advancement to SecDef might be in the ball park. Surely, if a FOX News t.v. personality (for the past eight years) can get the “nod” from the Trump camp, a seasoned veteran & established intellectual in things of war should receive honorable mention at the very least. Anderson has a habit of telling it like it is, to wit: one might like what is said & the manner in which it is said, but, one should listen. In the event CONGRESS should awaken to our self-inflicted plight and direct we get our house in order, we might want to have some institutional idea of what is needed to be done, and how to do it. To do that, if I could wave a magic wand, the first thing I would do in the “get well mode”, would be to select first rate educators, put them in MCU NOW, and turn MCU into an engine of creative & critical thinking, development of new doctrine where needed, and thorough instruction of our history. This is the fundamental blocking & tackling of our profession, we have been good at it, and we should return to its proven process.
Why has the PLA MC not developed into a littoral missile force like our Marine Corps is doing? Yes, I am aware that the PLA has a robust SSM antiship force. Why do we cede the naval battlefield to their naval infantry? Prior to FD we had the best littoral weapon system: the US Marine Corps. I remember reading somewhere that Lord of the Admiralty, Jackie Fisher, said an amphibious force is like a projectile fired from the fleet. Every littoral area the Chinese inhabit around the globe for their trade, should be a target for our Marine Corps. Why give them the advantage? The Marine Corps is an offensive force fired from our Navy.
As General Van Riper has said "no one is watching the store." Agreed, it is not nice to call the 38th and 39th CMC's mid wits. Guilty as charged. They may have high IQ's but, that might mean low common sense. Regardless, poor leadership is poor leadership, and they were/are poor leaders. They have demanded respect and adherence to their view. Their mindset is antithetical to the Corps that the writer served in, in that Corps, opposing views were tolerated and respect was earned. "Dave" and "Eric" oh now we are a first name basis with "Dave" and "Eric"? The writer can only imagine walking into my Bosses Office at 0630 on a Monday morning and saying "good morning Dave! How they hanging this morning" in my role as ADC to Major General David B. Barker. General's Berger and Smith are sadly, a sign of the times. Political Generals, they have succumbed to what ever swamp gas foggy bottom emits daily. Lack of discipline, lack of commitment, lack of reality. But the watch dog, AKA the Congress and specifically the senate armed services committee and subcommittee of seapower have allowed an unvetted process (FD2030) to germinate and grow into an unmanageable and unexecutable "doctrine." Don't believe this writer? Call Senator Shaheen's Office (D,NH) good luck getting a response and if you do, they will say "we are looking at it." Sound familiar? Everyone is "looking at it." At some point someone has to ask, where are the logistics behind the MLR. and the SIF? Where are the amphibious vessels that will glide peacefully and UNDETECTED across the glassy waters of the vast Pacific Ocean to drop the Marines off on Wake 4.0 and Guam 4.0 and the Philippines 5.0, yes, ole Dugout Dougie "shall return" and the Chinese will never dare to cross the Yalu River, Tet' what Tet'?...in the meantime one can see clearly that adhering to federal statute as in Title X mandates doesn't matter much. Iron sharpens iron, marshmellow's burn when over heated. Regardless of one's political persuasions, it is hard to argue that with nearly a trillion dollar defense budget that we are getting the most bang for the buck. We had the best bang per buck with the full MAGTF capability. Now? Ross Perot got in to a major row with Roger Smith the then CEO of General Motors Corporation. Ole Ross had the temerity to ask when GM was going to make a car that the public would buy, and if they could expect it to run longer than 2 days after being driven off the lot. Mr. Perot suggested that in the fiscal planning for that coming year that GM make a goal of doing one thing right. He suggested they get the lightbulbs for the tail lights right, and go from there. Ross was tossed off the Board of Directors for his insubordination. See any similar behavior in the 38th and 39th CMC's as that of Roger Smith CEO. Hmmm. and how has that worked for GM in the long haul? It would appear currently that common sense is an uncommon virtue with the founders and acolytes of FD2030. One can only hope common sense and a return to full on support of maneuver warfare and the thinking and logistics behind it necessary to fulfill Title X mandates and a MAGTF fully capable of executing that mission are on the way back in coming months and years.
Isn't a related question "Where are the islands?"?
It's been many years, but as I vaguely recall, you can't just ram a landing ship ashore on the nearest convenient island and start driving trucks off...a suitable island has to have the right beach profile, the right terrain ashore, access to the interior, overhead cover, and (if you're trying to hide), uninhabited. With logistics/resupply/extraction extremely questionable I certainly wouldn't want to get marooned on an island without a water source either. Not that many small islands in the region fit those requirements in my (very dated) experience.
