new idea, read an old book."

Your comments sent me back to the 1996 Marine Corps Publication OPERATIONAL MANEUVER FROM THE SEA for a re-read. I have to wonder if the current Marine Corps Leadership ever read it. This little publication is prophetic.

"In all other respects—goals, organizations, armament, and tactics—the warfare of the next 20 years will be distinguished by its great variety. For that reason, it is imperative that the Marine Corps resist the temptation to prepare for only one type of conflict. To focus on one threat greatly increases the danger that we will be surprised, and perhaps defeated, by another." p. 3

"The heart of Operational Maneuver from the Sea is the maneuver of naval forces at the operational level, a bold bid for victory that aims at exploiting a significant enemy weakness in order to deal a decisive blow." p. 10

"The sea offers, strategic, operational, and tactical mobility to those who control it." p. 16

Seems this publication sets the framework for both the Great Power Competition and a Peer-to-Peer Conflict.

Concerning the Great Power Competition I read this yesterday:

https://www.reuters.com/world/china-says-would-be-serious-mistake-if-argentina-cuts-ties-2023-11-21/

BTW the distance between Miami and Caracas is 1368 miles. CCP missile ranges: CSS-1B - 4000k; JL-3 - 10,000k; CSS10 - 11,200k, CSS20 - 12,000k; CSS-4 - 13,000k.

Expand full comment
1 more comment...

No posts