|
Quoted: The whole Marines strategy seems completely retarded. China is a straight up fireworks factory of missiles; trying to be in a dinky boat, or occupy a small island (what small island would that even be in the first island chain) is a recipe for getting absolutely blasted. https://i.redd.it/lvtmoq61cex91.png Even if successful, their entire shore based missile arsenal would likely be below a single Rapid Dragon delivery, which can be used without stranding a bunch of Marines on Gilligans missile target. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_Dragon_(missile_system) The Marines should face reality - Rifleman aren't a relevant force in whats essentially a A2AD Missile Duel / game of Battleship. Facing that, they should pitch themselves as the 'ABC Force' - Anywhere But China Force. With the rest of the services focused on China, the Marines mission will be to handle crisis that occur anywhere else in the world. The current collapse of Haiti, where armed gangs are stealing all the aid, and the UN unwilling to help, is a perfect example of a ABC mission. I tend to agree that moving into the A2AD zone right away is dumb. You have to roll back at least the surveillance assets China has monitoring the area. Without the target data the missile factory is a fireworks factory. Low observable ships provide a better margin of safety. The big question here is maritime surveillance drones both ISR assets but also weapons or suicide drones. Both can throw a wrench in these plans. I think a better idea to tackle the China problem is choking them out via lack of resources. Right now China is relying on imports of just about everything to meet their needs and production. Clog the choke points with subs and close the sea lines from Africa. This is why I have been highly critical of programs like the LCS and heavily in favor of a USN modern SSK program that can be shared internationally with chosen partners. This gives us smaller cheaper hulls able to patrol the choke points out of the island chain. These can be optimized for littorals easier than the larger Virginia’s. Investing in undersea mine clearance and laying with them would likely be huge assets. The bigger pay off is allies like Australia who are screaming for viable subs can get what they need. Their plan for SSNs is probably 20 years till their first SSN. Their Collin’s are obsolete now. You are going to need missile assets that can hit pipelines from Russia. Ukraine is critical right now because we need to break Russia’s ability to be a powerful ally in the coming war with China. With SSKs freeing up SSNs from more or less picket duty they can run constant missile missions hunt the wider Indian Ocean to close Africa and the Strong of Pearls. China is a tough nut inside the shell they built, but that nut relies on the international tree to flourish and that makes them vulnerable. |
| So the plan is to completely secure an area before landing people on an island assumed to not be defended so those people can set up missiles to attack a ship that might come into the area that was already cleared of the enemy so the ship could land? Do four guys with beltfeds, a couple of RPGs, a few suicide drones, and a pile of MREs on the island completely disrupt this whole mission? |
|
Quoted: These are not for storming beaches but sneaking around to spots to set up and fire at Chinese navy ships close to China's island bases in the South China Sea near Taiwan. These 3 ships vs 72 Chinese corvettes and any Chinese aviation that is sent to attack them if any of the 7,500 Chinese "civilian" ships or satellites or whatever sees them. It is a pretty sound philosophy on its face. The typical response by people who believe Hollywood movies too much will say the light ship will be quickly spotted by Chinese satellites and then destroyed in short order. Uh huh. You could play hell on a highly centralized military like China where things have to go far up the chain before ground commanders can act. I keep making this point; but it drove us crazy in the Gulf War trying to find those Scud launchers in Western Iraq. That was a first rate military With great Intel and great Command and Control, with a Institution very versed in how to conduct a real war. Now flip that with China who has zero institutional war managing knowledge, zero combat experience, highly centralized command trying to find, fix and finish these things. good luck -Morgan Freeman |
|
In the future, if possible, please put one or more paragraph breaks between links so things show up a little more readably like so. |
|