Unless I'm being ignorant, as I often am, you wouldn't be hiding amidst hundreds of possible islands...but a relative handful. Most of which can be ID'd via a map/chart recon, with imagery showing likely positions for a missile battery.
The emergence of PLAN-MC is a symptom of what's coming next, which is the return of largescale amphibious warfare to the Pacific. The USMC command structure must wake up to this, but that is the easy part. It must then wake the American people up to it.
Col Gary Anderson's comment..."due to some very poor decisions by an egocentric and incompetent Marine Corps commandant." is ridiculous. Dave Berger and Eric Smith are anything but egocentric and incompetent. They both, as CMC's, with their SIG have the inherent responsibility to shape the Corps for its percieved future....based on where our current Administration and National security apparatus is defining the priority threats. I all the higher guidance documents NSS, NDS, NMS, JSCP ir was VEOs, then China Russia Iran etc. The current SecDef and current Administration now puts China as our #1 paceing threat. So Dave and Eric must look at that and project the future employment of our Corps, including gains in technology currently or envisioned in the future. No Administration or Commandant except Al Gray, has had the bullseye sharp eye to where the Corp must go in the future. With what we are seeing today, China’s expanded Fleet, SMF, Drone technologies. Little blue men, their militia fleet, and malign influence in the SEA AOR as well as OBOR initiatives globally, I think they did a pretty good job! Do I agree with all of it...hell No, but was it malicious incompetency or egocentric? Not on your life. We all can disagree on concepts and philosophies, but to castigated our CMC as egocentric is beyond the pale. Gary has a impeccable "rap sheet" but he does himself a disservice in his personal castigation of both Senior officers in our Corps. My opinion only. M2
The 38th and 39th CMC’s have put the Corps on a path that will lead to its irrelevance if Congress does not act and act soon. In 2019, the 38th CMC misdiagnosed the operational problem in the same manner as French military officers did after World War I, that is, he made the false assumption that new technologies would preclude maneuver on future battlefields. With this assumption he radically reorganized much of the Corps for defense of a portion of the Western Pacific and stripped the remainder of its operating forces of the means to fight as combined arms teams. For most of its existence and certainly for the past 80 years the Corps has seen itself as an offensive force; moving away from that outlook will undoubtably affect our ethos.
You don’t have to be an expert in military affairs to understand any of this, which causes me to see the actions of these two CMCs as professional malpractice. My view is not an uncommon one. Most former CMCs have stated their belief that the Corps moved and continues to move in the wrong direction--I know as a fact six of the eight have said this. The same for many former combatant commanders, the two generals who led I MEF in major combat operations involving maneuver and fire, the four living Marine officers who are recipients of the Medal of Honor, and literally hundreds more. They can’t all be wrong.
Having commanded the Marine Combat Development Command, I know how force development is supposed to be accomplished. The 38th CMC circumvented that process, which is likely why some have accused him of intellectual arrogance. I believe they have a strong case though I don’t agree such belief should be used in personal attacks.
I have read the 2018 National Defense Strategy, the one most often cited by proponents of FD 2030; it did not require the 38th CMC to do what he did to our Corps. That is simply a bogus argument. The author of the 2018 NDS told me personally that he never intended CMC to do what he did.
I do appreciate that you have attempted to make an argument in support of Force Design 2030 and its proponents instead of attacking the critics of that plan as most other defenders do in their comments.
Gen Van Riper, Just like the decisions to stop our SRIGs and the integration and fusion of all things that gather and coordinate intelligence. Some of our previous leaders, Sir, failed to see the future. The SRIG construct, of Gen Gray, Col Bill Keller( RIP) Col Hart (RIP) was what we needed then and use now. So our Corps needs to look to the future, not the past. My opinion only. M2
Absolutely agree! Corps as it often did in the past needs to look to the future--amphibious tractors, helicopters, MPF, Warfighting Manual, SRIG, and so forth. Wha it never did previously was divest capability before new capabilities arrived. FD 2030 did that. As dumb as getting rid of CH-46s before the V-22s were in production.
Bravo Zulu sir on your experience and insight into this FD2030 insanity and for calling Berger/Smith and cohorts for what they are... VISION2035 is our only "saving grace" but the time to "reverse and restore" ain't a luxury that we may have... Semper Fi!
