Tuesday, March 29, 2022
Monday, March 28, 2022
3rd Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment, 2d Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force conducts Beach Landing @ Cold Response 22
Note. If amphibious assault is off the table, and the Missile Marines will land where the enemy ain't then why can't the Army just do it? If the Army will have more Anti-Ship Missiles, more UAVs, more Armored Vehicles, more Attack Helicopters and is capable of operating off Navy ships then why do we need the Missile Marines?
If the Missile Marines are smaller than the US Marines then why do we still stand up MEFs and MEBs? The MAGTF is hopelessly broken under Berger's plan. Why does he keep legacy command structures? If the Missile Marines are falling back under Navy command then why do we even have MEFs and MEBs?
The Missile Marines are part of the sea battle.
There is no more ground role for these forces.
With that being the case, Marine Air needs to change nameplates and become part of Navy Air. The Army will provide tanks? Let them also provide anti-ship missiles. Missile Marines will be part of the ISR net? We don't need them for that. We can do it better by taking the big amphibious ships and filling them with UAVs (like Turkey is doing) and control thousands of miles of air/sea with a HUGE ISR net that is less vulnerable than moving Missile Marines around by ship.
This beach landing was supposed to be a signal that the Missile Marines will do everything the US Marines did.
I'm not buying it.
You're looking at a force that has no relationship to its past.
A map to illustrate my point. Most nations on earth ARE NOT sanctioning Russia.
Note: The purpose of this post isn't to be a "booster" for Putin or Russia. It is to point out that the West in general is viewed in ways that many that come to this blog would probably find shocking. All the moral outrage that is being shown over Ukraine? People are wondering why we didn't have the same outrage in other nations where WE have launched operations. Am I saying they're right to feel that way? I have no opinion. But I do believe its important to note that NOT EVERYONE on this planet views things the same way that we do in the West. Additionally I've read that 70% of the GDP of the world is in those nations that are active in the sanctions. Ok. But that huge population center OUTSIDE of the 14% that have 70% of the GDP are future markets...points of instability...have necessary resources etc. Additionally (and this is my primary worry) if we see new alliances formed along with a new economic system that operates outside of the framework created by the West then we are on the verge of a radical shift in geopolitical power.
The above map shows all the nations that are and ARE NOT sanctioning Russia. For the people in back the countries in yellow are part of the sanctions scheme. By the numbers? 14% of the world's population is backing sanctions.Guess who’s sanctioning Russia?
— Carl Zha (@CarlZha) March 27, 2022
“The International Community”
Who’s not sanctioning Russia?
Rest of the World pic.twitter.com/WNFGOuwL8J
Want even more? Check this out via the Financial Times
Not for the first time, the west is mistaking its own unity for a global consensus. One misleading measure is at the UN. In the organisation’s last tally earlier this month, 141 of 193 member states condemned Vladimir Putin’s blatant violation of international law. But the 35 that abstained account for almost half the world’s population. That includes China, India, Vietnam, Iraq and South Africa. If you add those that voted with Russia, it comes to more than half.Moreover, many of those nominally against Russia are hedging their bets. Saudi Arabia is considering China’s request to be paid in yuan for its oil. That would help undercut the power of the dollar. Both Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates refused to take Joe Biden’s calls this month when he wanted them to step-up oil production — a rare snub to a US president.Last week the UAE hosted an official visit from Bashar al-Assad, Syria’s dictator, and Putin’s close ally, who the US rightly sees as a pariah. One of the UAE’s motives for rehabilitating Assad is that Biden is pushing to revive the nuclear deal with the regionally-dreaded Iran that would release more oil on to the global market. Even Israel, arguably America’s closest friend, is keeping an open mind. Its prime minister, Naftali Bennett, who is auditioning as a Russia-Ukraine mediator, has been conspicuously even-handed.All this may look academic in a few months if Ukraine continues to humiliate Russia and the west can sustain its unity. Everybody loves a winner and the hedging countries would probably tilt back towards the west. The bigger abstainers, such as India, which has quadrupled its oil imports from Russia at a discount compared to this time last year, would adjust their stance, which is causing anguish in Washington. But the world’s ambivalence should give Biden and Europe food for thought.One red flag is the west’s habitual tendency to claim moral leadership. This creates three problems. First, it is hypocritical. US public opinion paid little attention to the horrific carnage in Syria, for which Assad is primarily culpable. Though Germany took in 1mn refugees in 2015, most of the rest of the west did not follow suit. Britain and the US admitted fewer than 50,000 Syrians between them. What Russia is doing to Ukraine is barbaric. But there is plenty to go round. Many in the Muslim world, in particular, think America practises double standards. Thousands of civilians died in Iraq and Afghanistan from US munitions, though they were not deliberately targeted (unlike in Ukraine).