Sounds like they could swap a 400ft ship with a quartet of CB90s. Maybe throw in a pair more for additional cargo and call it good. Using something the size of a Perry class frigate to transport two platoons of guys seems just stupid. They should be going for the smallest, fastest, and cheapest vessel they can find or make that can drop troops and a pair of trucks on the beach. |
|
Quoted: More contracts will fix this problem. What we need are really expensive stealth ships.. and ones that can hover onto the beaches, then fly away when they need to. Like a Pontoon Harrier.. think of it! https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/425157/fly-nano-facebook-1_jpg-2584971.JPG want! i can't boat particularly well, or fly at all, but want! |
 PLA uses The China (Zhong Hua) Fuxing cruise-type ro-ro passenger ship for military transportation. |
|
Quoted: I tend to agree that moving into the A2AD zone right away is dumb. You have to roll back at least the surveillance assets China has monitoring the area. Without the target data the missile factory is a fireworks factory. Low observable ships provide a better margin of safety. The big question here is maritime surveillance drones both ISR assets but also weapons or suicide drones. Both can throw a wrench in these plans. I think a better idea to tackle the China problem is choking them out via lack of resources. Right now China is relying on imports of just about everything to meet their needs and production. Clog the choke points with subs and close the sea lines from Africa. This is why I have been highly critical of programs like the LCS and heavily in favor of a USN modern SSK program that can be shared internationally with chosen partners. This gives us smaller cheaper hulls able to patrol the choke points out of the island chain. These can be optimized for littorals easier than the larger Virginia’s. Investing in undersea mine clearance and laying with them would likely be huge assets. The bigger pay off is allies like Australia who are screaming for viable subs can get what they need. Their plan for SSNs is probably 20 years till their first SSN. Their Collin’s are obsolete now. You are going to need missile assets that can hit pipelines from Russia. Ukraine is critical right now because we need to break Russia’s ability to be a powerful ally in the coming war with China. With SSKs freeing up SSNs from more or less picket duty they can run constant missile missions hunt the wider Indian Ocean to close Africa and the Strong of Pearls. China is a tough nut inside the shell they built, but that nut relies on the international tree to flourish and that makes them vulnerable. The chinese are pumping out subs at an ridiculous rate. We need lots of hulls and fast. AIP subs have great range and are very capable while being a lot cheaper than nuke subs. We strangled the japanese in ww2 with diesel boats and although nukes are better overall, a bunch of AIP subs could fill a lot of gaps. |
|
I suspect China could actually pull off a successful adaptation of Kantai Kessen in the 21st century, if it comes down to it. Japan's plan basically fell apart once we refused to race across the Pacific and instead focused on taking calibrated, bite-sized chunks out of the IJN while we waited for the Two-Ocean Navy Act to bear fruit, China having all the shipyards this time on top of defending Taiwan essentially forcing immediate action may be the missing ingredients. |
|
Quoted: It is a pretty sound philosophy on its face. The typical response by people who believe Hollywood movies too much will say the light ship will be quickly spotted by Chinese satellites and then destroyed in short order. Uh huh. You could play hell on a highly centralized military like China where things have to go far up the chain before ground commanders can act. I keep making this point; but it drove us crazy in the Gulf War trying to find those Scud launchers in Western Iraq. That was a first rate military With great Intel and great Command and Control, with a Institution very versed in how to conduct a real war. Now flip that with China who has zero institutional war managing knowledge, zero combat experience, highly centralized command trying to find, fix and finish these things. good luck -Morgan Freeman Quoted: Quoted: These are not for storming beaches but sneaking around to spots to set up and fire at Chinese navy ships close to China's island bases in the South China Sea near Taiwan. These 3 ships vs 72 Chinese corvettes and any Chinese aviation that is sent to attack them if any of the 7,500 Chinese "civilian" ships or satellites or whatever sees them. It is a pretty sound philosophy on its face. The typical response by people who believe Hollywood movies too much will say the light ship will be quickly spotted by Chinese satellites and then destroyed in short order. Uh huh. You could play hell on a highly centralized military like China where things have to go far up the chain before ground commanders can act. I keep making this point; but it drove us crazy in the Gulf War trying to find those Scud launchers in Western Iraq. That was a first rate military With great Intel and great Command and Control, with a Institution very versed in how to conduct a real war. Now flip that with China who has zero institutional war managing knowledge, zero combat experience, highly centralized command trying to find, fix and finish these things. good luck -Morgan Freeman
