Tuesday, June 08, 2021
US govt lab concludes that the Coronavirus leaked from the Chinese lab in Wuhan?
Hmm.JUST IN - Classified report on the genomic makeup of #SARSCoV2 by a U.S. government national laboratory concluded in May 2020 that the virus may have leaked from the Chinese lab in Wuhan (WSJ)
— Disclose.tv 🚨 (@disclosetv) June 7, 2021
— SeaWaves Magazine (@seawaves_mag) June 7, 2021
For better or worse the US military is a "trusted" organization. If they were used to funnel money to this lab then you can bet we're gonna see other shoes drop in this thing.
Fauci is about to go down.
He won't go down alone.
It must be strange to go from being a rock star to being practically mud.
I'm sure Gov that pushed the draconian shut downs will get hammered in due time. That just leaves the medical profession. I wonder if they'll escape unscathed. I saw a banner declaring 2020-2021 the year of the nurse.
I believe they've tried real hard to push the hero meme on them. Will it last or will they face some backlash? Don't get me wrong. They did work. Hard, valuable work. But they also preached and lectured.
We'll see soon enough.
Just material highlighting the various MAGTF's employed by the old Corps...
 |
| A nice info graphic that showed the combat power available with a nominal MEU...remember they can be tailored to certain threats in patrol zones... |
 |
| Scalable across the spectrum of combat! |
 |
| SCALABLE & FLEXIBLE! |
Monday, June 07, 2021
GDLS proposal vs. Oshkosh proposal.
GDLS proposal vs. Oshkosh proposal.
— Ronkainen (@ronkainen7k15) June 8, 2021
You will find that Kongsberg RT40 turret needs higher hull riser, but Rafael Samson 30 turret doesn't need to modify the hull design. pic.twitter.com/sxvvAEO5Ci
If "Berger's Folly" is so right then why is the messaging on it so damn bad?
I was thinking about this thing that is being birthed and had to take a step0 back.
Full disclosure.
I don't like it. I don't like it one bit.
But if I pause and lie to myself and state that "Berger's Folly" is spot on and its just what the nation and the Corps needs going into the future it still leaves one huge question.
If this thing is so right then why is the messaging on it so bad? I've tried to keep an open mind on this thing. I've tossed out my critique of the thing, and I've expressed my misgivings.
Luckily I have a COUPLE of readers that have tried to give HQMC's view of things.
But even with that, doubts remain. Even with that its beyond obvious that the tribe HAS NOT bought into this thing.
Do you remember the steps leading up to this? Amos and his jacked up air centric Marine Corps. Neller with his wandering all over the place and basically a wasted four years. Now Berger and his radical transformation.
But do you know what came in-between all that? I do. It was two things that we were beat over the head with. Both of them false but both of them being repeated over and over with little pushback (I know I didn't because I thought they were batshit crazy).
The first was that we were a 2nd land army. I didn't buy that because Marines have been doing the Marine-thing since WW1~! No complaints at all. NONE. It suddenly hit the fan when we got an Air Centric Commandant.
The second came from some lost in the woods Major that asked (can you imagine having attained that rank asking this question) "who are we"?
I left that one alone because I expected the Division SgtMajor to handle that. Obviously he didn't because it became a "cause celeb" throughout the Mil-Twitter verse.
But back on task.
This Force Design seems built with the singular goal of "not being a 2nd land army" and of "getting back to our naval roots" (forgot to put that in there but it fits here).
Even in attempting to answer those questions the reality is that the Marine Corps is currently lost.
The friction throughout the organization is palatable. The confusion obvious. The churn undeniable.
I believe I'm right. I believe that shortly after Berger leaves office this concept will be put on the shelf.
But if I'm wrong and this is the way to go then Berger should get out from behind his desk, tour every Marine Corps installation, unit and fighting position and get buy in from those he leads.
He needs to get the messaging right on this thing and as of this moment he's failing about as badly as the Navy will in delivering his Light Amphibious Warship to him on time/budget.
The Science Suggests a Wuhan Lab Leak
I'll just leave this right here....yeah....where are all the bubbas that were YELLING on this blog that the science was saying this was from nature? Hello? Are ya'll out there?NEW - SARS-CoV-2 has a genome sequencing combination called "CGG-CGG". It is extremely rare, except when doing "gain-of-function" research in laboratories.https://t.co/Wbv96ztolj
— Disclose.tv 🚨 (@disclosetv) June 7, 2021
MQ-25 refueling Super Hornet...the vid!
Fueling the future: The #Navy made history June 4 conducting the first ever refueling operation between the MQ-25 T1 unmanned tanker and the F/A-18 Super Hornet.
— NAVAIR (@NAVAIRNews) June 7, 2021
📰: https://t.co/Nk2N3H1W0T pic.twitter.com/lleKEaTjgD
South African Army ill equipped to deal with regional crisis...
via BusinessLive.co.za
Any serious army will always have some uncommitted units to deal with emergencies and also longer-lasting contingencies. That could be the parachute and air-assault battalions for the former, and perhaps two infantry battalions as a minimum for the latter. That takes us to 19 infantry battalions. But the army has only 14.
In addition, it should maintain a mechanised brigade to ensure retention of those skills, because in an era of power competition a threat can arise much more quickly than such capabilities can be regenerated. While two infantry battalions of this brigade could be the two also serving as operational reserve in peacetime, this adds armour, artillery, air defence, field engineer, signals, maintenance and workshop units.
The border patrol capability, the rapid deployment force and the mechanised brigade add up to at least 26,000 troops. But what if the army must deploy to, for instance, Mozambique for an extended period? The reserve cannot be committed except as initial force, so the force requirement rises by another four infantry battalions and support elements, or at least 4,000 troops, taking the minimum safe deployable strength of the army to about 30,000.
Here it is worth remembering that during the 2000s there were three simultaneous long-term battalion missions (Burundi, DRC and Darfur) and briefly a fourth (Comoros), which dangerously overstretched the army.
Few armies have much better than 50% deployable personnel, the rest being in headquarters, training units, depots and workshops. That would argue for an army of 60,000. Even assuming the army can be particularly efficient and have a deployable strength of two thirds, that would still require an army of 45,000, compared to the actual current strength of 37,600.
There are about 12,250 reservists, but they are only readily available because the economy is so weak and unemployment so high, and are not suited to all roles, particularly those that demand exceptional fitness and currency on complex equipment. They should serve as emergency reserve, not to plug holes in the regular force.
The bottom line is that the SA army is understrength, overage and handicapped by obsolescent equipment and capability gaps. Not ideal in an unstable region in an era of power competition.