Until FD2030 was mandated and implemented 5 yrs ago, our Corps' truly was the premiere air-ground-task force in the world, and still the world's finest fighting force (altho the past decade witnessed the assault on our 'Warrior Ethos' and mandated gender intergration of our recruit training that has undermined our time-tested processes and institutions that made us such)... FD2030 devastated our MAGTF capabilities and rendered the Corps a "one-trick pony" in a circus of multiple and varying real-world threats, relegated to fighting the CHICOMs on remote Pacific islands in claiming to be a "ship destroying threat" in such a conflict...
VISION2035 must be implemented to SAVE our Corps and "reverse and restore" the lethality and capabilities of our MAGTF that FD2030 has proven to undermine and destroy!
Cfrog in his capacity of de facto spokesman for FD2030 is never wrong, silences those who disagree, coaches the 38th and now 39th CMC on ways to not answer logical questions and how to sass Senators, especially smart alecks like Senator Sullivan from Alaska (oh by the way who happens to be a Marine colonel) and brilliantly lays bare with cutting sarcasm just how devoid the thinking process in the oldest standing structure in Washington DC is from reality. As cfrog reminds the secret war games told him that FD2030 would prevail. I think cfrog may even have a seat at the meeting when the newly confirmed SecNav asks General Smith just what is it you fellas with the goofy haircuts do anyway? The long silence will be interesting to learn about when cfrog briefs us up! We have a navy that cannot prevent rust on its vessels and a Marine Corps with a Title X mission they can’t perform. What could possibly go wrong? Gallows humor prevails.
“To the shores of Tripoli” … Hmmmmmm… just wondering if any Presley O’Bannon’s are lurking about should the Marines be called upon to land somewhere in the Levant. Given recent developments there, such is not a wild idea. Can we do it right now?
As the official spokesman for Force Design 2030, I agree. The CMC captured the essence of your post in his guidance to the Force in August of 2023. Notably:
"We train and fight as Marine Air-Ground Task Forces that master combined arms to win battles. Our three Marine Expeditionary Forces are our principal warfighting organizations and are balanced to meet the requirements of our national strategy. Embarked aboard Amphibious Warfare Ships, the Marine Expeditionary Unit is our crown jewel, enabling us to be on scene, ready to fight as a self-contained Marine Air-Ground Task Force.
We prepare for the worst-case scenario – the pacing threat. If the day comes that we must face that threat, we will be ready. We accept some risk now to be ready for the future. This is what professional organizations do: prepare for the future."
- (then ACMC) Gen. E. R. Smith, USMC
So don't worry, noone will derail the changes made as part of Force Design. Force Design Proponents are two steps ahead on this and we have enough support from Marines and friends of Marines in Congress on both sides of the aisle. Our 'Marine Orchestra' does not need the inefficiency of all the extra chairs our detractors think we do, and we belive we have the pulse of the new administration. We will continue to be able to capitalize on divest to invest. The secret wargames said so.
How did the immediate stripping of all armour, most engineer support including bridging, much tube artillery, scout snipers and T/ O's reducing Marines in combat arms meet your definition of "inefficiency of extra chairs"? What program was instituted to create amphibious shipping necessary to meet Title 10 requirements? Were the "secret war games" conducted with weapons, equipment and personnel that existed then? exist now? will exist before the next challenge? FD 2030 has detractors b/c it has failed to convince highly competent, combat seasoned MARINES, not academics or fantasy gamesmen. With all due respect, Sir, the case has been made that you all did not do the necessary job of convincing the Marines.
Occasionally, I allow the Official Spokesman for FD (2030) to post in my place. I do this for three reasons. One, some levity that highlights the separation between FD marketing and real capability. Two, as a reminder of the FD Proponent's viewpoints.
Three, as a counter-bias, when I think the Pro 'FD sucks' advocates, of which I am a part, are leading with their chin, as in this case. There is a lot of chatter of how the new administration et al is going to change this and that etc. The official spokesman made a good point. The CMC (and FD) has been saying the right things, things that mirror what CP had in this post. There is strong conservative support, and Marine Associated Support in Congress for FD 'as it is'. As much as I like the Congressional Research Service (shout out to Ron O'Rourke), I don't see indicators that the CRS concerns are shared by a majority. And as far as efficiency, FD markets well in the 'renderings and concepts are cheaper and easier to sell than hard facts' / 'easy results now are preferred to hard results later' paradigm that exists in congress and in certain personalities associated with the incoming administration.
So, I thought we needed to be exposed to what the Official Spokesman had to say, because I think we are complacent about the probable outcomes with respect to FD in the next 4 months. If I had to bet, I'd say it's going to get rubber stamped again, with some lip service about amphibs.
I also fear how President-elect Trump views the Corps. He had two high level former Marines in his first administration and he soured on both. I’m not sure if he is all that enamored with the Corps at this point. I sincerely hope he allows an honest evaluation of the Corps.