|
|
Quoted: How survivable will platoon reinforced sized SIFs hauling HIMARS and NSMs around on little islands be, given the (lack of) speed of these LSMs to deploy and recover SIFs and what I would expect will be pretty heavy electronic and radiation signatures the SIFs will have? The answer they give is dispersed forces are more survivable. Can still be cut off from supply and located if they don't have good signature management as you point out. I still don't think they will be enough of a threat - robot JTLV with 2 short range JSMs (200Km?) is a joke, even if you have 10 of them. And anyone who has been on small Pacific islands knows those vehicles will get stuck anytime they go off a paved road. Robot vehicles make no sense there. Tomahawks and SM6 or PrSM make more sense but then you get big and heavy. |
|
Quoted: The answer they give is dispersed forces are more survivable. Can still be cut off from supply and located if they don't have good signature management as you point out. I still don't think they will be enough of a threat - robot JTLV with 2 short range JSMs (200Km?) is a joke, even if you have 10 of them. And anyone who has been on small Pacific islands knows those vehicles will get stuck anytime they go off a paved road. Robot vehicles make no sense there. Tomahawks and SM6 or PrSM make more sense but then you get big and heavy. Seems like the SIFs will essentially become fixed in place as well if the LSMs don't have the speed to rapidly redeploy them or the PLA interdicts the LSMs signifcantly. But, maybe that's the intent? |
|
Quoted: Interesting thread that makes me wonder. Some of the strategy docs leaking from the PLA also seem to indicate the military side of the house is far more honest with themselves about capabilities than any thinking person would like to see. There may still be a case for dictator's disease in the party, but probably less so for the .mil.
Thanks for the tweet thread. That was interesting. 
|
|
Quoted: Seems like the SIFs will essentially become fixed in place as well if the LSMs don't have the speed to rapidly redeploy them or the PLA interdicts the LSMs signifcantly. But, maybe that's the intent? Quoted: Quoted: The answer they give is dispersed forces are more survivable. Can still be cut off from supply and located if they don't have good signature management as you point out. I still don't think they will be enough of a threat - robot JTLV with 2 short range JSMs (200Km?) is a joke, even if you have 10 of them. And anyone who has been on small Pacific islands knows those vehicles will get stuck anytime they go off a paved road. Robot vehicles make no sense there. Tomahawks and SM6 or PrSM make more sense but then you get big and heavy. Seems like the SIFs will essentially become fixed in place as well if the LSMs don't have the speed to rapidly redeploy them or the PLA interdicts the LSMs signifcantly. But, maybe that's the intent? 3rd MarDiv has been doing exercises on this, but the ones I've seen publicized are basically artillery raids using C130 delivered Himars -- again, too short range (PrSM will be much better) rather than delivery by boats and dispersing into a small (but not tiny) island. They also had several drone re-supply programs but those have all died out from what I've seen. That would help give them more survivable resupply (but not big ammo like missiles). Guess they have done some amphib raids:  A landing craft, utility assigned to the amphibious transport dock ship USS Green Bay (LPD 20), lowers its ramp to unload a High Mobility Artillery Rocket System from 3rd Battalion, 12th Marine Regiment, 3rd Marine Division, as part of a simulated amphibious raid, at Kin Blue, Okinawa, Japan, Aug. 14, 2019. This simulated amphibious raid marks the first time that HIMARS have been inserted by landing craft, utility, demonstrating the Marine Air-Ground Task Force’s ability to conduct combined-arms maneuver from amphibious shipping. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Joshua Sechser) |
|
