C-130's for sale to China??? Has Obama lost his mind.

This is from Stephen Trimble's Blog today.  Go here to read it but be amazed.  Be very amazed.

Vago and General Flynn on the future Marine Corps.

Thanks Marcase, I definitely missed the vid---I appreciate it.

I'm not getting this and if you can clue me in I'd appreciate it.  My take on what this guy is saying is that we ARE moving toward being an EXCLUSIVELY expeditionary force.  I hear platitudes of doing it from the sea but that really seems to be an afterthought.  If I'm wrong let me know but he pointed out three main issues.

1.  Operations like those in Afghanistan are the future.
2.  Relief operations like those in Haiti and partnership missions are essential.
3.  Being light and expeditionary is paramount.
Whats left out?  Forcible entry.  Its taking a back seat to an expeditionary focus.
Why am I disturbed?  I hate to keep pointing this out, but what capabilities will we bring (if we focus only on expeditionary capability) to the table that the 82nd Airborne couldn't?

Boeing Silent Eagle Propaganda.

The F-35 Experience.

You're welcome RSF;))

Aviation has screwed the Ground side.

I've been chewing on a post that Jonathan sent me a week ago.  To be honest I've been looking and reading and thinking some more.  The article that Jonathan sent me is from DefenseNews Electronic Edition (subscription required) but this is the operative statement...

Over the last several months, Marine Corps rhetoric has become more moderate, said Dakota Wood, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assess­ments.

The Marine Corps is saying, “If it’s not the EFV specifically, it is cer­tainly the capability to conduct forcible entry operations from in­creased ranges,” he said.

“The Marine Corps’ real concern is: If I lose the EFV, do I also lose the funding or can I reapply that money to some new effort?” he said.

So what is the moral of the story regarding the EFV? 

1.  Too expensive.

2.  Too long in development.

3.  An attempt at revolutionary instead of evolutionary tech leap.

4.  Not built for real world operations (not talking its capabilities but rather its maintenance requirements)

But all this brings us to a bigger issue.
Marine Corps Aviation has effectively been allowed to screw the ground component.  We are becoming that mythical magical equivalent of a US Army Air Assault Force.  We are becoming helo centric with limited mechanized capabilities.
Consider this.  The ground side is now in danger of operating equipment that dates from the 70's in with the following programs on the chopping block...

Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle...
Marine Personnel Carrier (have you heard a whisper from that program in the last year?)...
JLTV (if the Marine Corps isn't signaling that this is a dead duck then you're not paying attention)...

Now also consider this.  Aviation will receive the following aircraft...

F-35...
AH-1Z...
UH-1Y...
CH-53K...
MV-22...
KC-130J...
Kaman UAV resupply helo...
other UAVs....

Lastly consider that Marine Corps future operating doctrine is incompatible with a historically mechanized Marine Division.  What do I mean?  Distributed Operations...Mini-ARGs...Partnership missions.

I asked earlier why Marine Tanks hasn't deployed---now we know.  Whether intentional or by accident, we're moving toward Dakota Wood's Commando Force structure.

1st Tanks, Canadian Leopards and the Afghan War.

*UPDATE*Grim added in the comments that I misinterpreted his statement.  Sorry brother. 

In an earlier post I asked the question.  Why isn't 1st Tanks deployed to the Afghan War zone as a complete unit to support combat operations?  You can read it here.  Well one of my readers hit me with this...

Grim said.. It might also be useful to note that both the Dutch and Canadians are planning to withdraw from Afghanistan and will be replaced by the US (most likely the Marines based on where they are based now.)

Well my response is "Wait one second!"  Is that the case or do we have something entirely different going on and is the US Marine Corps missing out on one of its Life Taking and Life Saving assets simply because they refuse to support this deployment?

I believe we are.  More on that in a later post tonight.  But for my buddy Grim and those that think like him I pass this along and tell you to read them and weep.  This from DefenseNews.

 

Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) is modernizing the Canadian Leopard 2A4 CAN tanks previously acquired from German Army surplus. The first batch of 20 tanks was handed back to the Canadian Armed Forces yesterday (October 7, 2010) at the Bergen training ground in northern Germany. The modernized tanks are scheduled to equip the Canadian forces in Hindu-Kush in Afghanistan.
The Canadians embarked on this latest upgrade of the tank in July 2009, anticipating their next deployment in the Afghan theater. The new version is specially designed for operations in Afghanistan based on experience gained by other Leopard 2 operators, including the Denmark and Canadian forces. (operating the Leopard 2A6M)

Follow the link to read the whole thing but my point remains...tanks are being used to great effect by our allies.  Our Marine Corps should follow suit.

Tell me again why 1st Tanks isn't deploying as a unit to Afghanistan?

Amazing.  If you watch the above video you'll see Assault Breacher Vehicles, M-88 Recovery Vehicles, D-9 Bulldozers, MRAPs, and MTVRs. 

What you won't see are M1 Tanks wearing USMC decals.

Why?

Our allies have successfully deployed heavy armor.  We constantly perform mechanized operations.  We assault heavily fortified areas and direct fire weapons would be an asset.

If we won't use them in conflicts like this, then the very notion of Marines and Tanks should be questioned.