Until FD2030 was mandated and implemented 5 yrs ago, our Corps' truly was the premiere air-ground-task force in the world, and still the world's finest fighting force (altho the past decade witnessed the assault on our 'Warrior Ethos' and mandated gender intergration of our recruit training that has undermined our time-tested processes and institutions that made us such)... FD2030 devastated our MAGTF capabilities and rendered the Corps a "one-trick pony" in a circus of multiple and varying real-world threats, relegated to fighting the CHICOMs on remote Pacific islands in claiming to be a "ship destroying threat" in such a conflict...
VISION2035 must be implemented to SAVE our Corps and "reverse and restore" the lethality and capabilities of our MAGTF that FD2030 has proven to undermine and destroy!
It must start ASAP …I like Jan 21, 2025.
Cfrog in his capacity of de facto spokesman for FD2030 is never wrong, silences those who disagree, coaches the 38th and now 39th CMC on ways to not answer logical questions and how to sass Senators, especially smart alecks like Senator Sullivan from Alaska (oh by the way who happens to be a Marine colonel) and brilliantly lays bare with cutting sarcasm just how devoid the thinking process in the oldest standing structure in Washington DC is from reality. As cfrog reminds the secret war games told him that FD2030 would prevail. I think cfrog may even have a seat at the meeting when the newly confirmed SecNav asks General Smith just what is it you fellas with the goofy haircuts do anyway? The long silence will be interesting to learn about when cfrog briefs us up! We have a navy that cannot prevent rust on its vessels and a Marine Corps with a Title X mission they can’t perform. What could possibly go wrong? Gallows humor prevails.
“To the shores of Tripoli” … Hmmmmmm… just wondering if any Presley O’Bannon’s are lurking about should the Marines be called upon to land somewhere in the Levant. Given recent developments there, such is not a wild idea. Can we do it right now?
As the official spokesman for Force Design 2030, I agree. The CMC captured the essence of your post in his guidance to the Force in August of 2023. Notably:
"We train and fight as Marine Air-Ground Task Forces that master combined arms to win battles. Our three Marine Expeditionary Forces are our principal warfighting organizations and are balanced to meet the requirements of our national strategy. Embarked aboard Amphibious Warfare Ships, the Marine Expeditionary Unit is our crown jewel, enabling us to be on scene, ready to fight as a self-contained Marine Air-Ground Task Force.
We prepare for the worst-case scenario – the pacing threat. If the day comes that we must face that threat, we will be ready. We accept some risk now to be ready for the future. This is what professional organizations do: prepare for the future."
- (then ACMC) Gen. E. R. Smith, USMC
So don't worry, noone will derail the changes made as part of Force Design. Force Design Proponents are two steps ahead on this and we have enough support from Marines and friends of Marines in Congress on both sides of the aisle. Our 'Marine Orchestra' does not need the inefficiency of all the extra chairs our detractors think we do, and we belive we have the pulse of the new administration. We will continue to be able to capitalize on divest to invest. The secret wargames said so.
How did the immediate stripping of all armour, most engineer support including bridging, much tube artillery, scout snipers and T/ O's reducing Marines in combat arms meet your definition of "inefficiency of extra chairs"? What program was instituted to create amphibious shipping necessary to meet Title 10 requirements? Were the "secret war games" conducted with weapons, equipment and personnel that existed then? exist now? will exist before the next challenge? FD 2030 has detractors b/c it has failed to convince highly competent, combat seasoned MARINES, not academics or fantasy gamesmen. With all due respect, Sir, the case has been made that you all did not do the necessary job of convincing the Marines.
Occasionally, I allow the Official Spokesman for FD (2030) to post in my place. I do this for three reasons. One, some levity that highlights the separation between FD marketing and real capability. Two, as a reminder of the FD Proponent's viewpoints.
Three, as a counter-bias, when I think the Pro 'FD sucks' advocates, of which I am a part, are leading with their chin, as in this case. There is a lot of chatter of how the new administration et al is going to change this and that etc. The official spokesman made a good point. The CMC (and FD) has been saying the right things, things that mirror what CP had in this post. There is strong conservative support, and Marine Associated Support in Congress for FD 'as it is'. As much as I like the Congressional Research Service (shout out to Ron O'Rourke), I don't see indicators that the CRS concerns are shared by a majority. And as far as efficiency, FD markets well in the 'renderings and concepts are cheaper and easier to sell than hard facts' / 'easy results now are preferred to hard results later' paradigm that exists in congress and in certain personalities associated with the incoming administration.
So, I thought we needed to be exposed to what the Official Spokesman had to say, because I think we are complacent about the probable outcomes with respect to FD in the next 4 months. If I had to bet, I'd say it's going to get rubber stamped again, with some lip service about amphibs.
I also fear how President-elect Trump views the Corps. He had two high level former Marines in his first administration and he soured on both. I’m not sure if he is all that enamored with the Corps at this point. I sincerely hope he allows an honest evaluation of the Corps.
I hope cfrog was being sarcastic... FD2030 decimated our MAGTF capabilities and rendered the Corps impotent to any crisis... an unfortunate truth!
I would also wish that were true, Joel T Bowling. Lord knows I still use sarcasm and readers think I'm serious/ delusional!