Quoted: These are not for storming beaches but sneaking around to spots to set up and fire at Chinese navy ships close to China’s island bases in the South China Sea near Taiwan. These 3 ships vs 72 Chinese corvettes and any Chinese aviation that is sent to attack them if any of the 7,500 Chinese “civilian” ships or satellites or whatever sees them. Quoted: Quoted: Light Amphibious Warships sounds like poorly armed and armored missile magnets if the Navy expects them to storm defended beaches.  These are not for storming beaches but sneaking around to spots to set up and fire at Chinese navy ships close to China’s island bases in the South China Sea near Taiwan. These 3 ships vs 72 Chinese corvettes and any Chinese aviation that is sent to attack them if any of the 7,500 Chinese “civilian” ships or satellites or whatever sees them. Suicide missions, IOW? |
| China will be just like Russia in any type of conflict—destroyed & clueless. The fact that people buy into this bullshit of China (or Russia) being some type of military superpower is hysterical. Someone please show me actual battlefield effectiveness of the Chinese military in the last 30-40 years. It all looks great on paper till the shit actually happens…… |
|
Quoted: I agree with boots. But I am not sure I can agree with armor. The effectiveness we are seeing with the portable tank killing missiles in Ukraine is astounding. When I was a kid I wanted to be a tanker instead of the grunt I became. You couldn’t pay me enough to be in a tank during combat now. We will have to wait and see about naval warfare to know for sure. But I am willing to bet it will prove to have become almost untenable since last it was used in any scale. Americans employ actual anti missile tech. The “trophy System” can stop multiple incoming missiles. The Israelis have used them in combat. In full drone warfare is rather be in the modern armor than the squishy red heat signature soft target. Now will modern militaries employ MBT’s??? Or are they the new battleships?? Maybe it will be a drone carrier command vehicle and some IFV’s and modern combat turning into the battle of agincourt. |
|
Quoted: In the future, if possible, please put one or more paragraph breaks between links so things show up a little more readably like so. I’m feeling like dog shit today so brain is in the fritz. Could you rephrase for 8th grade level reading or give me a few days to recover. |
|
Quoted: I’m feeling like dog shit today so brain is in the fritz. Could you rephrase for 8th grade level reading or give me a few days to recover. Note: I've replaced the "[" and "]" with "(" and ")" in order to show the text without the images. Instead of this (quoted from your post) (url=https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3708190-the-ugly-truth-can-the-light-amphibious-warship-survive-war-with-china/amp/)https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3708190-the-ugly-truth-can-the-light-amphibious-warship-survive-war-with-china/amp/(/url) (img)https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/2BD2A075-E52F-403D-AB40-C99918B3E2F2_jpe-2584940.JPG(/img)(img)https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/4B1C7A5C-5C52-47AC-A125-17B039EB9AE2_jpe-2584941.JPG(/img)(img)https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/A43D6DDB-CE16-49FB-917C-DEDEFDA3DFD9_jpe-2584942.JPG(/img)(img)https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/E4963B4F-7C08-4E6F-8482-0E6ED6E29D6B_jpe-2584950.JPG(/img)(img)https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/6B3470DF-4FBB-4188-842C-4C3ED3F82B00_jpe-2584944.JPG(/img)(img)https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/E5A109E6-A3E8-4F82-AA90-874F5DC0DCAE_jpe-2584946.JPG(/img) Do this (url=https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3708190-the-ugly-truth-can-the-light-amphibious-warship-survive-war-with-china/amp/)https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3708190-the-ugly-truth-can-the-light-amphibious-warship-survive-war-with-china/amp/(/url) Just hit the return button once or twice between links. It aligns the images rather than making them jumbled when viewed on a computer screen. |
|
