Navy Matters Blog says take the amphibs away from the USMC.

Check this out from NMB...

If the Marines are out of the amphibious assault business then why do they still claim to need 38 large hull amphibious ships? If we’re not doing the big amphibious assaults, logic suggests that we can eliminate many of the amphibious ships. Sure, we’d probably want to retain a handful for lower end operations. Around 18 amphibious ships would allow us to operate two MEUs, one each in the Atlantic and Pacific. A three ship ARG requires nine ships to keep three deployed, hence, the total of 18. Quite a drop from 38 and quite a potential savings!

The Marines can’t have it both ways. If they’re out of the business then they don’t need the assets, resources, and budget. In fact, if they’re dropping down to light aviation-based assault one could legitimately wonder if the Army’s aviation assault capabilities aren’t sufficient and superior.

Read the whole thing here.

My take on things?

I am so tired of Marine leadership speaking out and not realizing the power of their words.

Navy Matters Blog is spot on.  I can't refute a thing that he's said, but I also know this.  We will continue to be in the "combat" and "forcible entry" business.  A few air wingers that don't know a thing about the REAL Marine Corps can't change that.

All this group of leaders has done is throw mud in the face of the Marines they supposedly lead and protect pet projects at the expense of the institution.

NOTE!  Let me be clear.  Navy Matters isn't saying to TAKE away the amphibs but that its a logical next step if we are to believe what General Mullen stated.