| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Marine Commandant Worries Corps Losing 'Expeditionary Flavor' |
| 2007-10-20 |
| The Marine Corps commandant is worried about the service becoming "a second land army" and said al Qaeda in Iraq is crippled, but not destroyed. Marine Gen. James T. Conway told the Center for a New American Security yesterday the Marine Corps needs to get back to being the United States' expeditionary "shock troops." "I'm concerned about keeping our expeditionary flavor," he said. The 26,000 Marines in Iraq today are equipped much heavier than when the force first went into the country, Conway noted. For example, the Marines are shifting from up-armored Humvees to mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles. The MRAP adds a lot of weight to what is essentially a light infantry formation. "We're talking about a potential buy of 3,700 MRAPs," he said. "Those vehicles weigh 40,000 pounds each." "We've simply gotten heavier," he said. "We've become in many ways a second land army." This is fine for now, the commandant said, but planners must look to the future. He said these heavy vehicles - which have saved many lives in Iraq - simply do not fit in to the doctrine and mission Marines foresee. "What are we going to do with MRAPs in five to 10 years? Put them in shrink wrap and set them on asphalt, is my guess," Conway said. The pressure of operations in Iraq has forced the Corps to change training. Units spend seven months in Iraq and seven months back at home station. During that seven-month period at home, the units rest and refit, then train to go back to Iraq and fight a counterinsurgency battle. "Our training has suffered some," Conway said. Marine battalions used to go through training exercises at the training area at Twenty-nine Palms, Calif. Those exercises tested all aspects battle from artillerymen firing to air-ground coordination. Those iterations have dried up, he said. Marines seldom get time to do mountain warfare training or jungle training anymore. And Marines seldom serve at sea anymore. "We now have a generation of officers who has never stepped aboard a ship, and that concerns us with our naval flavor and ability to launch amphibious support," he said. Looking to the future, Conway said the Marine Corps must be able to handle the full spectrum of conflict from charging across a beach in a forced entry to irregular warfare. The Marines have looked at forging a professional advisor corps, but is holding off for the time being. Conway turned his attention to the state of military operations in Iraq. Al Qaeda in Iraq has been significantly crippled, he said, but the terrorist organization has shown an amazing ability to regenerate. "Are they crippled? Yeah," he said. "Are they still dangerous? Absolutely, and certainly they are not destroyed." Source: U.S. Department of Defense |
| Posted by:Pappy |
| #18 Okay - I'm back from the day's training (unlike the 'uniforms', I get to go home at night). So I'm ready to return fire. One: When he says 'flavor', think 'institutional memory'. He doesn't want to have the USMC have to learn all their skills over again when a war breaks out. Kinda like the Army does every war... Two: He isn't saying 'go to a lightly armed force'. I don't know where that gem came from. He sez 'expeditionary'; quick reaction followed up by heavier forces. Three: Expeditions do have to travel light. Figure a LAR (Light Armored Recon) unit has both LAVs and HumVees. Replace HumVees with MRAPs at 3-4 times an increase in weight. Your 'light' unit just got 1200 tons heavier. That stuff has to be moved; either by ship or aircraft. Marines don't have C-5s. Four: Again, 'expeditionary' is a mindset. The Army finally figured out during this war that junior officers need to think for themselves, be innovative and 'beg forgiveness rather than permission'. Guess who's been doing that since they started? And training - 29 Stumps is the Air-Ground Combat training center. It's the last Marine facility they can do an all-out exercise. Yes, we're still training - but it ain't what Marines are gonna have to face if they have to land somewhere. Agreed - there won't be too many WWII-style amphib operations. But there will be operations. There's lots of coastline. Worst thing in the world is to go in with your metaphorical shoes untied and your zipper open. They ain't the Army - they can't afford to take heavy initial losses (like at Normandy). |
| Posted by: Pappy 2007-10-20 22:46 |
| #17 Like I said before, its crying poor so he can get budget. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2007-10-20 21:37 |
| #16 Remember that the USMC has an institutional memory of being starved for funding, Gen. Conway is reflecting this concern: "We've simply gotten heavier," he said. "We've become in many ways a second land army." This is fine for now, the commandant said, but planners must look to the future. He said these heavy vehicles - which have saved many lives in Iraq - simply do not fit in to the doctrine and mission Marines foresee. The USMC is looking at getting budget money for Ospreys, JSF's, and the new Amphib tractor. All of these programs have run late and over-budget. Let's try to not read more into this press release than there really is... |
| Posted by: Throlumble Stalin2429 2007-10-20 13:30 |