Quoted: Unfortunately strategic guidance when the Marine Corps started down this path was such that crisis response and a force in readiness were not specified tasks. Quoted: Quoted: The whole Marines strategy seems completely retarded. China is a straight up fireworks factory of missiles; trying to be in a dinky boat, or occupy a small island (what small island would that even be in the first island chain) is a recipe for getting absolutely blasted. https://i.redd.it/lvtmoq61cex91.png Even if successful, their entire shore based missile arsenal would likely be below a single Rapid Dragon delivery, which can be used without stranding a bunch of Marines on Gilligans missile target. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_Dragon_(missile_system) The Marines should face reality - Rifleman aren't a relevant force in whats essentially a A2AD Missile Duel / game of Battleship. Facing that, they should pitch themselves as the 'ABC Force' - Anywhere But China Force. With the rest of the services focused on China, the Marines mission will be to handle crisis that occur anywhere else in the world. The current collapse of Haiti, where armed gangs are stealing all the aid, and the UN unwilling to help, is a perfect example of a ABC mission. Unfortunately strategic guidance when the Marine Corps started down this path was such that crisis response and a force in readiness were not specified tasks. Two finely honed capabilities that were a perfect fit for the size and scope of the USMC, and seemingly pissed away by Burger. Zinni and Van Riper are rightfully concerned that the USMC is destroying itself into irrelevance from within. |
|
Quoted: Lol 75 marines is nothing. The whole idea sounds stupid. Agreed. Sounds like some General is trying to position himself on the board of a defense contractor. Most likely the one who lands the whopper contract for a stealth landing ship that if it ever gets built will never get used. Putting small groups of Marines on remote islands close to the enemies mainland is rock stupid. |
|
Quoted: China will be just like Russia in any type of conflict—destroyed & clueless. The fact that people buy into this bullshit of China (or Russia) being some type of military superpower is hysterical. Someone please show me actual battlefield effectiveness of the Chinese military in the last 30-40 years. It all looks great on paper till the shit actually happens…… Aviators I speak with disagree with your assessment. Why temp fate underestimating someone or something with a mission to kill you? Maybe PLA/PLAN/PLAF aren’t up to U.S. standards of leadership and the art of war, but they can make up for it within superior numbers. Makes no sense to be dismissive of the ability of China to set us back on our heels or run us out of the region completely. |
|
Quoted: I tend to agree that moving into the A2AD zone right away is dumb. You have to roll back at least the surveillance assets China has monitoring the area. Without the target data the missile factory is a fireworks factory. Low observable ships provide a better margin of safety. The big question here is maritime surveillance drones both ISR assets but also weapons or suicide drones. Both can throw a wrench in these plans. I think a better idea to tackle the China problem is choking them out via lack of resources. Right now China is relying on imports of just about everything to meet their needs and production. Clog the choke points with subs and close the sea lines from Africa. This is why I have been highly critical of programs like the LCS and heavily in favor of a USN modern SSK program that can be shared internationally with chosen partners. This gives us smaller cheaper hulls able to patrol the choke points out of the island chain. These can be optimized for littorals easier than the larger Virginia’s. Investing in undersea mine clearance and laying with them would likely be huge assets. The bigger pay off is allies like Australia who are screaming for viable subs can get what they need. Their plan for SSNs is probably 20 years till their first SSN. Their Collin’s are obsolete now. You are going to need missile assets that can hit pipelines from Russia. Ukraine is critical right now because we need to break Russia’s ability to be a powerful ally in the coming war with China. With SSKs freeing up SSNs from more or less picket duty they can run constant missile missions hunt the wider Indian Ocean to close Africa and the Strong of Pearls. China is a tough nut inside the shell they built, but that nut relies on the international tree to flourish and that makes them vulnerable. I think you are wrong here. "Choking out" a nuclear-armed country, particularly as to food or energy, is almost certain to lead to nuclear escalation. The key is to keep a conflict regional and defeat local forces. Also, I think it is unlikely that we would be willing to attack merchant vessels regardless of flag because it is a bad look in today's world. At most, we might try to detain them with surface vessels, which is also problematic because I have read the Chinese have cargo containers that can conceal armament. Also, as to Russia, the problems here are entirely of Biden's making because he should have encouraged compromise and peace. Ukraine is NOT a critical national interest of the US, nor should the US focus its efforts on destroying Russia. If Russia and the US get into a nuclear war, who benefits? China, that's who. As such, Biden is literally flirting with handing the world over to China. As it is, he has unwisely pushed Russia into the arms of China and pissed off both of them. |