I agree that we should refrain from personal attacks. Personal attacks only focus the reader away from the real issues. I disagree that Gen Berger and Gen Smith have positioned the Marine Corps for the challenges of today or tomorrow. They have essentially transitioned the Marine Corps to irrelevance. To justify their actions based on the 2018 and 2022 National Defense Strategies is a bridge too far.
I appreciate your comment and am glad you particpated in the discussion. That said, I second Gen. McAbee's response. I would assert that the USMC does not match what the pacing threat is doing; the CP article touches on that. Further, the USMC is grossly under resourced for the fight tonight. Just getting a MEU out has turned into much more of a nutroll than 10-20 years ago. Autonomous, unmanned, digital are important ...but not the end all and be all. More so, being on hand for the fight still counts and will count well into the future. We are not ready for the on hand fight tonight the way we should be. I love Marines, and a squad will take a figurative hill with just figurative K-Bars (I know, out of date), but should we prepare and task them like that?
I disagree with your assessment of Mr Anderson' blistering critique of Berger and Smith and cohorts! Their FD2030 is borderline "criminal" in its sabotage of our Corps' MAGTF capabilities! The damage will take time to undo, which is a luxury we may not very well have... smh!
Gary Anderson's observations are "spot on" again here... FD2030 has proven a collosal failure and has ruined our MAGTF capabilities! VISION2035 will reverse and restore the damage inflicted by Berger/Smith and fellow cohorts and I pray it doesn't take a decade to do so, because we may not have the luxury of time on our side for such!
Isn't a related question "Where are the islands?"?
It's been many years, but as I vaguely recall, you can't just ram a landing ship ashore on the nearest convenient island and start driving trucks off...a suitable island has to have the right beach profile, the right terrain ashore, access to the interior, overhead cover, and (if you're trying to hide), uninhabited. With logistics/resupply/extraction extremely questionable I certainly wouldn't want to get marooned on an island without a water source either. Not that many small islands in the region fit those requirements in my (very dated) experience.
Unless I'm being ignorant, as I often am, you wouldn't be hiding amidst hundreds of possible islands...but a relative handful. Most of which can be ID'd via a map/chart recon, with imagery showing likely positions for a missile battery.
Don Whisnant’s observation of Gary Anderson’s
advancement to SecDef might be in the ball park. Surely, if a FOX News t.v. personality (for the past eight years) can get the “nod” from the Trump camp, a seasoned veteran & established intellectual in things of war should receive honorable mention at the very least. Anderson has a habit of telling it like it is, to wit: one might like what is said & the manner in which it is said, but, one should listen. In the event CONGRESS should awaken to our self-inflicted plight and direct we get our house in order, we might want to have some institutional idea of what is needed to be done, and how to do it. To do that, if I could wave a magic wand, the first thing I would do in the “get well mode”, would be to select first rate educators, put them in MCU NOW, and turn MCU into an engine of creative & critical thinking, development of new doctrine where needed, and thorough instruction of our history. This is the fundamental blocking & tackling of our profession, we have been good at it, and we should return to its proven process.
Why has the PLA MC not developed into a littoral missile force like our Marine Corps is doing? Yes, I am aware that the PLA has a robust SSM antiship force. Why do we cede the naval battlefield to their naval infantry? Prior to FD we had the best littoral weapon system: the US Marine Corps. I remember reading somewhere that Lord of the Admiralty, Jackie Fisher, said an amphibious force is like a projectile fired from the fleet. Every littoral area the Chinese inhabit around the globe for their trade, should be a target for our Marine Corps. Why give them the advantage? The Marine Corps is an offensive force fired from our Navy.
Perhaps Trump should consider Col. Gary Anderson as the new SecDef.
