Wednesday, July 01, 2020

2d Assault Amphibious Battalion training maneuvers on Onslow Beach ... Pics by Lance Cpl. Jacqueline Parsons











Houthis strikes on Saudi Airport

Open Comment Post. 1 July 2020.

rabbit is almost as big as the fox...wonder if he actually killed it...

Patria and Kongsberg Teaming Up for U.S. Turreted Mortar Programs


Story here.

Wow.  This program would be a natural in the old Corps but I'm not sure the new Corps will even be an observer in it.

I'm really liking the moves the US Army is making with regard to modernizing its ground force.

It's airborne forces (and light infantry) will gain mobility with the Infantry Squad Vehicle.  The Stryker while old has seen a number of upgrades along with firepower.  The turreted mortar will only add to that.  Heavy Brigades are also experiencing an evolution right before our eyes.

The weird thing is that the Army/Navy are evolving while the Marines/Air Force are seeking transformation.

Can't wait to see which direction is correct.

Monday, June 29, 2020

Scots Guards + Boxer = Strike Brigade?

Open Comment Post. 29 June 2020


Chinese Armor (Type 96A MBT?) thundering across the desert...





The Military We Have Vs. The Military We Need

Note.  I ran across this article and thought that I would be reading something so thought provoking that it would have me post it on the blog as an alternative way of thinking and stir debate.  That did NOT happen.  Instead I'm left wondering how this guy could be teaching at a premier defense university in the USA.

The Military We Have Vs. The Military We Need via Defense One (article here)

The military we have is heavy, destructive, lethal, blunt, combat-oriented, technology-dominant, general purpose, unilaterally capable, provocative, escalatory, expensive (gluttonously so), and unsustainable. It is basically a hard-power warfighting machine, totally captive of and obsessed with its own warfighting/warfighter verbiage, useful primarily for tacit threatmaking based on ostensibly superior capabilities, and prepared – arguably – only for traditional, conventional war (even though deployed for a variety of missions). 
The end (or toward the end) of the article first.  I thought the military we wanted was suppose to be destructive, lethal, blunt and combat oriented! Suffice it to say that this bubba is arguing for something different.
 The military we need would be quite the opposite: light, constructive, predominantly nonlethal, precise, noncombat-oriented, manpower-dominant, tailored, multilaterally-capable/-dependent, reassuring, de-escalatory, affordable, and sustainable. It would be a strategically effective force, designed to respond to a robust array of complex, most-frequently-occurring emergencies – peacekeeping, nation-building, humanitarian assistance, disaster response – that ultimately contribute most demonstrably to the overarching normative strategic aim of enduring global peace.
Yeah.

I don't get it.  I hope I'm wrong but can anyone point to any place on the planet where an external force has been able to successfully engage in nation building, peacekeeping etc...?

I can't think of one place where it's happened.  I stand ready to be corrected.

Anyway, read the whole thing and let me know what you think.

My guess is that this is a primer for a position in the new administration and is his bid at showing dramatic new ideas probably with the idea that an appointment can be had if he can justify slashing defense spending dramatically.

One last thing.

The force that he envisions for the US would be more in keeping with the current German model than many of our more powerful allies.  This portion should keep the people at the Pentagon up at night.
 Should such sweeping, transformative overhaul ever become a reality? Yes – if peace is actually our ultimate aim. Could it take place? Unlikely – given the intellectual shortcomings of the defense establishment in particular, and the national security community in general. These are heretical, heterodox ideas that can take root and be acted upon only as an outgrowth of new thinking that is in inexcusably short supply in government and think tank thought factories. In the final analysis, though, the military will have to take the lead – and want to take the lead – in dramatically reforming itself because politicians have major vested interests, political and economic, in preserving the status quo and in letting the military dictate its own fate. Whether the military has the intellectual wherewithal to measure up to such a challenge is a matter for high hopes, but measured expectations. But if we are to produce a future that is better than the past, we shouldn’t give up on hope. 
What should keep you up at night?

The knowledge that someone at the Pentagon is reading this article and agreeing with it 100%

Sunday, June 28, 2020

RAFAEL Multi-Missile SPIKE NLOS Launcher Configuration



I was happy to share this vid when I found it but I'm a bit miffed. Some of these manufacturers fail to realize that we want to see the system they've developed, not explosions or the weapon they launch (in this case). Good vid but I wanted a bit more.

Royal Air Force Chinook doing work down low...



Chinese Navy vs the QUAD countries


If payloads over platforms is the correct meme....If China is able to develop effective anti-ship missiles that can be launched from small ships...If Chinese Diesel Electric Subs are as effective as their European counterparts...then we have a huge problem in the Pacific.

I guess the first issue is the most important one.  Would the Quad countries actually stick together if a fight were declared?  Notice that the S. Koreans aren't included?  That's a huge red flag in my mind.

Next is the issue we covered first.

How will the USMC's future force structure make up for this deficit and is the juice worth the squeeze if they're able to get on land?

Just looking at this chart, leadership fiddled while the threat turned into a monster.

Did the naval order of battle against the Soviet Union/Warsaw Pact ever look this bad during the height of the Cold War?

Open Comment Post. 28 June 2020