Thanks to Jeff for the link!
via War is Boring.
This clarity of Marine Aviation’s “primary mission” is gone today. It has been replaced with something else.
If this situation weren’t troubling enough, in a six-page May 2017 Marine Corps Gazette article about Marine aviation, the deputy commandant for aviation emphasized not once, but twice, “The F-35B has proven that we have a war-winning capability in our hands” — without even once mentioning anything to do with supporting marines on the ground. Nowhere in the article can one even find the words “ground combat element,” “infantry,” “grunt,” “combat engineer,” “armor,” “artillery,” or “Marine on the ground.” Perhaps this ahistorical belief in a jet’s “war-winning” capability, combined with a loss of primary focus on the ground combat element, has led aviation leadership to wrongly overlook the Guardian Angel.
If this trend continues, one can’t help but wonder if future “Marine Aviators of the Year” will be awarded in honor of the airpower advocates such as Giulio Douhet, Billy Mitchell, and John Warden instead of Alfred Cunningham.
Given such foundation-shaking thinking coming from the top of Marine Aviation, perhaps it is no surprise that ground combat element marines don’t have the support they need, nor are they slated to anytime soon, despite the Marine Corps Operating Concept’s specific guidance to provide it. Regardless, this tragic reality must be addressed head-on. The reasons to do so are many, including, as Rep. Niki Tsongas recently highlighted when expressing her concerns about Marine Corps budgeting priorities, “the Marine Corps’ mission to be the premiere force-in-readiness and the historical reliance that the nation has placed on the Marine Corps’ role in ground combat.” This reliance today includes the Marine Corps providing almost one-third of the United States’ total active-duty ground combat capability.
Story is here, and its a must read.
I never heard of this writer, Steve Cuomo, but he's spot on. Marine Air Leadership went off the rails in their support of the F-35. Maybe it was the focus on accomplishing the mission of getting the plane in service, but in the end it really doesn't matter.
Marine Air Leadership is talking about doing everything EXCEPT providing support for Marines on the ground.
Even worse?
Marine Ground, especially in the Infantry Community is all about it. When you hear Infantry Battalion Commanders talking about "integrating with Marine Air" instead of what Marine Air can do to support their forces then you know you have an institution that has lost its way.
Happily I'm not the only one that's noticed this. Steve seems to think that the answer lies with UAVs.
He's wrong.
Davis before he left (and I'm working on a podcast that will take his parting letter to taks) talked about a V/TOL UAV that would again, do everything except provide support to Marines on the ground. Missions like radar picket for the fleet, escort for MV-22s and even air to air combat was discussed but Close Air Support?
If he mentioned it, it was in passing.
Unfortunately the answer will require a bit of spilled blood. Not in combat, but in budget terms. Marine Air needs to be handcuffed monetarily. Too much money is programmed currently and into the future for self discipline to be realized.
Stop feeding the beast and you can get him back in the cage.
Marine Air needs to be stuffed back in its cage. It's terrorized the Marine Corps landscape for too long.
Side note: WHY is everyone so freaking jazzed about fighting in Mega Cities? I cringe at the notion that when its tried I'll be saying I told ya so, but these writers, Think Tanks and Generals are pushing the idea hard. We will see body bags filled and Lost Battalions gobbled up in slums outside these cities just mark my words.
