Tuesday, August 16, 2016
*Company Landing Teams/Squad Experiments show the USMC isn't serious about the near peer threat.*
What have we seen? ISIS has operated almost like a nation state military. They are using tanks, artillery, UAVs...everything but aircraft (and they're rumored to have captured at least one) against both Iraqi and Syrian forces.
We're seeing the same in Africa by groups affiliated with ISIS.
What is the Marine Corps solution? The Company Landing Team? Not hardly. Every swinging dick and ovary in the Marine Corps knows that formation will not hold up on the battlefield we see in Iraq/Syria. They might perform well in the advisory role in Afghanistan but we're talking about combat situations.
So why the push? Why the desire to play with the basic Marine Corps Infantry Squad? I believe the answer is clear. First the Marine Corps isn't serious about the big fight that Neller talked about not long ago. Second? This is even more ominous to me. Company Landing Teams/Squad Experiments make sense if you're trying to push as many Marine units forward as possible. If combat power is only a secondary consideration and your main mission is simply presence then it might work.
The problem is that our peer competitors are looking to recreate what the Marine Corps is throwing away. Combined Arms Teams of the first order that can scale up and down the spectrum. Company Landing Teams will relegate the Marine Corps to supporting operations...operations other than war, training of foreign forces and disaster relief.
IF THE MARINE CORPS was serious about near peer threats then it would seek to reinforce the MEU. If additional skills sets are needed then they would be attached. UAVs for every squad? Then you would simply pull those operators from the wing and attach them. You want to get fancy and do the same with a cyber warrior? No problem, but the CLT is definitely not the answer.
Side Note: I'm making this prediction before HQMC fully develops its marketing campaign to sell their bullshit. We will see the ACV canceled this fall with the talking point that the AAV upgrades and the desire to prepare for the next war necessitates a high speed AAV. They will further state that the ACV just doesn't provide enough of a technological leap forward to justify purchase. Tanks of course is buried but they'll state that they're moving it to the reserves to keep the tribe quiet. Unfortunately that won't be what gets people howling. I expect a reduction in artillery with the same thing done. They'll be moved to the reserves. It will be stated that aviation can provide much more responsive and tailored fires. Last but not least they'll trumpet the increase in the size of Marine Corps Infantry Battalions to sell the idea that they're actually increasing combat power instead of relegating the Marine Corps to meals on wheels duty or SOCOM perimeter guard (outer perimeter...the Rangers must do the inner perimeter after all).