Get Rid of the Marine Corps???

[Marauder06]

New DoD Adviser Has Made Controversial Proposal: Get Rid of the Marine Corps

Retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor, newly-appointed as a senior adviser at the Pentagon, has a track record of making controversial statements. But his most provocative of all might be a proposal to do away with the U.S. Marine Corps.

 

[PineTrees500]

No comment on the USMC comments, as that's totally his opinion. But from what I've read he was put in this position to help bring the troops home as quick as possible, and that I support. Personally I like the guy. He's very controversial and in todays age that's a good thing.

 

[Kaldak]

New DoD Adviser Has Made Controversial Proposal: Get Rid of the Marine Corps

Retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor, newly-appointed as a senior adviser at the Pentagon, has a track record of making controversial statements. But his most provocative of all might be a proposal to do away with the U.S. Marine Corps.

He's just upset that the Corps is better than the green machine 😉

 

[Ooh-Rah]

If someone would kindly provide me the good Colonel’s mailing address, I could get these sent out.

Eat a bag of dicks

 

[Devildoc]

He does NOT hide his biases in that article. A therapist needs to ask him where the bad ol' marine Corps hurt him....

I'm not sure he's going to find many people who take his comments seriously.

 

[Ooh-Rah]

I am going to guess that this “senior US Marine Corps officer” prays to Chesty every night that his name is never released! LOL

Several years ago, I asked a senior U.S. Marine Corps officer to name each of the services’s most creative thinkers. His answers were entirely predictable to anyone with even a passing knowledge of those in uniform, except when it came to the Army. He didn’t hesitate: “It’s Doug Macgregor,” he said. “He’s the best thinker they have, living or dead.”

The revenge of Col. Douglas Macgregor – Responsible Statecraft

 

[Dame]

If someone would kindly provide me the good Colonel’s mailing address, I could get these sent out.

Eat a bag of dicks

Hmmmm. Now where was that gift thread?

 

[Devildoc]

I am going to guess that this “senior US Marine Corps officer” prays to Chesty every night that his name is never released! LOL

Several years ago, I asked a senior U.S. Marine Corps officer to name each of the services’s most creative thinkers. His answers were entirely predictable to anyone with even a passing knowledge of those in uniform, except when it came to the Army. He didn’t hesitate: “It’s Doug Macgregor,” he said. “He’s the best thinker they have, living or dead.”

The revenge of Col. Douglas Macgregor – Responsible Statecraft

With all due respect, and I mean it because I said "with all due", he has said some things that I agree with, to wit getting out of Iraq, getting out of Syria, and getting out of Afghanistan.

That said, I think he thinks a little highly of himself, and he's probably not quite the Von Clausewitz/Napoleon military thinker that he thinks he is. I do find it ironic that one of the calling cards of the Marine Corps is to be lighter and faster and more mobile, which is exactly what he thinks the army should be doing. But that the army should be doing it, and not the Marines.

 

[DA SWO]

With all due respect, and I mean it because I said "with all due", he has said some things that I agree with, to wit getting out of Iraq, getting out of Syria, and getting out of Afghanistan.

That said, I think he thinks a little highly of himself, and he's probably not quite the Von Clausewitz/Napoleon military thinker that he thinks he is. I do find it ironic that one of the calling cards of the Marine Corps is to be lighter and faster and more mobile, which is exactly what he thinks the army should be doing. But that the army should be doing it, and not the Marines.

Go find his wiki bio, it's interesting.
More Sun Tzu then Clausewitcz.

We don't need the Army taking the "Naval Infantry" role.
They'd fuck it up in 18-24 months.

 

[Steve1839]

We don't need the Army taking the "Naval Infantry" role.
They'd fuck it up in 18-24 months.

Optimist...

 

[BloodStripe]

No bias, but here's who I hope becomes the next SECDEF.

https://www.2ndmardiv.marines.mil/Leaders/Biography/Article/516073/major-general-francis-l-donovan/

 

[Grunt]

I see the Good Idea Fairy is active again and trying to mess everything up!

He/She/It needs to go back to sleep....