| #15 Marines were lucky to have Lejune before WWII. They need to recognize that there will probably not be years of WWII style amphibious operations on tropical islands again and that the Army learned to do them as well as the Marines. Finally, we are in the process of self-dismantlement of our Navy. If the Marines were truly forward looking, some 21st century Lejune would recognize that the under-served niche of specialty operations available for domination is urban combat. Master this and they'll have work to last them for a long time. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-10-20 13:10 |
| #14 Old Spook: And his [Marine Gen. James T. Conway] worry about training is hogwash. No training out there that exceeds combat experience. "Our training has suffered some," Conway said. In the real world the Marines will probably never get another Pacific Island campaign like WWII. D-day, Beach Bombardment, assault boats circle up and head into shore, Hit the beach, tear out a toehold and then punch inland. During War Time all the peace time training routines change. In the South Pacific the Marines didn't face much armor like the American Army did in Europe, and consequently they didn't train like the Army did in Europe either. Combat is by far the ultimate and most productive Experience & Test. This is true for Leaders and Leadership [NonComs or Officers, Marine Team Work and for the individual Marine. It's just possible that Gen. James T. Conway loves the Corps so much he hates to see it fighting in cities full of civilians.. and losing Marines because of ROE. Marine Commandant Worries.. I wonder if Gen. James T. Conway was one of the Marine Generals that was leaking to Murtha.. IMHO |
| Posted by: Black Charlie Glavising2606 2007-10-20 12:57 |
| #13 Between other features the USMC has no medical personnel of its own: they are lent by the Navy. That is because Marines didn't develop as a full service able to operate by itself but as the land arm of the Navy. They weren't supposed to lead large scale prolonged operations on land. IMHO they still are at the core a kind of marge scale commando whose mission is to destroy or capture high value objectives and not meraely trade blows with ennemies (a single army division has more artillery and tanks than the entire Marine Corps) |
| Posted by: JFM 2007-10-20 12:33 |
| #12 He just wants to go back to having Marines on some boat that deploy for 75 days and then get back on their boats. Those days are gone. Marines in Afghanstan will still require a large Joint logistical footprint. Lots of Army, lots of Airforce and even some Naval aviation assets. They can have control of that AOR but they know their logistics has to be suplemented by the Army. Their CH-46 (Marine version of the Army CH-47 Chinook) is under powered for the higher elevations of Afghanistan. Alos, there is no Telling how the Osprey would work there but maybe it can. There will still be Airforce cargo lift, Army logistics and Naval electronic warfare equipment there. Dont even get me started on the Marines inability to recover CDS (cargo delivery system) items for Parachute drops. The Marines want Afghanistan because it requires a smaller force, which will allow them to do other things. But thats just my thought... |
| Posted by: ArmyLife 2007-10-20 11:24 |
| #11 "...the Marines are amphibious penetration shock forces" Only since (and during) WWII. Prior to that, and going all the way back to 1800 and before, they were mostly "state dept troops" Think Butler, not Lejeune. Given 21st century "long war" doctrine, the Marines may want to go back to their roots. |
| Posted by: Thromp Fillmore2138 2007-10-20 11:14 |
| #10 United States population 1940: 132 million United States Army: 267 thousand United States Marine Corps: 28 thousand Ratio USMC to USA: 10.4 percent Ratio of both to US population: .223 percent United States population 2000: 281 million United States Army:471 thousand United States Marine Corps: 172 thousand Ratio USMC to USA: 36.5 percent Ratio of both to US population: .228 percent Well Commandant, when your strength authorization reached a certain ratio with the Army, you get to pick up their load as well. Particularly since both of you are authorized at an overall strength level that match those prior to WWII in comparison to the general population, even though the military responsibilities are far more than the uniform leadership could imagine back then. If you want to get back to the 'old days' then cut the force structure authorization back to the Army to get a ratio more in line with the 'old days'. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-10-20 10:41 |
| #9 The Marines should be a heavy, rapid response force that can hit from the sea, any time anywhere. They need to be able to establish a beach head and provide an area for heavier army units to move further inland. With some heavy lifting craft, it can be done with the more armored equipment. However, in one aspect the argument, the general is right. The Marines have been used as a second Army since the Vietnam war. While the combat experience is invaluable, I do believe that most generals and leaders see them as that and not as a quick strike force to seize launching points for further attacks. I would love to see the Marines actually do a beach landing again. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2007-10-20 09:25 |