|
Quoted: 3rd MarDiv has been doing exercises on this, but the ones I've seen publicized are basically artillery raids using C130 delivered Himars -- again, too short range (PrSM will be much better) rather than delivery by boats and dispersing into a small (but not tiny) island. They also had several drone re-supply programs but those have all died out from what I've seen. That would help give them more survivable resupply (but not big ammo like missiles). Guess they have done some amphib raids: https://d1ldvf68ux039x.cloudfront.net/thumbs/photos/1908/5666680/1000w_q95.jpg Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The answer they give is dispersed forces are more survivable. Can still be cut off from supply and located if they don't have good signature management as you point out. I still don't think they will be enough of a threat - robot JTLV with 2 short range JSMs (200Km?) is a joke, even if you have 10 of them. And anyone who has been on small Pacific islands knows those vehicles will get stuck anytime they go off a paved road. Robot vehicles make no sense there. Tomahawks and SM6 or PrSM make more sense but then you get big and heavy. Seems like the SIFs will essentially become fixed in place as well if the LSMs don't have the speed to rapidly redeploy them or the PLA interdicts the LSMs signifcantly. But, maybe that's the intent? 3rd MarDiv has been doing exercises on this, but the ones I've seen publicized are basically artillery raids using C130 delivered Himars -- again, too short range (PrSM will be much better) rather than delivery by boats and dispersing into a small (but not tiny) island. They also had several drone re-supply programs but those have all died out from what I've seen. That would help give them more survivable resupply (but not big ammo like missiles). Guess they have done some amphib raids: https://d1ldvf68ux039x.cloudfront.net/thumbs/photos/1908/5666680/1000w_q95.jpg A landing craft, utility assigned to the amphibious transport dock ship USS Green Bay (LPD 20), lowers its ramp to unload a High Mobility Artillery Rocket System from 3rd Battalion, 12th Marine Regiment, 3rd Marine Division, as part of a simulated amphibious raid, at Kin Blue, Okinawa, Japan, Aug. 14, 2019. This simulated amphibious raid marks the first time that HIMARS have been inserted by landing craft, utility, demonstrating the Marine Air-Ground Task Force’s ability to conduct combined-arms maneuver from amphibious shipping. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Joshua Sechser) EABO is a means of supporting the fleet, only III MEF is converting its 3 divisional regiments to littoral combat regiments I and II on paper will retain their traditional capabilities, however the cost of the EABO gear sets may be so much they cannot of the capability in the other two MEFs. |
|
More fear mongering to gin up support for increased defense spending to line the pockets of the industrial military complex. I don't think any money should be spent on Defense until the U.S. Senate holds hearing to determine how the DOD and the U.S. Intelligence agencies severely OVER estimated Russian military capability and DOD states firmly what Strategic lessons were learned from the defeat in the GWOT. You don't subsidize failure. Serious reforms are required by DOD including the retirement of multiple General and Flag officers, ideally those most involved in formulation of strategy during the GWOT. We keep funding and supporting failure we're going to get more of it and if there is a conflict with China we can't afford to fail. Tough love time, time to roll up the sleeves and figure out what the Hell is wrong and why we failed in Afghanistan then see some reforms that assure the American people it will NEVER happen again. Vietnam, Afghanistan, we're not learning key lessons and good men and women are paying the price for it. |
|
I'm a break it down: China is where China is and has a lot of weapons and people, China only needs to worry about the Western Pacific. The US is where it is, the US has an interest where China is, China is a long way away, the US feels the need to worry about four Oceans, 7 seas, and a bunch of gulfs. The US is going to have major problems if we get into military action with China. In total war, the US can beat China. In Real War, I am not so sure. |
|