As General Van Riper has said "no one is watching the store." Agreed, it is not nice to call the 38th and 39th CMC's mid wits. Guilty as charged. They may have high IQ's but, that might mean low common sense. Regardless, poor leadership is poor leadership, and they were/are poor leaders. They have demanded respect and adherence to their view. Their mindset is antithetical to the Corps that the writer served in, in that Corps, opposing views were tolerated and respect was earned. "Dave" and "Eric" oh now we are a first name basis with "Dave" and "Eric"? The writer can only imagine walking into my Bosses Office at 0630 on a Monday morning and saying "good morning Dave! How they hanging this morning" in my role as ADC to Major General David B. Barker. General's Berger and Smith are sadly, a sign of the times. Political Generals, they have succumbed to what ever swamp gas foggy bottom emits daily. Lack of discipline, lack of commitment, lack of reality. But the watch dog, AKA the Congress and specifically the senate armed services committee and subcommittee of seapower have allowed an unvetted process (FD2030) to germinate and grow into an unmanageable and unexecutable "doctrine." Don't believe this writer? Call Senator Shaheen's Office (D,NH) good luck getting a response and if you do, they will say "we are looking at it." Sound familiar? Everyone is "looking at it." At some point someone has to ask, where are the logistics behind the MLR. and the SIF? Where are the amphibious vessels that will glide peacefully and UNDETECTED across the glassy waters of the vast Pacific Ocean to drop the Marines off on Wake 4.0 and Guam 4.0 and the Philippines 5.0, yes, ole Dugout Dougie "shall return" and the Chinese will never dare to cross the Yalu River, Tet' what Tet'?...in the meantime one can see clearly that adhering to federal statute as in Title X mandates doesn't matter much. Iron sharpens iron, marshmellow's burn when over heated. Regardless of one's political persuasions, it is hard to argue that with nearly a trillion dollar defense budget that we are getting the most bang for the buck. We had the best bang per buck with the full MAGTF capability. Now? Ross Perot got in to a major row with Roger Smith the then CEO of General Motors Corporation. Ole Ross had the temerity to ask when GM was going to make a car that the public would buy, and if they could expect it to run longer than 2 days after being driven off the lot. Mr. Perot suggested that in the fiscal planning for that coming year that GM make a goal of doing one thing right. He suggested they get the lightbulbs for the tail lights right, and go from there. Ross was tossed off the Board of Directors for his insubordination. See any similar behavior in the 38th and 39th CMC's as that of Roger Smith CEO. Hmmm. and how has that worked for GM in the long haul? It would appear currently that common sense is an uncommon virtue with the founders and acolytes of FD2030. One can only hope common sense and a return to full on support of maneuver warfare and the thinking and logistics behind it necessary to fulfill Title X mandates and a MAGTF fully capable of executing that mission are on the way back in coming months and years.
"Where are the amphibious vessels"
Isn't a related question "Where are the islands?"?
It's been many years, but as I vaguely recall, you can't just ram a landing ship ashore on the nearest convenient island and start driving trucks off...a suitable island has to have the right beach profile, the right terrain ashore, access to the interior, overhead cover, and (if you're trying to hide), uninhabited. With logistics/resupply/extraction extremely questionable I certainly wouldn't want to get marooned on an island without a water source either. Not that many small islands in the region fit those requirements in my (very dated) experience.
Unless I'm being ignorant, as I often am, you wouldn't be hiding amidst hundreds of possible islands...but a relative handful. Most of which can be ID'd via a map/chart recon, with imagery showing likely positions for a missile battery.
The emergence of PLAN-MC is a symptom of what's coming next, which is the return of largescale amphibious warfare to the Pacific. The USMC command structure must wake up to this, but that is the easy part. It must then wake the American people up to it.
As some have referenced in other posts... FD2030 is the equivalent of the French "Maginot Line" of the post WW1 era... smh!
Exactly!
Col Gary Anderson's comment..."due to some very poor decisions by an egocentric and incompetent Marine Corps commandant." is ridiculous. Dave Berger and Eric Smith are anything but egocentric and incompetent. They both, as CMC's, with their SIG have the inherent responsibility to shape the Corps for its percieved future....based on where our current Administration and National security apparatus is defining the priority threats. I all the higher guidance documents NSS, NDS, NMS, JSCP ir was VEOs, then China Russia Iran etc. The current SecDef and current Administration now puts China as our #1 paceing threat. So Dave and Eric must look at that and project the future employment of our Corps, including gains in technology currently or envisioned in the future. No Administration or Commandant except Al Gray, has had the bullseye sharp eye to where the Corp must go in the future. With what we are seeing today, China’s expanded Fleet, SMF, Drone technologies. Little blue men, their militia fleet, and malign influence in the SEA AOR as well as OBOR initiatives globally, I think they did a pretty good job! Do I agree with all of it...hell No, but was it malicious incompetency or egocentric? Not on your life. We all can disagree on concepts and philosophies, but to castigated our CMC as egocentric is beyond the pale. Gary has a impeccable "rap sheet" but he does himself a disservice in his personal castigation of both Senior officers in our Corps. My opinion only. M2
The 38th and 39th CMC’s have put the Corps on a path that will lead to its irrelevance if Congress does not act and act soon. In 2019, the 38th CMC misdiagnosed the operational problem in the same manner as French military officers did after World War I, that is, he made the false assumption that new technologies would preclude maneuver on future battlefields. With this assumption he radically reorganized much of the Corps for defense of a portion of the Western Pacific and stripped the remainder of its operating forces of the means to fight as combined arms teams. For most of its existence and certainly for the past 80 years the Corps has seen itself as an offensive force; moving away from that outlook will undoubtably affect our ethos.