 

[Teufel]

It's not a new idea. This proposal pops up every time we draw down our military forces after a conflict. I haven't done the math but I bet you that it costs the Marine Corps less money to recruit, train, and equip our 180,000 people than it would take the Army to do the same for 180,000 soldiers. Secondly, while these conversations usually turn into Marine infantry vs Rangers debates for some reason, I don't think that's our major contribution to the joint force. I know that's really surprising coming from an infantryman. To be honest though, I think the Marine Corps is well suited for war, but is superior to other forces in peacetime. The Army has fly away capabilities that can respond to certain crises but none that match the spectrum of options that the Navy-Marine Corps team afloat provides. Marine Expeditionary Units are the force of choice to quickly respond to non-combatant evacuations, disaster relief, and other humanitarian assistance operations. The combination of amphibious connectors like the LCU and LCAC with the V22 means that they don't require landing fields and air strips, although they can build them for follow on joint forces. I also think that while we produce really good infantrymen, our real crown jewels are our combat support troops. They certainly aren't grunts, but they have a sense of service pride, physical toughness, and combat mindset that I don't see as much of in the other services.

 

[Ranger Psych]

It's not a new idea. This proposal pops up every time we draw down our military forces after a conflict. I haven't done the math but I bet you that it costs the Marine Corps less money to recruit, train, and equip our 180,000 people than it would take the Army to do the same for 180,000 soldiers. Secondly, while these conversations usually turn into Marine infantry vs Rangers debates for some reason, I don't think that's our major contribution to the joint force. I know that's really surprising coming from an infantryman. To be honest though, I think the Marine Corps is well suited for war, but is superior to other forces in peacetime. The Army has fly away capabilities that can respond to certain crises but none that match the spectrum of options that the Navy-Marine Corps team afloat provides. Marine Expeditionary Units are the force of choice to quickly respond to non-combatant evacuations, disaster relief, and other humanitarian assistance operations. The combination of amphibious connectors like the LCU and LCAC with the V22 means that they don't require landing fields and air strips, although they can build them for follow on joint forces. I also think that while we produce really good infantrymen, our real crown jewels are our combat support troops. They certainly aren't grunts, but they have a sense of service pride, physical toughness, and combat mindset that I don't see as much of in the other services.

I still think the best force reconfiguration I've heard was from Thomas Barnett.

Sorta follows suit with your take, which is solid.

 

[Kraut783]

I see the Good Idea Fairy is active again and trying to mess everything up!

He/She/It needs to go back to sleep....

 

[DA SWO]

It's not a new idea. This proposal pops up every time we draw down our military forces after a conflict. I haven't done the math but I bet you that it costs the Marine Corps less money to recruit, train, and equip our 180,000 people than it would take the Army to do the same for 180,000 soldiers. Secondly, while these conversations usually turn into Marine infantry vs Rangers debates for some reason, I don't think that's our major contribution to the joint force. I know that's really surprising coming from an infantryman. To be honest though, I think the Marine Corps is well suited for war, but is superior to other forces in peacetime. The Army has fly away capabilities that can respond to certain crises but none that match the spectrum of options that the Navy-Marine Corps team afloat provides. Marine Expeditionary Units are the force of choice to quickly respond to non-combatant evacuations, disaster relief, and other humanitarian assistance operations. The combination of amphibious connectors like the LCU and LCAC with the V22 means that they don't require landing fields and air strips, although they can build them for follow on joint forces. I also think that while we produce really good infantrymen, our real crown jewels are our combat support troops. They certainly aren't grunts, but they have a sense of service pride, physical toughness, and combat mindset that I don't see as much of in the other services.

Your internal Combat Support needs augmentation for long hauls.

 

[Teufel]

Your internal Combat Support needs augmentation for long hauls.

They are a bridging solution for the joint force, just like the rest of the Marine Corps.

 

[AWP]

You'd have a better chance of ceding Florida to Cuba than killing the Marine Corps.

 

[DasBoot]

Just stop trying to do this. The Marine Corps will likely outlast the United States. The Untied Status Marin Crops will be here for years to come. They’re like herpes- there’s no cure for that shit. It’s like the 82nd Airborne x10 (literally... 18,000 x10= 180,000. Drunk Ranger math FTW).

 

[Steve1839]

It I think the Marine Corps is well suited for war, but is superior to other forces in peacetime. The Army has fly away capabilities that can respond to certain crises but none that match the spectrum of options that the Navy-Marine Corps team afloat provides.

As one who participated in the early days of Operation Restore Hope, I've got to disagree...nothing to do with the quality of troops or leadership, but the Navy-Marine Corp did a piss poor job of sustaining operations in Somalia in 92-early 93...