Quoted: China will be just like Russia in any type of conflict—destroyed & clueless. The fact that people buy into this bullshit of China (or Russia) being some type of military superpower is hysterical. Someone please show me actual battlefield effectiveness of the Chinese military in the last 30-40 years. It all looks great on paper till the shit actually happens…… I'd never underestimate an enemy. While I don't expect them to match us capability-wise, they have numbers we don't, and their LOCs would obviously be much shorter than ours. Our economies are inseparably linked at this point and a long war wouldn't make sense for either side. But, a very short war to capture Taiwan before we could move additional assets to stave it off is what I would envision. Once they had it, would we move to take Taiwan back or would we take the black eye and limit our casualties? China would catch heat internationally, but since everyone gets everything from China, that would be short-lived compared to their long-term goal of possessing Taiwan. I suspect a strategy like that is what Putin had in mind when he invaded Ukraine this year (it worked in Crimea after all), but the terrain and situation are a bit different in the South China Sea. |
|
Quoted: Never mind the problems with the ships, what about the 75 Marines that will be left on the islands in a contested sea/airspace? It sounds like resupply will difficult, and the Chinese will certainly know where the missiles are coming from. Sounds like the setup for a bunch of mini Wake Islands. This. |
|
Quoted: More fear mongering to gin up support for increased defense spending to line the pockets of the industrial military complex. I don't think any money should be spent on Defense until the U.S. Senate holds hearing to determine how the DOD and the U.S. Intelligence agencies severely OVER estimated Russian military capability and DOD states firmly what Strategic lessons were learned from the defeat in the GWOT. You don't subsidize failure. Serious reforms are required by DOD including the retirement of multiple General and Flag officers, ideally those most involved in formulation of strategy during the GWOT. We keep funding and supporting failure we're going to get more of it and if there is a conflict with China we can't afford to fail. Tough love time, time to roll up the sleeves and figure out what the Hell is wrong and why we failed in Afghanistan then see some reforms that assure the American people it will NEVER happen again. Vietnam, Afghanistan, we're not learning key lessons and good men and women are paying the price for it. Attached File |
|
It appears that .gov is pressuring the dominant semiconductor producers in Taiwan to move more production to the US, but Taipei is resisting, most likely because keeping the production local is Taiwan's "silicon shield" strategy. The faster that production gets moved elsewhere, the more willing .gov is to accept China taking Taiwan. https://www.ft.com/content/bae9756a-3bce-4595-b6c9-8082fd735aa0 https://www.stimson.org/2022/semiconductors-and-taiwans-silicon-shield/ |
|
The USMC budget is $48 billion. That’s rather close to Russia’s entire defense budget of like $66 billion. And $300 million for a barge that can only make 14 knots, and only carries 75 marines? That’s not even a full rifle company. |
|
Quoted: I'd like to think that's a hit piece but after the zumwalt and lcs it's pretty much the new reality in procurement. My Dad, who was career AF, and started crew chiefing F-4’s in VN, then transitioned to procurement for the T-46 program, said that there really needed to be people with combat arms experience doing procurement. Too many cube dweller logisticians he worked with had no clue how the sharp end of the service worked. What looks good on a spreadsheet or PowerPoint doesn’t necessarily transfer to the field. |
| 75 Marines, so an Infantry Company on a ship the size of a LST traveling 14 knots. Seems like kind of a waste. What happened to all of those hydrofoils I saw speeding around Rosie Roads 33 years ago? I'm sure hydrofoils eat up fuel but they ran circles around us literally. The USMC has away been behind when it comes to mobility. David |
|
Quoted: Also less infantry so I guess the Army with its shortage of infantry and maritime transport can fill in for island hopping operations https://taskandpurpose.com/news/marine-corps-force-design-infantry/?amp https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/0712F2C9-F03C-4CE4-A3F2-5BC32F34B102_jpe-2584969.JPG Quoted: Quoted: No tanks... Also less infantry so I guess the Army with its shortage of infantry and maritime transport can fill in for island hopping operations https://taskandpurpose.com/news/marine-corps-force-design-infantry/?amp https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/459941/0712F2C9-F03C-4CE4-A3F2-5BC32F34B102_jpe-2584969.JPG So basically the USMC is transforming itself into coast artillery? |