You don’t have to be an expert in military affairs to understand any of this, which causes me to see the actions of these two CMCs as professional malpractice. My view is not an uncommon one. Most former CMCs have stated their belief that the Corps moved and continues to move in the wrong direction--I know as a fact six of the eight have said this. The same for many former combatant commanders, the two generals who led I MEF in major combat operations involving maneuver and fire, the four living Marine officers who are recipients of the Medal of Honor, and literally hundreds more. They can’t all be wrong.
Having commanded the Marine Combat Development Command, I know how force development is supposed to be accomplished. The 38th CMC circumvented that process, which is likely why some have accused him of intellectual arrogance. I believe they have a strong case though I don’t agree such belief should be used in personal attacks.
I have read the 2018 National Defense Strategy, the one most often cited by proponents of FD 2030; it did not require the 38th CMC to do what he did to our Corps. That is simply a bogus argument. The author of the 2018 NDS told me personally that he never intended CMC to do what he did.
I do appreciate that you have attempted to make an argument in support of Force Design 2030 and its proponents instead of attacking the critics of that plan as most other defenders do in their comments.
Gen Van Riper, Just like the decisions to stop our SRIGs and the integration and fusion of all things that gather and coordinate intelligence. Some of our previous leaders, Sir, failed to see the future. The SRIG construct, of Gen Gray, Col Bill Keller( RIP) Col Hart (RIP) was what we needed then and use now. So our Corps needs to look to the future, not the past. My opinion only. M2
Absolutely agree! Corps as it often did in the past needs to look to the future--amphibious tractors, helicopters, MPF, Warfighting Manual, SRIG, and so forth. Wha it never did previously was divest capability before new capabilities arrived. FD 2030 did that. As dumb as getting rid of CH-46s before the V-22s were in production.
Bravo Zulu sir on your experience and insight into this FD2030 insanity and for calling Berger/Smith and cohorts for what they are... VISION2035 is our only "saving grace" but the time to "reverse and restore" ain't a luxury that we may have... Semper Fi!
I agree that we should refrain from personal attacks. Personal attacks only focus the reader away from the real issues. I disagree that Gen Berger and Gen Smith have positioned the Marine Corps for the challenges of today or tomorrow. They have essentially transitioned the Marine Corps to irrelevance. To justify their actions based on the 2018 and 2022 National Defense Strategies is a bridge too far.
I appreciate your comment and am glad you particpated in the discussion. That said, I second Gen. McAbee's response. I would assert that the USMC does not match what the pacing threat is doing; the CP article touches on that. Further, the USMC is grossly under resourced for the fight tonight. Just getting a MEU out has turned into much more of a nutroll than 10-20 years ago. Autonomous, unmanned, digital are important ...but not the end all and be all. More so, being on hand for the fight still counts and will count well into the future. We are not ready for the on hand fight tonight the way we should be. I love Marines, and a squad will take a figurative hill with just figurative K-Bars (I know, out of date), but should we prepare and task them like that?
I disagree with your assessment of Mr Anderson' blistering critique of Berger and Smith and cohorts! Their FD2030 is borderline "criminal" in its sabotage of our Corps' MAGTF capabilities! The damage will take time to undo, which is a luxury we may not very well have... smh!
Gary Anderson's observations are "spot on" again here... FD2030 has proven a collosal failure and has ruined our MAGTF capabilities! VISION2035 will reverse and restore the damage inflicted by Berger/Smith and fellow cohorts and I pray it doesn't take a decade to do so, because we may not have the luxury of time on our side for such!
"Where are the amphibious vessels"
Isn't a related question "Where are the islands?"?
It's been many years, but as I vaguely recall, you can't just ram a landing ship ashore on the nearest convenient island and start driving trucks off...a suitable island has to have the right beach profile, the right terrain ashore, access to the interior, overhead cover, and (if you're trying to hide), uninhabited. With logistics/resupply/extraction extremely questionable I certainly wouldn't want to get marooned on an island without a water source either. Not that many small islands in the region fit those requirements in my (very dated) experience.
Unless I'm being ignorant, as I often am, you wouldn't be hiding amidst hundreds of possible islands...but a relative handful. Most of which can be ID'd via a map/chart recon, with imagery showing likely positions for a missile battery.