| #8 No training out there that exceeds combat experience. Nope. In a given conflict combat tends to take determined forms exerting only some facets of combat skill, you still need to train or you will lose your other skills (eg Marines are not exerting their ability to operate against armor). An analogy could be airline pilots. Despite flying every day they still have training sessions both on flying simulators and on real planes where they focus on how to fly and land with malfunctioning instruments and engines so the day it happens they haven't forgotten what to do. |
| Posted by: JFM 2007-10-20 08:52 |
| #7 I think the General is making the same argument I made a few days back. Remember the talk of taking the Marines out of Iraq and "giving" them Afghanistan, making Afghanistan a Marine mission? I pointed out that the Marines are amphibious penetration shock forces, who make the breech that the Army then uses for extended inland operations, which is a very different kettle of fish. Marines have something like a 1 to 5 ratio of combat to combat support personnel, which keeps them quick and agile. They can also be used as a "knockout punch", opening up "instant fronts" with the enemy, forcing them to divide their forces. But once this mission is over, they need redeployment and resupply, or else they start losing their training edge, becoming less quick and agile. The Army, however, has about a 1 to 15 ratio, making them much slower, but able to sustain operations for many months and years. They are more capable of adaptation to a particular battle space, adding whatever "weight" is needed. Slow, heavy, methodical. Right now, the Marine mission in both countries should be limited to two types: training and elite forces operations. That is, they should both train Iraqi and Afghan army personnel, and give some selected personnel combat exposure in support of Army missions; and they should be using their elite forces, like Recon and SOCOM, for deep penetration, high degree of difficulty missions. All other Marine personnel in theater should be aboard ship in the Persian Gulf and environs, preparing for their next contingency Marine operations. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-10-20 08:41 |
| #6 'Expeditionary Flavor' heh OS, kool vet and analysis.. |
| Posted by: Red Dawg 2007-10-20 03:16 |
| #5 Hey Gen, if your Marines can't hack it, the Army will take up the slack the way it always does. You pick up your packs and march away, the Army will do the heavy lifting, as it always has like at Normandy. If he wants to pull the Marines back to being a light infantry only, limited use force, thats fine, we can cut the size of the Corps and give that money to the Army who can and will develop and deploy heavy forces that are flexible, mobile and can sustain themselves in the field. No place the Marines can get to that we couldn't use another Ranger regiment instead, with air and sealifted Stryker battalions. That'll stir up a hornets nest. Heh. No insult intended towar dht eMarines. I believe the General is talking out his 4th point of contact. I disagree with the General - heavy job requires heavy units, so that's what the Marines have. One thing all my service time taught me is that line Marines get the damn job done no matter how heavy or light their gear. Thats what makes them Marines - they adapt quickly and excel no matter what. That's what they have done in Iraq. And his worry about training is hogwash. No training out there that exceeds combat experience. I think I smell budget ploys in his talk. That and he is worried about the Navy's new "Naval Infantry" who are taking over a lot of the old Marines shipboard and in-port duties. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2007-10-20 02:16 |
| #4 "We've simply gotten heavier," he said. I feel for you sir. We all tend to do that as we get older, and don't watch the diet. Heh. In all seriousness, this would explain the desire to make a'stan an all-marine show. It is a theatre that precludes heavy armor, and the locals are either unable or unwilling to consistantly use IED/SFP weapons. Instead the talibs just make futile massed infantry assults. Let the army have fun in Iraq. As for the future of the mraps, given that they will probably be fuel and maintence hogs, and dont fit in with the MTOE picture the clowns in DC have for the army, the DOD will prolly scramble to sell them off at the first opportunity. which is a shame as we in the guard could use them here in the domestic security role (i.e. the mexicans get cute with their expat population here, or the code pinkos realy get out of hand). |
| Posted by: N guard 2007-10-20 01:20 |
| #3 I hear he's also discovered a severe shortage of Underwood Five's. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2007-10-20 01:15 |
| #2 Joe - I lost you around one of the curves - are the Marines gonna join the OWG? |
| Posted by: Chuckles Jaise7272 2007-10-20 00:34 |
| #1 The "1000-flag", multinational task force = OWG Global Navy. Police Actions [mostly on land'deep inland + BIG/MEGA-CITY URBAN OPERATIONS] + International/Multi-Later Cooperation + Humanitarian Missions. * GWEN STEFANI'S BOSOM versus OLLIE STONE, AEROSMITH, and TEXAS-SIZED ASTEROIDS back in 1960's-70's Guam [Taotamonas = Ancestral Ghosts, including NOT dead then = not personally known then]. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-10-20 00:23 |