America and the West is reaching a shatterpoint.
What has me alarmed is that I'm seeing more and more enthusiasm for a China/India friendship/alliance/partnership...frenemy...WHATEVER!
Think about it.The China/India friendship is paramount to fighting modern colonialism perpetrated by the West. It is not the interest of the 1.4 billion Chinese & 1.3 billion Indian people, the vast majority of whom are farmers, working class & poor, to bicker when history demands unity
— Frank Naidoo (@naidooinc) March 23, 2022
Can you imagine how that one move could so dramatically shift the global power balance?
China, Russia, India, Iran, Syria? With many more trying to pile onto the scene with the new cool kids?
The tech alone would be stunning. Chinese, Russian, and Indian aerospace/aviation sectors teaming up?
They would be on the Mars and heading to set up a colony before our policy makers could properly digest the new power dynamic.
My point?
Its the usual.
Our State Dept needs to get off its ass and start working overtime. Time to pour a little honey in the tea (with a shot of whiskey) and make nice.
Additionally we're gonna have to learn that we MUST offer more than military exercises and weapons.
We have lost the ability to actually have a diplomatic approach to friends AND enemies.
We have become too dependent on military power and instead of using our economic power as a lure, we've turned it into a hammer.
A rethink of our foreign policy is overdue. We've become stale and predictable.
Bully tactics will no longer work in this dynamic new age.
MUST READ! It is not clear if the Marine Corps is going in an objectively better direction than it was before Berger took office
via Real Clear Defense
For now, it is not clear if the Marine Corps is going in an objectively better direction than it was before Berger took office. Neither the Commandant nor his critics have done a good enough job laying out all of the evidence and analyses in support of their arguments. Berger’s critics should work diligently to ensure they are not relying too heavily upon their dated personal experiences and well-entrenched opinions. But the real burden falls on Berger. This is not his Marine Corps. It belongs to all Americans, and this is our collective national security he is betting with. The tanks and most of the artillery are gone, but they can be brought back. Rebuilding infantry battalions is trickier. Berger should make a stronger, more transparent argument to help the next commandant guide the Corps’ future.
Berger is attempting to be a change agent. He's terrible at it. He's making rookie mistakes in regard to the task he's undertaken.
He hasn't explained his plan from start to finish. In other words he hasn't explained what the NEW Marine Corps he's building will look like and how it will be more capable than the one he destroyed.
Additionally he's relying on information that he insists is private but yet at the same time is asking everyone to simply trust him.
Not even retired 4 stars trust him on this!
I'm his biggest critic (I know...little blog he doesn't even know I'm alive but I'm good at shouting) and I'm willing to change my mind if he simply took the time to sell his idea.
He hasn't.
He's simply started wholesale change that from all appearances seems to be for the sake of wholesale change.
That's dangerous for the Marine Corps and the country.
If he's wrong, and since he's only a man he very well could be, he could be doing more damage to the organization he says he loves than the enemy has done to the Corps in a century.
In short?
He's got to sell this abomination (or salvation..I don't know) or it won't work and it will take longer to reconstitute the Corps than it did for him to break it.
Subscribe to:
Comments
(
Atom
)